This is why I suggested some thought about the glass - and not just concentrating on the signature. There are any number of scenarios that could explain why it is, or is
not, Daum via the way this thread is going, especially if we look at an inscribed signature under a microscope as it were.
So, this fraudster signs the bit of glass, is disgusted with him/her self and has a fit of regret - then puts it into the system anyway?? They give it to charity and it's sold for £1.00 at a boot fair. Whilst not impossible, it stretches the point somewhat. (Paul's implication is that is was bought at a boot fair). Sorry Cathy, I don't buy it I'm afraid

Sometimes, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.........
Nigel