Rolex purchased from reputable shop reported stolen by Rolex

[Gebbeth]

Originally Posted by csaltphoto

Actually the only people who don't pay for the watch is the criminal who stole it. They rarely do any prison time for theft. No fine and no paying back victims. They get to keep the money. The victims and the rest of us pay for the criminals behavior. We pay for everything.

My only caveat to this is that in the criminal chain of custody, these watches are usually peddled, or laundered, at a steep discount to the FMV because to the robber, it was free to obtain, and he needs to get rid of it quickly. Any price you sell it would be pure profit (watch Goodfellas for this little bit of mafia economics), so you don't care that much about price elasticity.

So in some strange way, what the insurance company is offering the OP might actually be more than what the criminal actually obtained when he pawned off this stolen good.

But yes, the criminal faces minimal time, if at all, but it depends on whether the criminal ever gets caught, and if he does, is he caught just for that one stolen good (most likely not), or because he is part of an organization that does this, or is caught with multiple stolen items at once or over time (more likely).

If he's caught as part of an organization or caught with a large amount of stolen goods, yes, he will serve jail time, although probably not as long as you would want.

But how much time do you want him to spend? Surely you don't want to sentence him for life or execute him right?

I get it, it's frustrating, but with regard to public policy for crime and levels of crime, it's not as easy as you think.

[Gebbeth]

BTW, the insurance company, and the seller (if he was not involved in the theft), is not liable for any gain in the watch value or the lost "sentiments" about losing a watch you bought for a special occasion. It's just not a valid response to a fair compensation offer.

There is an oft cited example in law. If you take pictures of a vacation to some exotic location, and your camera memory card failed because of a manufacturing defect, the manufacturer may be obligated through warranty to refund you the cost of the memory card.

The manufacturer is NOT liable to pay you for the vacation costs or lost memories having lost these pictures because of the costs. These consequential damages are almost NEVER recoverable.

In the case of the stolen watch, even more so. You are essentially asking for consequential damages from an innocent 3rd party (the insurer or the original seller who seems to be trying to work with you and does not appear to be responsible for the actual theft....or in any conspiracy with the original theft).

This is simply not going to happen.

Before the insurance company withdraws their offer, and makes you sue them for recovery....which believe me....is a pain that will haunt you for the rest of your life....(try suing an insurance company....just try....they employ, by far, the most attorneys of any industry), take their offer and make it a life lesson instead.

[iangbris]

Originally Posted by swish77

Man, all of this chatter and not one mention of the “reputable” store that sold the watch?? And what was the watch we’re talking about? Sub, GMT, Day-Date etc .....???

OP, any reason you’re not providing this info? A lot of us here buy watches in the UK. Would be nice to know the store so we can make better decisions about future purchases. Think of it as a community service for all these fine fellows who gave you advice.

Absolutely, all I’m asking for is advice and I thank you for all of it.

It was a neo vintage steel sports watch.

I am trying to work with all parties involved,they are the retailer, insurance underwriters and Rolex and I have been deliberately vague to protect all of them. I don’t want anyone making purchasing decisions based on this because there is nothing to base them on.

Based on most of the answers here people would be happy to buy from them so my feedback would be for the minority


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GONZO2LR]

Originally Posted by iangbris

They have the same watch for sale for £5150 more than what I paid. Thank you for your kind feedback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

was your Rolex insured?

[iangbris]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

BTW, the insurance company, and the seller (if he was not involved in the theft), is not liable for any gain in the watch value or the lost "sentiments" about losing a watch you bought for a special occasion. It's just not a valid response to a fair compensation offer.

There is an oft cited example in law. If you take pictures of a vacation to some exotic location, and your camera memory card failed because of a manufacturing defect, the manufacturer may be obligated through warranty to refund you the cost of the memory card.

The manufacturer is NOT liable to pay you for the vacation costs or lost memories having lost these pictures because of the costs. These consequential damages are almost NEVER recoverable.

In the case of the stolen watch, even more so. You are essentially asking for consequential damages from an innocent 3rd party (the insurer or the original seller who seems to be trying to work with you and does not appear to be responsible for the actual theft....or in any conspiracy with the original theft).

This is simply not going to happen.

