The story below needs updating with the following facts:
In April 2010, The Antiques Trade Gazette published a front-page expose of this seller's eBay activity. Read here. Subsequently, the seller changed his eBay ID. It is now toby-20. As you can see eBay reveals that toby-20 is our problem seller 1079edmund.
In April 2010, The Antiques Trade Gazette published a front-page expose of this seller's eBay activity. Read here. Subsequently, the seller changed his eBay ID. It is now toby-20. As you can see eBay reveals that toby-20 is our problem seller 1079edmund.
Faked Sunderland Lustre: Will eBay Ever Act?
I purchased a plaque from eBay seller 1079edmund (E B Edmunds of Pontypool, Torfaen, UK) two years ago (plaque 4). It had undeclared damage to one corner, and I asked for a partial refund, which the seller gave with good grace. So I was happy with the transaction.
I bid on another of his items (plaque 2). My bid was nudged up by small degrees until I was outbid, and I didn’t get it. A week or so later he said he was listing ‘the pair, number 2 of 2’ to the plaque I’d bid on. But the lustre splashes on the border, as unique as a fingerprint, showed the plaques were one and the same. If another bidder had pulled out, why not just say so?
1079edmund uses ‘user id kept private’ listings, which in my experience is usually (though not always) a bad sign. It prevents buyers seeing who is bidding against them and who has won the item. I looked at 1079edmund’s feedback history and one buyer, alyson5678, had almost 100% activity with him. It seemed likely to me that he was bidding up his own items using this alias. He also uses nye2506 and 465gillian in the same manner. (Myrna adds: note that ALL eleven feedbacks for 465gillian were left by 1079edmund!)
I bid on another of his items (plaque 2). My bid was nudged up by small degrees until I was outbid, and I didn’t get it. A week or so later he said he was listing ‘the pair, number 2 of 2’ to the plaque I’d bid on. But the lustre splashes on the border, as unique as a fingerprint, showed the plaques were one and the same. If another bidder had pulled out, why not just say so?
1079edmund uses ‘user id kept private’ listings, which in my experience is usually (though not always) a bad sign. It prevents buyers seeing who is bidding against them and who has won the item. I looked at 1079edmund’s feedback history and one buyer, alyson5678, had almost 100% activity with him. It seemed likely to me that he was bidding up his own items using this alias. He also uses nye2506 and 465gillian in the same manner. (Myrna adds: note that ALL eleven feedbacks for 465gillian were left by 1079edmund!)
 Plaque 4: Over-painted transfers  Genuine plaque, not overpainted. |
 Plaque 2: Over-painted transfers  Genuine plaque, not overpainted. |
1079edmund’s dishonesty made me suspicious. The colours on the ship plaque (plaque 2) just looked wrong. I
went back to the verse plaque (plaque 4) I’d purchased and compared it with the many others I own. Like those on the ship plaque, the colours on the central transfer were too shrill, and didn’t appear on any of my other plaques. They were also painted too neatly, each leaf painstakingly coloured in. On my other plaques, the tinting to the transfers was done in broad washes of colour.
I went through records of plaques that had come up on eBay over the last year or so and found many with the same distinctive colouring (plaques 1 & 3). But all of them sold by 1079edmund. Unfortunately, I can only show you the tip of the iceberg, as I didn’t save photos of them all.
went back to the verse plaque (plaque 4) I’d purchased and compared it with the many others I own. Like those on the ship plaque, the colours on the central transfer were too shrill, and didn’t appear on any of my other plaques. They were also painted too neatly, each leaf painstakingly coloured in. On my other plaques, the tinting to the transfers was done in broad washes of colour.
I went through records of plaques that had come up on eBay over the last year or so and found many with the same distinctive colouring (plaques 1 & 3). But all of them sold by 1079edmund. Unfortunately, I can only show you the tip of the iceberg, as I didn’t save photos of them all.
