Rolex purchased from reputable shop reported stolen by Rolex

[Davidt]

Originally Posted by No SUBctitute

.

The watch store has chosen to take on the risk of selling watches of undetermined provenance. It would be nice if the watch store assumed that a cost of doing business was to find a replacement watch for customers who later found out they had bought a stolen watch from that store. The customer entered into an agreement to buy a watch eight years ago. If the store is unable to make good on the promise to transfer legal ownership of the watch to the customer (since it was stolen property), then the store should obligate itself to provide the customer with another similar watch.

Its not the watch store that has chosen to take this risk. Every watch store takes this risk as Rolex does not provide access to their stolen register. Instead dealers use an amalgamation of other, third party databases that are only partially complete. Before the CPO programme and after access to the database was restricted, there was no way to buy a used or vintage Rolex with full certainty that legal title could be transferred. In fact even Rolex’s database isn’t complete as it relies on a stolen watch being reported.

Blaming the dealer here or suggesting they chose to take a risk and should therefore make up the difference is ridiculous. If you want security against this extremely rare occurrence, buy new as there will always be a minuscule risk buying used. Even with papers.