Before the insurance company withdraws their offer, and makes you sue them for recovery....which believe me....is a pain that will haunt you for the rest of your life....(try suing an insurance company....just try....they employ, by far, the most attorneys of any industry), take their offer and make it a life lesson instead.

I’ve made no reference of any discussions with any of the parties involved, outside of what I expected and what I would do if I was the seller. The rest is opinion including yours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BlackandBlue80]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Your whole argument is based on vitriol. Only Rolex has access to the Rolex stolen list, so no amount of due diligence by the seller would have revealed what only Rolex knew. Once the seller was advised of the Rolex determination he offered the buyer a full refund. The buyer has been made whole. The seller has no further obligation.

If the buyer were to post unfounded accusations about the seller on the internet and try to damage him and his reputation the seller could surely litigate to halt the slander and seek monetary damages from the buyer.

As much as this case is a disappointment for the buyer, getting a 100% refund is a good deal. The seller did the standup thing. He has no obligation to replace the watch.

I agree what you are saying. I was not pushing to slander or damage the seller, just to point out this is a problem that requires public knowledge. Most of us on the forum would be cautious, but someone who walks by may not realize the risks. This needs to be public knowledge that stolen Rolexes are something to be aware of. The selling watch dealer sourced it from somewhere that was unknown and resold it to the OP. In my opinion the “expert” watch dealer who currently is selling more watches bears some responsibility. Rolex is also a problem for making it difficult to trace the watches. There should be a way to quickly report a stolen watch and check serial numbers direct from Rolex. That would significantly put a dent in resale of stolen watches. Regardless I am hoping the OP can find a good resolution and the seller can find a way to ensure that this doesn’t happen again.

[iangbris]

Originally Posted by GONZO2LR

was your Rolex insured?

Yes, the serial numbers are with my insurers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[funkright]

Best case scenario, I would ask for the original amount PLUS what those funds would have earned in savings at the average rate since that date. That is an acceptable scenario.

Outside of that, I would say you're pretty well serviced that they're still around and are willing to make amends, so to speak.

Good luck in your efforts, but I would push for a bit more due the lost potential (opportunity cost) over that period.

Originally Posted by iangbris

Hi all,
I’m looking for some advice from the community please.
Back in 2017 I bought a Rolex from a reputable seller with a number of shops in the UK. Fast forward to December, I sent it to Rolex for a service and was horrified to learn that it was stolen in a burglary in 2016. Rolex, as per their policy have retained the watch and have passed me onto the insurance company that settled the claim, who are now seen as legal owners. The watch did not come with papers, which I find out are with the insurance company.

I reached out to the company that sold me the watch and they have offered me what I paid for it back in 2017. I want to work with them however I find their solution to be an insult. It was bought for my sons 21st so you can imagine he is devastated as well as now being in a position that we have to pay £5k+ to replace it.

What recourse do you suggest that I take? I am waiting to hear back from the original seller after I told them that their solution was not acceptable.

Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Davidt]

I can’t believe anyone seriously thinks they are entitled to current market value, or original purchase price plus average S&P500 increase, for a watch purchased 8 or so years ago. That’s nuts.

If the dealer was named here, the only thing I’d be taking away is that it’s safe to buy from them as if you go back with an issue EIGHT YEARS later, they’ll sort it out, even if it’s out of their control.

[S’portEye]

Agree^^^

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

yes, he will serve jail time, although probably not as long as you would want.

But how much time do you want him to spend? Surely you don't want to sentence him for life or execute him right?

I get it, it's frustrating, but with regard to public policy for crime and levels of crime, it's not as easy as you think.

I don't care about the jail time or whatever punishment. It's obviously not a deterrent. I think thieves should reimburse their victims by whatever means it takes. And I personally don't care about the thieves welfare.

[NigeG]

Originally Posted by csaltphoto

I don't care about the jail time or whatever punishment. It's obviously not a deterrent. I think thieves should reimburse their victims by whatever means it takes. And I personally don't care about the thieves welfare.

