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.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by 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.

Agree. The insurance company only needs to recover the claim costs. The OP may be able to buy the watch back for close to what he paid for it using the refunded money from the seller.

[gamingdoctor]

Originally Posted by Davidt

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.

Where there's smoke there's fire.

The watch shop sold a stolen watch, mistake was made, damage done. If I knew the watch store I would likely never shop there again, there's plenty of trusted sellers elsewhere. The only way I would regain confidence again is if the store furnished the same model. Larger shops could likely absorb this cost with no problem and gain the trust of a customer.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

Where there's smoke there's fire.

The watch shop sold a stolen watch, mistake was made, damage done. If I knew the watch store I would likely never shop there again, there's plenty of trusted sellers elsewhere. The only way I would regain confidence again is if the store furnished the same model. Larger shops could likely absorb this cost with no problem and gain the trust of a customer.

Why would providing a new replacement watch cause you to regain trust?

If you are walking away for the reason they sold a stolen watch, how does that reasoning change by the seller providing you a new watch? If I was the seller, I would presume you aren't going to be a return customer, refund the original purchase, and move on.

[gamingdoctor]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Why would providing a new replacement watch cause you to regain trust?

If you are walking away for the reason they sold a stolen watch, how does that reasoning change by the seller providing you a new watch? If I was the seller, I would presume you aren't going to be a return customer, refund the original purchase, and move on.

Presumably they stand by their sales. I've bought plenty of watches off the trusted sellers here. I have a feeling that if something like this happened, they would make it right by providing a similar watch.

[Calatrava r]

The problem is the used watch industry mode of operation. Watches are sold based upon possession. I have never had any dealer ask me for a copy of a receipt where I have sold a watch to prove I owned it. What happens is a stolen watch passes a few hands and eventually ends up in the hands of a reliable person who unwittingly owns it not knowing it was stolen.

Kat says she has sold 50 or so watches lately. Did any of her purchasers demand written proof of ownership. She can weigh in on that. But, even if they did, it still doesn't cover prior sales of the same watches before Kat, assuming she bought any of them the used.

As somebody said above, if you buy used, risk of title is always there no matter who you buy from. Box and papers help tremendously but are not absolute protection. At least buying from a reputable firm gives the peace of mind they will refund your purchase price if and when a watch they sold turns out to have been stolen.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by 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.

Personally, I feel that watch is tainted now. I’m not sure I’d want a stolen watch back, even knowing the original owner had been made whole.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Imran]

Originally Posted by Davidt

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.

I really feel that the risk becomes almost zero if only watches with papers / card are considered.

[Davidt]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

Where there's smoke there's fire.

The watch shop sold a stolen watch, mistake was made, damage done. If I knew the watch store I would likely never shop there again, there's plenty of trusted sellers elsewhere. The only way I would regain confidence again is if the store furnished the same model. Larger shops could likely absorb this cost with no problem and gain the trust of a customer.

I think it’s highly unlikely they know they were selling a stolen watch. 80’s/90’s/modern Rolex are hardly rare - they’re everywhere and all but shady, low volume dealers make their profit on an established spread. This could just have easily happened to one of your trusted sellers. How could it not? No one has access to a flawless stolen register, and the second best thing isn’t available to most dealers. As a result trusted dealers should do the next best thing and make people whole, as is the case here.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have no idea who the dealer was who sold this watch and I’m not affiliated with any.

[Davidt]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

Presumably they stand by their sales. I've bought plenty of watches off the trusted sellers here. I have a feeling that if something like this happened, they would make it right by providing a similar watch.

I’d love anyone to provide an example where one of the ‘trusted dealers’ has had this scenario and refunded current market, rather than purchase price.

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by Davidt

I’d love anyone to provide an example where one of the ‘trusted dealers’ has had this scenario and refunded current market, rather than purchase price.

Especially 8 years hence. I think the lesson here is, send the thing to Rolex for a service immediately, so this can get sorted out close to time of sale.

[NigeG]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

Especially 8 years hence. I think the lesson here is, send the thing to Rolex for a service immediately, so this can get sorted out close to time of sale.

As I said earlier: just buy a new link at a Rolex Service Centre. No need to pay for a service immediately. Serial number will be checked against their stolen register


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Calatrava r]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

Especially 8 years hence. I think the lesson here is, send the thing to Rolex for a service immediately, so this can get sorted out close to time of sale.

But you never know when the watch may be reported as stolen. If it was taken by a person working inside a home, it could be months before the owner, if they have a large collection stored all over, realizes the watch was not misplaced but stolen.

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

But you never know when the watch may be reported as stolen. If it was taken by a person working inside a home, it could be months before the owner, if they have a large collection stored all over, realizes the watch was not misplaced but stolen.

This is true, but that’s gotta be a rare occurrence, no?
And a thief isn’t taking a watch to David SW or Bob’s watches. This thing has probably changed hands a dozen times before it winds up at a reseller.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

The problem is the used watch industry mode of operation. Watches are sold based upon possession. I have never had any dealer ask me for a copy of a receipt where I have sold a watch to prove I owned it. What happens is a stolen watch passes a few hands and eventually ends up in the hands of a reliable person who unwittingly owns it not knowing it was stolen.

Kat says she has sold 50 or so watches lately. Did any of her purchasers demand written proof of ownership. She can weigh in on that. But, even if they did, it still doesn't cover prior sales of the same watches before Kat, assuming she bought any of them the used.

As somebody said above, if you buy used, risk of title is always there no matter who you buy from. Box and papers help tremendously but are not absolute protection. At least buying from a reputable firm gives the peace of mind they will refund your purchase price if and when a watch they sold turns out to have been stolen.

Good summary as usual

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

Presumably they stand by their sales. I've bought plenty of watches off the trusted sellers here. I have a feeling that if something like this happened, they would make it right by providing a similar watch.

If it was a modern watch sold to you recently they would likely come out ahead giving you a replacement. Their cost is much lower than you paid. They would only lose their costs with a replacement (keeping the margin).

And the seller did stand by their sale. They refunded full purchase price.

[Norbert]

I think the thing take out of this is, keep your box and papers! Even though the forum curmudgeons say they aren't worth anything, in the event you need to sell, they are good to have.

[Calatrava r]

Originally Posted by Norbert

I think the thing take out of this is, keep your box and papers! Even though the forum curmudgeons say they aren't worth anything, in the event you need to sell, they are good to have.

And never keep or store the watch with the box and papers.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

The problem is the used watch industry mode of operation. Watches are sold based upon possession. I have never had any dealer ask me for a copy of a receipt where I have sold a watch to prove I owned it. What happens is a stolen watch passes a few hands and eventually ends up in the hands of a reliable person who unwittingly owns it not knowing it was stolen.

Kat says she has sold 50 or so watches lately. Did any of her purchasers demand written proof of ownership. She can weigh in on that. But, even if they did, it still doesn't cover prior sales of the same watches before Kat, assuming she bought any of them the used.

As somebody said above, if you buy used, risk of title is always there no matter who you buy from. Box and papers help tremendously but are not absolute protection. At least buying from a reputable firm gives the peace of mind they will refund your purchase price if and when a watch they sold turns out to have been stolen.

I have sold a lot of watches, and have never been asked to prove ownership. However, almost all had their original box and papers, which I always include pics of in my Ads. I do not include the original receipts, as they have personal info on them. I think buying preowned watches with box and docs eases people’s minds.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[worldofoyster]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Agree. The insurance company only needs to recover the claim costs. The OP may be able to buy the watch back for close to what he paid for it using the refunded money from the seller.

however, next time when he sends the watch in for service, it may flag again as stolen watch and being confiscated.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

however, next time when he sends the watch in for service, it may flag again as stolen watch and being confiscated.

Correct. I mentioned that earlier in this thread. The insurance company would need to clean up the history with Rolex or this will happen again.

[winst]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Correct. I mentioned that earlier in this thread. The insurance company would need to clean up the history with Rolex or this will happen again.

One of my best friends lost his 116234 on Super Jubilee several years ago when renovating his house. Found it last year in a stud wall, crystal cracked, dial damaged and worse for wear. Asked my advice on what to do and I told him to contact the insurance company who had paid him out for it and ask about what his options were.

They told him to send the watch back for appraisal and they would come back to him with his options. Once appraised, these were to either just give the watch back, or he could purchase it for £3000, a very good price which he took them up on. As he had bought an identical watch with the insurance pay out a few years earlier, he had hoped he could sell it for a profit but many people gave him low ball offers as so much money needed spending on it, service, crystal, dial (Changed it from White Romans to Blue Batons), crown and date wheel. I ended up swapping him for a pristine Air King 14000M Blue Arabic that he had always liked, where I had just had it serviced by RSC with new hands, crown and crystal.

When I took the 116234 to the AD for official Rolex service, no problems as it must have been removed from the register by the insurers. I spent £1400 on all of the work done and although it is not a perfect example as it had some over enthusiastic polishing on it previously, it is a very nice watch that stands me at about £4700, fully serviced with 2 years Rolex Warranty which is a definite bargain. Just think of how much aI would have paid for the same watch through CPO. The nice added bonus for me, was he found the original box and papers after I bought it which he didn’t realise he still had.

Definitely worth the OP asking the insurance company how much to buy it back, but I would still like to know which model it is, as I feel this is relevant.

[Tricolore66]

Wow, what a messy situation! I believe I read somewhere that Rolex was working on a system to incorporate blockchain technology to validate the chain of ownership of their watches, which would hopefully minimize these kinds of conflicts.