 Plaque 1 |
 Plaque 3 |
|
I’d recently purchased another plaque from 1079edmund (plaque 5), which hadn’t yet arrived. It shames me to admit it when I look at the photo now. I’d known the border was odd, but he’d said the plaque was perfect. I had seen other plaques with similar borders before, but when I looked through my records, you’ve guessed it, they were all from 1079edmund. I e-mailed him saying not to bother posting it, and that I wanted a full refund. I was too late and the plaque arrived the next day. A smell of gloss paint greeted me as I opened the package! 1079edmund gave me a large refund (over 70%), after a struggle.
|
 Plaque 5 |
If anyone reading this thinks they may have purchased an object with faked lustre, it is easy enough to tell. Compare it to the lustre on other items. The iridescent metallic glint you get with real lustre is impossible to fake the way 1079edmund does it (with gloss paint). There should be a real depth to the shine, glinting/flickering in the light (almost like a mirrored surface) as you move the object around. As time goes by, lustre does get rubbed, but even on very rubbed items you get traces of this iridescent effect. If it looks like other pieces of lustre in this respect, chances are it’s OK. If it looks dull and flat by comparison, maybe it’s wrong. In that case, try scratching at a bit of the pink with your fingernail in an area that doesn’t notice. You might be able to tell then whether or not it is paint on the surface, rather than lustre under a glaze. Wet a piece of tissue with white spirit and rub a hidden area. If the paint has recently dried, the paint might stain the cloth. Real lustre will never do that.
I got out the Nitromors (English paint stripper--Myrna used automotive paint stripper in the US. It's weaker but it works) and applied it liberally to reveal a rubbed, but infinitely more attractive plaque beneath. (NB lustre and enamelling won’t be damaged by paint stripper so long as you don’t scratch too hard. Be warned though, some plaques and jugs have hand-painted script or dates over the glaze – never use paint stripper on these.) I ended up paying less for the plaque than it was worth. The crazy thing about 1079edmund’s activity is that the objects he over paints, are often commercially quite attractive.
I couldn’t leave negative feedback without risking a tit-for-tat response from him (under eBay’s old system). He’d given me a refund, so I had no grounds for a dispute through eBay. This accounts for how he has maintained 100% positive feedback over 392 transactions – his unhappy customers shrink from leaving negative comments. I know others have had similar experiences to me. I recognized an antique dealer amongst his history, who’d left complimentary feedback. I contacted her and she replied:
‘Yes I did buy something off him which was heavily restored which he did not mention in the auction. He was very good and took it back and gave me a full refund. Why do people do that, they obviously know that the items are restored, do they think that people are blind and would not know. As you said they are very over painted. I shall be very wary next time.’
And a collector from Sunderland wrote to me:
‘My one and only purchase from Edmund was about 18 months ago. A verse which was unusual. Paid about £350. It is away in a box at the moment. (I am sending this quickly in case it can help.) This plaque had all the lustre painted with pink gloss. I scraped it off to reveal a crack. I emailed him and went away for a couple of days. His first email offered a £100 reduction. As I could not reply while away he must have got worried and emailed again offering £150 off. I accepted this offer but have kept away from him since.’
At this point, I had no hard proof that 1079edmund was faking the over-painting himself. He might, though it seemed a slim possibility, have bought the over-painted items from someone else. For personal interest, I kept records of some of the things he’d sold. Plaques 6 and 7 have over-painted transfers and edges. One reason for painting the edge this way is to conceal damage and repairs, as in the case above. Plaques 8 and 11 have over-painted transfers, but original borders. Plaques 10 and 9 have fake pink borders, but original transfers. The military portrait plaque is from the Boer War, so 20th century, and probably originally had a green border. Plaques with green borders sell for about a tenth of the value of pink-bordered plaques. The quality of the transfer on the ship plaque, suggests it might have had an orange border. Orange-bordered plaques were produced later and are very prone to rubbing. Two reasons why they are less desirable to collectors.
 Plaque 6: Over- painted transfers and edges  Plaque 8: over-painted transfers but original borders  Plaque10: fake pink borders, but original transfers |
 Plaque 7: Over painted-transfers and edges  Plaque 9: fake pink borders but original transfers  Plaque11: over-painted transfers but original borders |
Clicking on the images of plaques 6-11 below will enlarge them.
