Rolex sent to RSC for service, got confiscated

[floater156]

Originally Posted by swissautopro

A lot of people have those, George. A Rolex is a significant purchase.

x2, I'm saving my receipt.

[azguy]

There are many times when I read RSC policies and rules and really wonder if I should continue with the brand or just sell them off and wear my Omega's and Breitling's.

I know some of you are chocking on your coffee and donuts, but I'm tired of this "hey you are lucky we let you wear/own your watch" Rolex attitude.

They should be hand-holding the OP, the poor guy is probably so upset and I bet they treated him like the thief.

Rolex should know that a secondary market is there and they should support it somehow by doing verification and stolen watch checks before people make huge $$$ purchases...IMHO

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by Vaxe

My cousin purchased a brand new Datejust 16200 from an AD in Northern California in 2006, and recently sent it over to RSC for its first overhaul.

Did they perform the service? Did your friend ask for the watch back before the service?

Seems a little strange itself.

Proof of ownership is key.

Original receipt.
Original paperwork in cousin's name.
Bank/CC statement with AD name and 16200 cost.

Absent any the above puts your cousin at a disadvantage against the other party who have at least lodged a formal police report.

[4vCoupe]

Originally Posted by fjohn56

I'm the guy above who purchased a rolex from a trusted seller, took it to the RSC in LA, received the letter from rolex general counsil saying the watch was reported stolen, dual ownership, trusted seller wired me a refund the next morning. The trusted seller was Tony aka justrolexes on TRF out of San Diego. I highly recommend Tony. Would like to point out I paid cash for this watch, was not given a reciept and did not ask for one. Tony responded immediatly with excellant communication & promising a complete refund the next morning. I provided my bank number and the money was in my account 5 minutes after the bank opened. Tony followed thru and is a rare man of honor. I never threated Tony in any way, and never felt the need to, simply provided Tony the docs, immediately he promised a complete refund. This was the first watch I purchased on TRF. Someone who was here before me said to buy the seller not watch. I will buy another watch from Tony. He deserves this write up, Tony earned it in my book.

Makes me glad I purchased from a trusted TRF seller who will stand by what he sells and will not hesitate to make it right.

[T-Rip]

The OP needs to answer some questions asked on this thread..

[Vaxe]

An update:
My cousin spent the evening looking for the box, and fortunately was able to locate it along with the serial number pamphlet. However, it does not have her name recorded on it (the original fold out kind, not the new warranty cards), and since she paid in cash, there is no way to involve the bank. She does not recall receiving a receipt since the discount was good and it was under the impression to be an under-the-table kind of deal.

The RSC is closed during the weekend, so we will attempt to make contact on Monday with the updated proof of ownership on our end.


It boggles my mind that there isn't a more streamlined way for Rolex to register proper ownership. It seems that ownership is registered with Rolex after the watch is sent in for service, and not when the watch is purchased from an AD. Essentially, years could pass before Rolex is informed of the purchaser of the watch - too much time for things to go wrong.

I think this is a serious issue and can potentially be exploited by malicious sellers, exemplified by her current situation with the Datejust. Seems quite intuitive for Rolex to just establish an infrastructure for ADs to directly register the watch to the buyer on Rolex's system at the time of sale.


Thanks for all the helpful advice, I will keep you all updated with the case.

[tomchicago]

Vaxe I'm pretty sure it's illegal for them to keep your watch without the police involved. Call the cops/attorney.

[imono]

OP - so who's name is on the certificate?
Or is it blank?
It is also entirely possible it could have been purchased at a high end jewelry store thinking it is an AD.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Vaxe

An update:
My cousin spent the evening looking for the box, and fortunately was able to locate it along with the serial number pamphlet. However, it does not have her name recorded on it (the original fold out kind, not the new warranty cards), and since she paid in cash, there is no way to involve the bank. She does not recall receiving a receipt since the discount was good and it was under the impression to be an under-the-table kind of deal.

The RSC is closed during the weekend, so we will attempt to make contact on Monday with the updated proof of ownership on our end.


It boggles my mind that there isn't a more streamlined way for Rolex to register proper ownership. It seems that ownership is registered with Rolex after the watch is sent in for service, and not when the watch is purchased from an AD. Essentially, years could pass before Rolex is informed of the purchaser of the watch - too much time for things to go wrong.

I think this is a serious issue and can potentially be exploited by malicious sellers, exemplified by her current situation with the Datejust. Seems quite intuitive for Rolex to just establish an infrastructure for ADs to directly register the watch to the buyer on Rolex's system at the time of sale.


