Seeking Information on 5517/5513

[Filipão]

@Frontier
Please protect us too by disclosing the seller's name.
Thank you

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by Filipão

@Frontier
Please protect us too by disclosing the seller's name.
Thank you

I’m pretty sure the signed NDA will make that highly unlikely.

[Filipão]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

I’m pretty sure the signed NDA will make that highly unlikely.

Well, I had to try...

[Haywood_Milton]

"Lawsuit....amicable recovery....non-disclosure agreement."

I'm not sure how one can reconcile those elements with each other.

Very pleased of course if you have been reimbursed, but if that required legal action and was then conditional upon an NDA, in circumstances where perhaps the seller had a clear obligation to refund in full, then the seller may have been very lucky. Another victim might not have accepted an "amicable recovery," instead suing for their money, refusing to sign an NDA and making the matter public for the good of all.

I accept that an easier path may have appealed.

While you may not be able to name the seller, perhaps this anonymity allows you to tell us if you think the watch was sold in ignorance or with dishonesty.

Thankyou very much for updating us and good luck in replacing it with something that can be only better!

[Filipão]

Sorry for my ignorance and laziness, I did not look up the acronym NDA. My fault. On my behalf - I'm a bl@@dy foreigner.

[rootbeer7]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

"Lawsuit....amicable recovery....non-disclosure agreement."

I'm not sure how one can reconcile those elements with each other.

Very pleased of course if you have been reimbursed, but if that required legal action and was then conditional upon an NDA, in circumstances where perhaps the seller had a clear obligation to refund in full, then the seller may have been very lucky. Another victim might not have accepted an "amicable recovery," instead suing for their money, refusing to sign an NDA and making the matter public for the good of all.

I accept that an easier path may have appealed.

While you may not be able to name the seller, perhaps this anonymity allows you to tell us if you think the watch was sold in ignorance or with dishonesty.

Thankyou very much for updating us and good luck in replacing it with something that can be only better!

Perhaps you could also share details of serial number, caseback and some more images. Preferably a ‘copy’ of the original sales list (using cut & paste won’t specifically identify seller). That way, if the watch comes up again, full disclosure is available at a click of a button.

Glad it ended well for you, but let’s try to avoid it happening again.

[Goochy]

Originally Posted by Frontier

I am finally able to report back on the MilSub 5517. After having the watch inspected with the guidance of my attorney and insurance company it was in fact determined to not be what was represented when I purchased it. After three months of litigation I just settled the lawsuit which included an amicable recovery and required executing an NDA.
Thank you to members here for bringing this to my attention and for pointing out the discrepancies.

Glad you got it sorted. You said there was an "amicable recovery" but you didn't say what happened to the watch, did you keep it or return it to the seller?

[cardiel]

more mystery......will keep this thread going....

[harry in montreal]

I just don’t have any idea how the buyer didn’t show it around to get feedback either before or after purchasing.

This is a question for mr Milton and or Jed... How often has someone asked you for feedback on a watch in exchange for a few $ for your time? I would think it’s the best money spent related to a big ticket purchase.

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

I just don’t have any idea how the buyer didn’t show it around to get feedback either before or after purchasing.

This is a question for mr Milton and or Jed... How often has someone asked you for feedback on a watch in exchange for a few $ for your time? I would think it’s the best money spent related to a big ticket purchase.

People ask for / expect / demand help all the time, often becoming agitated if it is politely declined. It is the reason I now leave my mailbox on this forum and others full. Very occasionally someone offers to pay for one's time, but I don't believe I have ever charged yet.

Posting images of a watch on open forum will commonly realise the desired result without putting upon an individual, as this thread itself illustrates.

Insta : haywood_milton_rolex

[cardiel]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

Very occasionally someone offers to pay for one's time, but I don't believe I have ever charged yet.