An important distinction should be made here between ‘restoration’ and ‘forgery’. Restoration is bringing an item back to its original condition, by giving it a polish, repairing a chip, or filling a crack. Forgery is the willful attempt to deceive people into believing that an item is something that it never was, usually in order to get more money than it’s worth.
This year, apparently having exhausted whatever collection of plaques he was selling, 1079edmund started buying items on eBay to over-paint. The ‘before’ and ‘after’ photos (below) speak for themselves. Note the positions of imperfections in the glaze. You can see beyond any doubt the items are the same. I confronted him with the evidence and said that I believed his activity was illegal. He promptly withdrew the children’s mug and the ‘Thou God’ plaque from eBay. Armed with proof that 1079edmund was faking the over-painting himself, I wrote to eBay on 26 June 2009. They didn’t respond.
 Bought by Edmund Dec 2008  Bought by Edmund May 20  Sold eBay by grumpywhosegrumpy70 May 2009 |
 For Sale by Edmond Jan 2009  For Sale by Edmund June 2009  For Sale by Edmund June 2009. The orange/brown THOU GOD SEEST ME plaque is late 19th/early 20th century, but once painted pink it mimicked a plaque that would have been worth double, if genuine. |
|
Subsequently, he listed a jug that looked suspect (see alongside). I wrote to eBay again on 27 July
2009, but again got no response. A couple of weeks later, I went through edmund1079’s feedback history and contacted all of his buyers. The jug had been bought by an American collector and he’d been very happy with it. With a few pointers though, he was able to see it had been extensively over-painted. The paint scratched off with his fingernail. Sadly he’d bought several items from the seller over a period of time. He was at least able to get a full refund for the jug, by raising a dispute through PayPal. |
 |
I wrote to eBay a third time on 20 August 2009, and said that they were culpable because they’d been forewarned that a faked item was listed on their site. Again I got no reply.
Dick Henrywood, author of several reference books on 19th century ceramics, and Myrna both wrote to eBay in support of my case. Neither has had a response. And yet it was reported in the Antiques Trade Gazette that eBay UK are trying to tackle antiques fraud. It is very hard to believe they’re seriously interested in the issue.
1079edmund still lists his over-painted items. And in a twist of fate, the ‘Thou God’ plaque 1079edmund withdrew from eBay, reappeared again (number 190340223599) listed by another seller. The seller had innocently bought it through a local auction house. He writes:
‘I have come across Edmunds before but it is usually Staffordshire figures that he paints up. (He buys white or almost white figures and colours them) I have seen these sold in the past for over £400 each. I have withdrawn 599 and the auction house, where I purchased it, have agreed to take it back and refund my money (They know Edmonds of old but these plaques slipped through the net).’ In a second e-mail he adds: ‘By the way I believe that Edmonds main efforts are still in Staffordshire figures so beware. Also last Christmas I came across a number of Childrens plates which he had butchered with all sorts of odd colours.’
I’m about to write to eBay again. If anyone has had a bad experience with this seller, please e-mail eBay and me via
Myrna. Don't take a partial refund. Why should this seller make a penny? Insist on full refund, to include postage. And please leave very negative feedback.
Stephen Smith, London, UK.
If you would like enlargements of any of these pictures, please email [email protected] and they will be forwarded to you.
Update, October 29, 2009.
All the letters of concern to eBay notwithstanding, 1079edmund is at it again! Stephen Smith, ever vigilant, notes that 1079edmund is selling on eBay a plaque that he 'sold' in October. Perhaps he sold it to himself--"shill bidding" is the term-- because bidding did not go high enough. For whatever reason, the plaque is again on eBay, but it has had a paint job. If you click on the pictures, you can enlarge them. Note the positions of the white blotches in the lustre on the border. Clearly, this is one-and-the-same plaque!
Left: For sale by 1079edmund in October. Ebay item 160365512932.
Right: For sale by 1079edmund in November. Ebay item 160373478902.