Thanks for all the helpful advice, I will keep you all updated with the case.

Register proper ownership... Since a watch may change hands many, many times in it's life, no company can strictly "register" an item to one owner and nobody else.. Would you want Rolex to refuse service to you, or keep your watch because their records don't show that you were the original purchaser. ?? Dealers maintain a record of purchases to consumers, and Rolex knows what Dealer every serial was sent to originally.

If your cousin has the original fold-out paper, then she will likely be able to "prove" ownership. A police report of theft could easily be a typo or even an insurance scam with a serial pulled out of thin air or by whomever sold it to her.. A photocopy of the original warranty, and declaration of purchase at the Dealer in 2006 that Rolex knows the watch was originally sent to should be sufficient..

Unless there is something that your cousin is not telling you.......

[bondtoys]

Why is your cousin surprised about the unfold when the watch has been purchased under the impression of an ' under the table deal?'

[nch209]

I simply do not understand how this works, referring to how Rolex keeps watches. A watch can be reported as stolen when its not--- by the first owner prior to reselling---- and then Rolex keeps it? This just seems off considering the scam potenial- especially if Rolex strives to get it back to the first owner, not to mention the hassel of doing such a process. Is this really happening, happening frequently, or an urban legend? It just does not makes sense to me...

[Tools]

Originally Posted by nch209

I simply do not understand how this works, referring to how Rolex keeps watches. A watch can be reported as stolen when its not--- by the first owner prior to reselling---- and then Rolex keeps it? This just seems off considering the scam potenial- especially if Rolex strives to get it back to the first owner, not to mention the hassel of doing such a process. Is this really happening, happening frequently, or an urban legend? It just does not makes sense to me...

Not sure I understand your perspective.. If your watch was stolen, wouldn't you want Rolex to hold it and notify you it was in for service, awaiting confirmation of the legitimate owner ?? Any business has the obligation to report a potential crime. Take a Harley in to a Dealer with the wrong serial number on the front forks sometime and see who greets you when you come to pick it up.. Or your Ford with chop-shop parts on it.

If the first owner commits fraud - he is a criminal. Crime is handled through the proper channels.

[bondtoys]

I think, that rolex will hand over the watch to the authorities when the ownership is in question. That's why the op got contacted by them

[karmatp]

This "under the table deal" sure seems odd to me. I bet this was not a new Rolex from a AD, or this would not be happening.

I have a couple of friends that have had the Rolex watches stolen and they can't wait for the day some guy who thinks he got a good deal tries to get them serviced.

Even when you service a watch at a local AD using a watchmaker with a parts account, they must provide the serial to Rolex for replacement parts.

I for one am glad that Rolex is proactive in confiscating stolen watches, someday it may get one of our watches back to us.

Just think about how many people are buying watches without boxes and papers thinking they are getting a good deal when it turns out, it was stolen sometime down the road.

[Lagunatic]

Originally Posted by Highland Ranger

My concern here would be that the op has the story correct and the cousin bought the watch legit with all paperwork from the ad who either defrauded him some how or made a mistake.

Wouldn't Rolex bear some responsibility for the actions of their ad?

One would hope something like that could not happen but if it could argument for not using rsc ever.

Good point , but the guy doesn't have the Receipt

[skyman51]

Whole thing doesn't seem right. I have heard this story for years. I think it is an urban legend. What if you live in North Carolina and you send your watch to Dallas RSC for service. They confiscate it? and than do what? What if you have owned the watch for years and bought it from a private individual with no receipt of any kind, it is not Rolex's job to be the FBI.

[superscot69]

What if you have owned the watch for years and bought it from a private individual with no receipt of any kind, it is not Rolex's job to be the FBI.

Have to agree this is so wrong on the part or the RSC

[skyman51]

Until someone with a first hand experience of this happenig to them that they care to relate, I think it is not true.

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by skyman51

Whole thing doesn't seem right. I have heard this story for years. I think it is an urban legend. What if you live in North Carolina and you send your watch to Dallas RSC for service. They confiscate it? and than do what? What if you have owned the watch for years and bought it from a private individual with no receipt of any kind, it is not Rolex's job to be the FBI.

There's your urban legend.



The whole 'under the counter' cash deal feeds fuel to this fire.

[Grissom]

Makes little sense if bought new from an AD, unless the AD reported it stolen, before going out of business, and then "sold" it to your cousin, for cash, no receipt or documentation, "under the table".......or perhaps an unscrupulous employee of that AD sold it to your cousin for cash "under the table", kept the $$ and told the owner/manager that the watch was stolen. Lots of room for bad things going on, when purchasing with no receipt/documentation. If a deal is purported to be soooo good that no documentation will be forthcoming, unless you know and can trust the seller (such as buying from Tony as noted above) I would pass!

[Sam Philip]

Originally Posted by skyman51

Until someone with a first hand experience of this happenig to them that they care to relate, I think it is not true.

Agree

[skyman51]

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

There's your urban legend.



The whole 'under the counter' cash deal feeds fuel to this fire.

Is this your personal experience? What RSC is that letter from?

[Lagunatic]

the story sounds fishy to me

[hsfrank]

Originally Posted by blue lion

If the watch was reported stolen I'm not sure having receipts would show anything other than the OP bought the watch. That's not in doubt. I bet this won't be easily resolved, a dual ownership as posted above it seems.
Let us know what happens.

Not necessarily so. If the receipt shows the watch was purchased at an AD originally , and the person holding the receipt is the same as on the warranty card, then RSC would have no leg to stand on IMHO. They would have to admit that there was a mistake somewhere. All this assumes that the serial numbers are the same.

[Lagunatic]

Maybe forum member Vaxe is making fools out of all of us.

[jay1988]

I'd be extremely surprised if your "cousin" didn't get their watch back. A decent attorney could probably sort this out for you. Obviously it depends on the law in the part of the world you are in but a bank statement showing the transaction would show you bought it. The amount (I'm assuming) would indicate you didn't buy it thinking it was stolen as most AD's offer around 10% discount at most so who pays 10% of RRP for a watch they think is stolen ? I can't see any judge deciding to confiscate the watch.

[Lagunatic]

Originally Posted by jay1988

I'd be extremely surprised if your "cousin" didn't get their watch back. A decent attorney could probably sort this out for you. Obviously it depends on the law in the part of the world you are in but a bank statement showing the transaction would show you bought it. The amount (I'm assuming) would indicate you didn't buy it thinking it was stolen as most AD's offer around 10% discount at most so who pays 10% of RRP for a watch they think is stolen ? I can't see any judge deciding to confiscate the watch.

You think attorneys work for free? It would cost more for an attorney than the watch is worth.

[77T]

[jay1988]

Originally Posted by Lagunatic

You think attorneys work for free? It would cost more for an attorney than the watch is worth.

My cousin would work for free yes.

I know lawyers who charge £150 an hour and I'm not exactly sure how it works but I'm fairly sure one hour to look over the information and one hour to show up in court would be all you need. Even if your lawyer charged $1000 an hour how many hours do you think it's going to take him ? He needs to look over the information and show up in court. Unless I'm missing something.

The best thing is to be vigilant when buying. If you buy from TRF for example take a print screen of the thread in the for sale section. Send the seller a few e-mails from your e-mail account and save them.

If you have all those things especially an e-mail dated on 20/5/2011 and that e-mail says $5000. Then you have a bank statement with a transaction for $5000 going through on the 21/5/2011. You also have a print screen of a for sale add online dated 19/5/2011. What kind of judge is going to believe that you bought it knowing it was stolen. I don't think many places in the world would confiscate a watch in that situation.

[nch209]

Originally Posted by Tools

Not sure I understand your perspective.. If your watch was stolen, wouldn't you want Rolex to hold it and notify you it was in for service, awaiting confirmation of the legitimate owner ?? Any business has the obligation to report a potential crime. Take a Harley in to a Dealer with the wrong serial number on the front forks sometime and see who greets you when you come to pick it up.. Or your Ford with chop-shop parts on it.

If the first owner commits fraud - he is a criminal. Crime is handled through the proper channels.

My perspective has to do with your last statement- if the first owner commits fraud.... that is my point. If you buy a watch from an individual and they later report it stolen, then Rolex keeps it and tries to give it back to the individual? That makes no sense to me, and I can not imagine Rolex is wanting to police watches comming in. Maybe they do, but I would be surprised.

I think your comparison of Harleys and Fords is a bit off base as when these switch hands there are titles being transfered and more records kept. I am totally against fraud of any kind, but simply see Rolex holding allegid stolen property as being a big PIA for them... and in some cases if in fact they do, they may be holding it for a person commiting fraud.

Does my perspective make sense? I simply see faults in what appears to be a good gesture from Rolex. Maybe I am off base...