Interesting thought. Can picture the conversation
“right Sonny Jim, you owe the victim £15k for this Rolex you nicked”
“Cor blimey Guvnor! I only got a Monkey for it. I ain’t got £15K and I’ve nine kids to feed”
“Unlucky Son, off to The Scrubs wiv yer”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vanyo]

Originally Posted by iangbris

Hi all,
I’m looking for some advice from the community please.
Back in 2017 I bought a Rolex from a reputable seller with a number of shops in the UK. Fast forward to December, I sent it to Rolex for a service and was horrified to learn that it was stolen in a burglary in 2016. Rolex, as per their policy have retained the watch and have passed me onto the insurance company that settled the claim, who are now seen as legal owners. The watch did not come with papers, which I find out are with the insurance company.

I reached out to the company that sold me the watch and they have offered me what I paid for it back in 2017. I want to work with them however I find their solution to be an insult. It was bought for my sons 21st so you can imagine he is devastated as well as now being in a position that we have to pay £5k+ to replace it.

What recourse do you suggest that I take? I am waiting to hear back from the original seller after I told them that their solution was not acceptable.

Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Submit application with criminal charges against the current legal representative of the seller on selling stolen goods done by a group of people. Make the state attorneys office to accept the charges and commence with investigation. Ones the charges are accepted, negotiate with the shop if they want you to pursue the charges or they wish to settle. Believe me, the management of the store will be very disappointed.

[winst]

Originally Posted by Vanyo

Submit application with criminal charges against the current legal representative of the seller on selling stolen goods done by a group of people. Make the state attorneys office to accept the charges and commence with investigation. Ones the charges are accepted, negotiate with the shop if they want you to pursue the charges or they wish to settle. Believe me, the management of the store will be very disappointed.

OP is in the UK not the US.

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by Vanyo

Submit application with criminal charges against the current legal representative of the seller on selling stolen goods done by a group of people. Make the state attorneys office to accept the charges and commence with investigation. Ones the charges are accepted, negotiate with the shop if they want you to pursue the charges or they wish to settle. Believe me, the management of the store will be very disappointed.

Criminal Charges? Is there some sort of statute of limitations in the UK?

Is there any indication whatsoever that the shop acted in a criminal manner?

[Scholar]

It's extremely weird how OP seems to want the dealer to pay him back the grey market scalper rate for the watch when they have absolutely agreed to do the right thing by reimbursing him.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Scholar

It's extremely weird how OP seems to want the dealer to pay him back the grey market scalper rate for the watch when they have absolutely agreed to do the right thing by reimbursing him.

Indeed

The shop here, unless proven to have been dealing in stolen goods, has no further liability/responsibility than returning actual costs, nothing more.

Attempting to extort more by intimidation or threats to damage a reputation could be considered a crime.

[Calatrava r]

https://law.stackexchange.com/questi...ght-it-10-year

This link presumes to discuss the law in Poland and Switzerland. Very interesting.

[bluestreak]

Why on earth does Rolex not allow access to its stolen watch database? Maybe the OP should sue Rolex. Seems more reasonable than suing the shop.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

Why on earth does Rolex not allow access to its stolen watch database? Maybe the OP should sue Rolex. Seems more reasonable than suing the shop.

I expect that if the database was published the original owner would not have got his stolen watch back.

[winst]

Which model is it iangbris, just to get some perspective as to how hard it would be to get a replacement if not a birth year one?

[rolexnerd]

Hahaha this is hilarious! The seller is doing right by the OP and yet he complains and still wants more.

[NigeG]

Originally Posted by Tools

I expect that if the database was published the original owner would not have got his stolen watch back.

The owner of the watch, when it was stolen, will probably not get it back. It now belongs to his Insurance company. They may offer him first refusal to buy it but there’s no guarantee of it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kevin of Larchmont]

This is a truly great thread.

[Easy E]

Maybe I have missed the answer to this, but has the OP actually asked the insurance company what they will take for the watch? If the original seller is offering a full refund and the insurance company will take less maybe the OP can get the watch vbqck and make a couple of bucks. The insurance payout would have been at 2016 values. IDK.

[brandrea]

I still like Paul’s approach to this.

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by NigeG

Interesting thought. Can picture the conversation
“right Sonny Jim, you owe the victim £15k for this Rolex you nicked”
“Cor blimey Guvnor! I only got a Monkey for it. I ain’t got £15K and I’ve nine kids to feed”
“Unlucky Son, off to The Scrubs wiv yer”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk