Experience with Stolen Rolex that was recovered by Service Center

[saltyandwet]

Originally Posted by samwoo2go

I got a new DJ 41 back in October 2023. It was stolen around New Years (yes less than 3 months). Not going to get into what happened but I do want to talk about the recovery process and see if anyone has gone through it and can provide me with some guidance.

I reported the watch stolen of course and have a police report. I also reported it stolen with Rolex directly so the serial number is tagged.

About early March, I got a letter from a Law Firm ( Gibney, Anthony & Flaherty, LLP ) representing Rolex (I looked them up, legit) letting me know a Jeweler sent the watch into Rolex for service and it's now seized by Rolex pending outcome. Great! Watch found VERY QUICKLY!

Not so fast. The law firm is basically telling me it's not so simple to decide even though I have a police report, original serial card and receipt. They need the seller to relinquish claim to the watch. Since he didn't, the law firm now wants to "introduce" me to the other party directly so we can sort it out. This process feels completely insane to me and honestly feels like the law firm does not want any legal liability and just want to toss this over the fence. The only reason the other party would want to communicate direct with me is to probably try and settle (extort) money to release the claim.

This is so crazy that Rolex would not want to put a swift end to a shady grey dealer that bought a watch with no papers and was in possession of stolen property. I feel like the way they are handling this only continues to encourage all these crimes with owners around the world.

In so far, I have not been actively involving my Detective on the case because they actually hinted that involving the police will take longer, which also feels really shady to me. But it's been about 3 weeks now with no real resolution, so I think I am going to go the police route.

In so far, I told the firm I am not going to communicate with 3rd party, gave them all my documentation and requested that the watch be release to me or my local police dept.

My questions are:

- Does anyone know a customer email address for Rolex USA or Switzerland? I can't seen to find one via searching. Or a good phone number?

- Anyone have dealt with this before, how should I handle this?

OFC they are not going to just release the watch back to you. Who is to say you didn't sell the watch w/o box and papers, all cash transaction and try to pull a fast one? I can sell a Daytona to you for $5k, no box, no papers, all cash. As soon as you drive off, I will report to police and Rolex. Are you going to just release the watch back to me?

[VonSomething]

This is exactly why a lot of dealers prefer you to 'come to them' if there are any issues with the watch and they'll fix it. I've heard it being said a million times from these Youtube dealers.

For sure a lot of shady stuff going on with all those 'no box no papers' watches.

[docmri]

100% disagree. The watch was my brothers. It was stolen from him. THe dealer was in possession of stolen property. He sold stolen property. The ownership never transferred from my brother. The watch always belongs to him. The second buyer did nothing wrong (other than buying a watch from a non authorized dealer, if you can consider that wrong) but he never owned the watch. He was the second victim in this story where he handed over his money to someone who gave him something that didn't belong to him and therefore could not transfer ownership. This is no different than me stopping you on the street and offering to sell you a car parked on the street that I just found the car keys don't the flood that the owner dropped.. You give me a 1000 bucks for it and tell you its yours. You drive off with it. You don't own the car. You were swindled out of 1000 bucks. You need to get your money back from the person who swindled you ( in the car scenario- not the owner of the car) or from the person who sold you the watch since they are the ones that took your money and gave yo something they had no right to give you. THe owner of the watch is still my brother. There should be no dispute about this. The poor second buyer needs to demand or sue the person who sold him stolen merchandise. But, my brother simply needs to have his stolen merchandise returned to him.

[webble1]

Perhaps another example of Rolex’s decision to not allow access to their stolen watch register leads to a stolen watch being bought and sold a number of times. If they hadn’t withdraw this there would not be so many transactions of stolen watches.

[hojlund]

Originally Posted by webble1

Perhaps another example of Rolex’s decision to not allow access to their stolen watch register leads to a stolen watch being bought and sold a number of times. If they hadn’t withdraw this there would not be so many transactions of stolen watches.

I think rolex can develop a pay to play system, let those people in need to access their stolen database.

[worldofoyster]

Originally Posted by docmri

100% disagree. The watch was my brothers. It was stolen from him. THe dealer was in possession of stolen property. He sold stolen property. The ownership never transferred from my brother. The watch always belongs to him. The second buyer did nothing wrong (other than buying a watch from a non authorized dealer, if you can consider that wrong) but he never owned the watch. He was the second victim in this story where he handed over his money to someone who gave him something that didn't belong to him and therefore could not transfer ownership. This is no different than me stopping you on the street and offering to sell you a car parked on the street that I just found the car keys don't the flood that the owner dropped.. You give me a 1000 bucks for it and tell you its yours. You drive off with it. You don't own the car. You were swindled out of 1000 bucks. You need to get your money back from the person who swindled you ( in the car scenario- not the owner of the car) or from the person who sold you the watch since they are the ones that took your money and gave yo something they had no right to give you. THe owner of the watch is still my brother. There should be no dispute about this. The poor second buyer needs to demand or sue the person who sold him stolen merchandise. But, my brother simply needs to have his stolen merchandise returned to him.

The minute the watch was stolen from your brother, he lost his ownership.

The grey maybe liable if he purchases from the theft without doing enough due diligence. however, when the other guy purchases from the grey under good faith and can provide proof that it's fair trade transaction, his ownership begins at that point. If your brother wants the watch back, he needs to purchase the watch from the other guy as a separate transaction.

[77T]

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

The minute the watch was stolen from your brother, he lost his ownership.

The grey maybe liable if he purchases from the theft without doing enough due diligence. however, when the other guy purchases from the grey under good faith and can provide proof that it's fair trade transaction, his ownership begins at that point. If your brother wants the watch back, he needs to purchase the watch from the other guy as a separate transaction.

Not true in USA - but I can't say what another Country does.

The original owner loses "possession" upon the theft. He or She does not lose "ownership".

The buyer of a stolen watch, even unwittingly, does not gain clear title.

The matter will go to the authorities who performed the original police report. If the recovery occurs in a different country, then that jurisdiction plays an important role - bilateral agreements on repatriating stolen assets will matter a lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[worldofoyster]

Originally Posted by 77T

Not true in USA - but I can't say what another Country does.

The original owner loses "possession" upon the theft. He or She does not lose "ownership".

The buyer of a stolen watch, even unwittingly, does not gain clear title.

The matter will go to the authorities who performed the original police report. If the recovery occurs in a different country, then that jurisdiction plays an important role - bilateral agreements on repatriating stolen assets will matter a lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

ain't no way the other guy is giving up the watch that he paid for legally for free

[HHIslander]

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

The minute the watch was stolen from your brother, he lost his ownership.

The grey maybe liable if he purchases from the theft without doing enough due diligence. however, when the other guy purchases from the grey under good faith and can provide proof that it's fair trade transaction, his ownership begins at that point. If your brother wants the watch back, he needs to purchase the watch from the other guy as a separate transaction.

:

No. You do not lose legal ownership of goods after they have been stolen. If that were the case, there would be no such charge as “possession of stolen goods” as possession would be all that matters.

[Kingcobb]

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

ain't no way the other guy is giving up the watch that he paid for legally for free

The other guy will have no say in the matter...Just like in all honesty neither will the original owner.

If they don't come to an agreement between themselves, it will be remanded to the police department who will take it before a judge for a declaratory judgment based on the evidence they have.

The judge will rule, again if all is as has been presented in this post, in favor of the original owner and that will be that.

Unless the current owner is the actual thief or it can be shown that they knowingly bought stolen goods, they aren't under any legal trouble, but their only hope for compensation outside of the original owner coming to a financial agreement to avoid the courts, would be to contact the individual from whom they purchased said watch for a refund.

[bondtoys]

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

ain't no way the other guy is giving up the watch that he paid for legally for free

That‘s what the guy, who bought my watch on ebay- which has been stolen from me earlier thought as well.

1 ultimatum later that has remained unreplied - his flat got searched on Christmas Eve and my watch has been returned 2 weeks later.
And he had to pay for my attorney and court fees.

[docmri]

Ummm,No. What country laws are you citing? What you cited sounds ridiculous and certainly not the not the case in the USA (where the theft occurred). You do not lose ownership of an item if someone steals it from you. You lose possession and then get possession back when it is recovered.

[INC]

Originally Posted by docmri

Ummm,No. What country laws are you citing? What you cited sounds ridiculous and certainly not the not the case in the USA (where the theft occurred). You do not lose ownership of an item if someone steals it from you. You lose possession and then get possession back when it is recovered.

Except, for example, when you asserted an insurance claim and the insurance company paid. In this case, the insurance company will be the owner, and you will only be able to buy back the watch you previously owned if the insurance company allows it.

[docmri]

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

The other guy did not do anything wrong and should not take the loss if he shows good faith and provides proof that he spent his own money to purchase the watch. The other guy is not obligate to give back the watch for free, with or without a lawyer. your bro should go after the theft or the dealer who purchased the watch from the theft

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

ain't no way the other guy is giving up the watch that he paid for legally for free

Originally Posted by INC

Except, for example, when you asserted an insurance claim and the insurance company paid. In this case, the insurance company will be the owner, and you will only be able to buy back the watch you previously owned if the insurance company allows it.

Correct. If you accept money for the watch, you no longer have a claim on it. In my brother's case, the second buyer asked if my brother had made an insurance claim (he did not), as that would have invalidated his claim that the watch was his. However, I assume if someone wanted to contact the insurance company, they might have a claim for the watch to go to them. I wonder.