Insta : haywood_milton_rolex

that surprises me.....you would think if your pockets are deep enough to spend 100K+ on a watch you could budget another 5 or 10% to pay an expert for an inspection / report.........I know I would

[vintagetudor]

Totally agree with the sentiments above and thank god we have the respected experts to help out.

[harry in montreal]

Well, if the OP got out of this with his money, he should b sending you and Jed something as thanks. You were instrumental in helping and I’m just bringing this up because of how valuable your insight is. I’m sure some people are kind, and some are obnoxious, but you should be rewarded for helping prevent a loss as material as this. What I’m saying is that the nicer we are to guys like you, the better the chances you weigh in to save another ass.

[Haywood_Milton]

That’s a kind thought but in this thread especially Jed was “the man.”

[SubKing]

Originally Posted by Frontier

I am finally able to report back on the MilSub 5517. After having the watch inspected with the guidance of my attorney and insurance company it was in fact determined to not be what was represented when I purchased it. After three months of litigation I just settled the lawsuit which included an amicable recovery and required executing an NDA.
Thank you to members here for bringing this to my attention and for pointing out the discrepancies.

I been following this thread for awhile, waiting to see the outcome.

It doesn't add up to me.

The initial response by you to the 3 months of litigation and finally the NDA, just doesn't sound right.

Different laws in every state, however common law + common sense tells me otherwise. I ran this situation by my wife who is an attorney.. Missing lots of details here, but we came to the conclusion as if this was an act of fraud.. Selling something counterfeit for tens of thousands if not hundreds, is a criminal act. Very few people would agree to sign a NDA in this situation. Courts in the US are backed up. so I would imagine a court date would be a ways out. Even if you filed a lawsuit which would take some time to gather the evidence, have an attorney draft the documents, file it with the courts, get the fraudster served.. 3 months is lightening speed in normal circumstances. Let's add covid into the equation and that would slow things down more.

If you didn't say "lawsuit" I think it would have worked more in your favor as a quick settlement between two parties can be reached in most cases between attorneys before a lawsuit is filed.

NDA's can be broken in most instances when it involves a crime.

Again I am going off very very vague facts that have been presented by you but I am trying to piece this together as best as I can.

Your original statement saying you won't know anything for "several weeks" until you return to your other home is also an unusual response.

It all just seems very convenient for you to avoid any direct questions that have come up in this thread since the beginning.

A note to add:
Just to dive a bit further, Seems majority of your posts are from selling, buying or leaving feedback for others on this forum after purchases or sales. From the modern watches you post in past for sale threads, it just seems that a 5517 is outside your wheelhouse. I don't know many people who would consider one for their first vintage among almost all modern watches that you have bought and or sold here. If you were really considering a milsub and were a member here, why you wouldn't seek advise before such a serious vintage purchase?

I can assume you don't know much about vintage because you were fooled by a milsub that is obviously fake to the trained eye. I can tell you if I was personally fooled over a milsub, I wouldn't be making casual conversations in other threads I created on TRF talking about the new tudor black bay as if everything is fine. That fake watch would become my primary focus of concern.

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by SubKing

I been following this thread for awhile, waiting to see the outcome.

It doesn't add up to me.

The initial response by you to the 3 months of litigation and finally the NDA, just doesn't sound right.

Different laws in every state, however common law + common sense tells me otherwise. I ran this situation by my wife who is an attorney.. Missing lots of details here, but we came to the conclusion as if this was an act of fraud.. Selling something counterfeit for tens of thousands if not hundreds, is a criminal act. Very few people would agree to sign a NDA in this situation. Courts in the US are backed up. so I would imagine a court date would be a ways out. Even if you filed a lawsuit which would take some time to gather the evidence, have an attorney draft the documents, file it with the courts, get the fraudster served.. 3 months is lightening speed in normal circumstances. Let's add covid into the equation and that would slow things down more.

If you didn't say "lawsuit" I think it would have worked more in your favor as a quick settlement between two parties can be reached in most cases between attorneys before a lawsuit is filed.

NDA's can be broken in most instances when it involves a crime.

Again I am going off very very vague facts that have been presented by you but I am trying to piece this together as best as I can.

Your original statement saying you won't know anything for "several weeks" until you return to your other home is also an unusual response.

It all just seems very convenient for you to avoid any direct questions that have come up in this thread since the beginning.

A note to add:
Just to dive a bit further, Seems majority of your posts are from selling, buying or leaving feedback for others on this forum after purchases or sales. From the modern watches you post in past for sale threads, it just seems that a 5517 is outside your wheelhouse. I don't know many people who would consider one for their first vintage among almost all modern watches that you have bought and or sold here. If you were really considering a milsub and were a member here, why you wouldn't seek advise before such a serious vintage purchase?

I can assume you don't know much about vintage because you were fooled by a milsub that is obviously fake to the trained eye. I can tell you if I was personally fooled over a milsub, I wouldn't be making casual conversations in other threads I created on TRF talking about the new tudor black bay as if everything is fine. That fake watch would become my primary focus of concern.

What if it was ruled that the seller was guilty of negligent misrepresentation, and not fraudulent misrepresentation? I could see an NDA being agreed upon by both parties. The buyer for having it resolved and being compensated, and the seller for admitting the mistake and not wanting to sully his reputation.

Just thinking out loud.

[Blueline226]

I’ve been following this for a while but chose to stay out of the discussion. Glad I asked to see a photograph and it’s been resolved. Still here for the comments though!!

[SubKing]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

What if it was ruled that the seller was guilty of negligent misrepresentation, and not fraudulent misrepresentation? I could see an NDA being agreed upon by both parties. The buyer for having it resolved and being compensated, and the seller for admitting the mistake and not wanting to sully his reputation.

Just thinking out loud.

Anything is possible. I just think there are other oddities about this situation pushing the lawsuit aside. When I try to put them together it just seems more unlikely than likely to me. As Haywood pointed out, the facts presented just don’t flow with each other in this case.

Last he left off that the seller of the watch was being cooperative so he won’t reveal his identity. All if a sudden it turns into a lawsuit with “3 months of litigation”... you would think if things turned that nasty he would have shared something about this situation esp try to collect more insight from experts here to help gain more info to help his case.

It’s not the first and wouldn’t be the last time that a member has tried to test out a fake here on the forum to see if it looks the part enough to pass under the radar.

[Tavli3]

Originally Posted by SubKing

Anything is possible. I just think there are other oddities about this situation pushing the lawsuit aside. When I try to put them together it just seems more unlikely than likely to me. As Haywood pointed out, the facts presented just don’t flow with each other in this case.

Last he left off that the seller of the watch was being cooperative so he won’t reveal his identity. All if a sudden it turns into a lawsuit with “3 months of litigation”... you would think if things turned that nasty he would have shared something about this situation esp try to collect more insight from experts here to help gain more info to help his case.

It’s not the first and wouldn’t be the last time that a member has tried to test out a fake here on the forum to see if it looks the part enough to pass under the radar.

You've certainly raised some facts to be concerned with. I for one am now very confused and am not sure which is worse, having a fake faker or having an unknown seller selling fake 5 figure watches still at large without his or the watch's identity being made public.

I get the impression that Jedly was kind enough to be a key factor in the OP's recovery. I would think the OP's attorney would have certainly wanted to have direct speaks with Jedly as being the expert. Maybe Jedly can shed some light on this without betraying any trust or agreements made between him and OP.

One thing that doesn't make sense is why would OP post a picture of such a bad fake when if he's a member I'm sure he's noticed that way better fakes have been called out instantly on the forum so there was no chance this would pass.

I hope this story doesn't take a turn to the dark side.

