1953 "Sovereign" Forgery/Fake Anyone Seen One Before?

I don't know how it works in the US, but in the UK the auctioneers hide behind a combination of "Caveat Emptor" and the auction regulations. With a few exceptions, the auctioneer is entitled to sell under the vendor's description, and if that is wrong, the seller's case is with the vendor, not the auctioneer.
Clearly it is different if the auctioneer has come up with the description - though difficult to prove. In the UK the other factor comes from the Hallmarking laws - if the auctioneer is registered and describes an item as precious metal when it proves not to be, they are liable.
I have tried raising issues with obvious fake coins before now with various auctioneers, and got the brush off. The only answer is to boycott such auctions.

@ PaddyB

I hear what you are saying, and agree that any collector should be able to spot such an obvious fake... Everything about the coin is wrong. It still rubs me the wrong way when an auction house has been informed it is an obvious fake and not even a gold fake, yet decides they are going to sell the coin anyway. All while claiming the coin is sold "as is" without any guarantee of authenticity. I feel any auction house that is willing to list an item it describes as "gold" should be held accountable when it is not gold... I guess if they had written "gold colored" or something they might have an out.

IIRC, for online only auctions (US), the descriptions of gold/silver coins/bullion have to be accurate. I am going to have my semi-retired attorney father take this up and look into it for me, from a legal perspective. Will let you guys know what I find out in the end.