[Frontier]

I want to take a moment to discuss my last message. I mentioned I settled a lawsuit. To clarity, I settled a dispute. It never reached the courts and was settled between my attorney and the seller. After three months of negotiations it was resolved.
As for all the other comments, I never would have posted pictures of the watch just to be ridiculed and I thank Jedly for bringing the problem to my attention so quickly.
In the end it was naive of me to not perform proper due diligence on what I thoughts was a unique vintage piece when I purchased the watch and it ultimately cost money to get my money back.

[rootbeer7]

Originally Posted by Frontier

I want to take a moment to discuss my last message. I mentioned I settled a lawsuit. To clarity, I settled a dispute. It never reached the courts and was settled between my attorney and the seller. After three months of negotiations it was resolved.
As for all the other comments, I never would have posted pictures of the watch just to be ridiculed and I thank Jedly for bringing the problem to my attention so quickly.
In the end it was naive of me to not perform proper due diligence on what I thoughts was a unique vintage piece when I purchased the watch and it ultimately cost money to get my money back.

Please could you reveal serial number at least. That way if this piece comes to light again there is an online record of it.

[strafer_kid]

Certainly a very interesting discussion!

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

Please could you reveal serial number at least. That way if this piece comes to light again there is an online record of it.

Honestly, there are probably a large number of fakes in existence, and posting the serial number of one particular example is pointless. More important is simply to educate yourself to recognize them. In this case, it is not terribly difficult if you simply look closely, as one would typically do for a high value purchase.

[Kijamon]

There's a 5513 at the next Sotheby's auction in Geneva if that helps? Lot 47

[roh123]

Originally Posted by Kijamon

There's a 5513 at the next Sotheby's auction in Geneva if that helps? Lot 47

Not sure the forum is the right place to advertise your sale. And I doubt it will make any difference as Sothebys can market the watch on their own. The forum will just become annoying when everyone markets their sales on auctions, ebay or whatever platform of their choice.

That said; best of luck. Just don’t spam multiple threads for no real reason.

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Honestly, there are probably a large number of fakes in existence, and posting the serial number of one particular example is pointless. More important is simply to educate yourself to recognize them. In this case, it is not terribly difficult if you simply look closely, as one would typically do for a high value purchase.

Surely the fact that Frontier bought this watch may disprove your assertion?

Knowing that there was a fake bearing its case number could be only of great service to the community.

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by Frontier

I want to take a moment to discuss my last message. I mentioned I settled a lawsuit. To clarity, I settled a dispute. It never reached the courts and was settled between my attorney and the seller. After three months of negotiations it was resolved.
As for all the other comments, I never would have posted pictures of the watch just to be ridiculed and I thank Jedly for bringing the problem to my attention so quickly.
In the end it was naive of me to not perform proper due diligence on what I thoughts was a unique vintage piece when I purchased the watch and it ultimately cost money to get my money back.

The seller must have asked you for evidence to support your case that the watch was incorrect. Did you or your attorney seek input from Jedly for that?

Was the seller a dealer or a private seller? How had they described the watch and did it seem to be the right sort of price for a genuine, full spec 5517?

Finally, you say that it "ultimately cost money to get my money back." Why would your attorney allow that to be the case, if the seller had misrepresented an item in any way?

[rootbeer7]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

Surely the fact that Frontier bought this watch may disprove your assertion?

Knowing that there was a fake bearing its case number could be only of great service to the community.

Thank you Haywood. In times past, fakes have been recognised by a set serial number.

[Haywood_Milton]

I keep hoping we will hear more of this watch, so that the wider community may be protected. It's all very strange.

Jed, without saying any more than you are comfortable with, did you have any contact with Frontier beyond this public exchange?

[rootbeer7]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

I keep hoping we will hear more of this watch, so that the wider community may be protected. It's all very strange.

Jed, without saying any more than you are comfortable with, did you have any contact with Frontier beyond this public exchange?

I agree. Looking back now, that watchcase alone was questionable. I can’t understand why OP can’t furnish us with more answers. Sadly this piece will simply resurface again.