Looks like i got conned when i bought my gold rolex submariner

[chicfarmer1]

Lesson: you weren't as fussy as you thought you were. If you were, you would have (1) researched to be sure the place of business was in fact an authorized Rolex dealer--this seems uncertain in your telling, (2) bought the watch yourself in person so you could go over all assurances face to face, (3) checked its specs including its vintage immediately upon receipt of it, and (4) made sure all those details were listed in your insurance policy. Since none of those happened, it may be unfortunate but finally just something that happened.

You are now a more informed buyer. Think about this and move onward. Nobody owes you anything.

[gpfps]

You vented and now move on. I think like you do, but life is short and don't sweat the little stuff .

[Postnikov]

...and last but not least: the cardboard outer box pointed edges looked the tiniest bit worn too....

[cdweller]

You got hustled a bit which stinks, but there really is nothing you can do at this point except learn from the experience and move on. Don't dwell on it, even though it was unfortunate! Goodluck

[broker]

I don't know if I can make a connection with the stainless steel models, but if your "93" has the old bracelet and the 2002 has the SEL I would, in the case of the model in gold, prefer the former.
It is worth mentioning also that the gold sub ​​is far from being a good seller and, therefore, the case "letter/year 93" does not mean that the watch was made this year or next, he may have been sitting in the factory for years ...

[Thatguy]

I know how you feel. When I was 14 I bought a Rolex in NY for about $10 and it might not have been real. Maybe I should go and see if he is at the same street corner.

[Psmith]

Originally Posted by Thatguy

I know how you feel. When I was 14 I bought a Rolex in NY for about $10 and it might not have been real. Maybe I should go and see if he is at the same street corner.

Did you keep the box and papers?

[RIPLEYXL9]

Well the plot thickens. :) :) :)
The good news is the Head of Customer Services has checked that yes "X" was used in 91,92, & 93 for certain Rolex's so she thinks the prospective buying dealer [who is not an AD] just picked the date that would have the lowest value.

She also confirmed that various models use different letters for differnt years and that Rolex dont publish the full specialised list for confidentiality and to frustrate would be counterfieting. She also confirmed that the Letter "X" was used for my model in the last half of 2001 and 2002.

Furthermore she could see that my specific serial number was shipped from ROLEX Switzerland to the Rolex AD in the City I bought it in Germany in March 2002.
As they have seen the watch 4 times [service etc. and fiitting an additional link] she is positive the watch I bought in is a genuine 18ct Rolex Submariner, and it was shipped to Germany in 2002 by the Rolex factory/distribution and it was made in either the last half of 2001 or the the early months of 2002. Apparently its very difficult to determine the exact month of manufacture without a special request and a reason
Personally in light of the fact it all fits I am totally happy because I can now represent the watch fairly and with total confidence to any Buyer as a 2002 watch, as i have confirmation fro Rolex it was shipped to Germany by the Rolex factory in early March 2002 and an invoice from a Rolex AD stating 8th March 2002.
Whether it was made on the bench in November 2001 or Jan 2002 to be honest I dont think matters one jot - after all the Rolex system it self states it a 2001 or 2002 Watch!
Actually as she pointed out, as its a a very high serial number > 846,000 it suggests it was probably very late 2001 or more likely 2002.

Obviously I assume a Rolex UK employee in her position would not lie about this, and she also added that if required, she/Rolex could confirm this to any prospective buyer. Even to the point if they wanted to go in to St James Sq. with the watch they would then be abe to inspect it and say this watch is a 2002 version.
So I am a very happy bunny!
Good job I didn't liable the dealer eh!
And now I can ask top price for it with confidence.

Proving their is a god; mixed in with the original price list was the fax copy I sent the dealer. Specifcally requesting "they order for me a completely new watch direct from the Rolex Factory, specifically not one that has been lying on a shelf for years. On the basis that they are fully Authorised Rolex agents. And that I understand it will take 7 days for them to get the watch from Rolex"

So for the cynical posters: Actually the Rolex dealer could have been in serious do dos had he knowingly supplied an 11 year old watch to a customer, who in writing specifically only wanted a new one" direct from the factory".
My dear little nephew who is both a US Attorney and a UK Barrister said he'd have to check it out [as he specialises in Corporate Tax law] but he felt as a minimum the Dealer would have had to compensate me for the difference in value befteen a 2002 and a 1991 Submariner - which he felt was the minimum reasonable thing to do. And if the Dealer proved difficult then start looking at "misrepresentation of fact within the fullfillment of a contract" - OK I didn't follow everything as I was waiting for a definitive from Rolex plus these lawyers rattle of statue, precedence and case law like rattle snakes; But it sounded awfully like Fraud. Not to mention there apparently could be a possibility that I could force the dealer to 'perform the contract' namely supply a squeeky clean Submariner - naturally I would then have to return the old watch!
Er that I felt would be pushing it as the new its now £24K against £8.5 to £10K [not sure of best 2nd hand valu yet?] But little lawyer said he'd have to look it up as different types of assets are treated differently - I said yeah but Ive had 10 years use enjoyment out of it. He replied |I understand that but it depends how this has been classified could be that or could be a simple sorry you knowingly flooged of an 11 year old watch that was not worth £16770 on that date. So go and supply a new one as contracted and you can have the old one back your customr shouldnt suffer becuase the price of gold has gone up and no you can't rely on Equity to protect you, as you 'didn't come to court with clean hands' . I guess translated it means OK you the dealer lose out because you tried to cheat a customer and it backfired in your face!

And to all the sympathetic posters - appreciated as I was feeling a little hard done by.
It also not a bad idea for all buyers to check this out in writing and keep it in case it all goes nasty in future!


What would I expect directly from Rolex well obviously now we know its not 11 years older nothing ; but had it been a 1991 watch directly nothing, as they are 3rd Party to the contract. But indirectly, as I went out of my way to check the dealer was an Authorised Agent/Dealer; bluntly so I could buy with utter confidence and peace of mind!
I would have expected them to force the dealer [threaten to take away their dealerhip] to do the honourable thing of putting right the transaction financially. And if they couldn't make the dealer do it, as a gesture of goodwill for not policing their Dealership network properly; they could have offerred me a lovely discount on the new replacement Submariner [circa up to the dealers normal markup i.e. at Dealer cost ]- which they could have supplied direct to me.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by RIPLEYXL9

Well the plot thickens. :) :) :)
The good news is the Head of Customer Services has checked that yes "X" was used in 91,92, & 93 for certain Rolex's so she thinks the prospective buying dealer [who is not an AD] just picked the date that would have the lowest value.

She also confirmed that various models use different letters for differnt years and that Rolex dont publish the full specialised list for confidentiality and to frustrate would be counterfieting. She also confirmed that the Letter "X" was used for my model in the last half of 2001 and 2002.

Furthermore she could see that my specific serial number was shipped from ROLEX Switzerland to the Rolex AD in the City I bought it in Germany in March 2002.
As they have seen the watch 4 times [service etc. and fiitting an additional link] she is positive the watch I bought in is a genuine 18ct Rolex Submariner, and it was shipped to Germany in 2002 by the Rolex factory/distribution and it was made in either the last half of 2001 or the the early months of 2002. Apparently its very difficult to determine the exact month of manufacture without a special request and a reason
Personally in light of the fact it all fits I am totally happy because I can now represent the watch fairly and with total confidence to any Buyer as a 2002 watch, as i have confirmation fro Rolex it was shipped to Germany by the Rolex factory in early March 2002 and an invoice from a Rolex AD stating 8th March 2002.
Whether it was made on the bench in November 2001 or Jan 2002 to be honest I dont think matters one jot - after all the Rolex system it self states it a 2001 or 2002 Watch!
Actually as she pointed out, as its a a very high serial number > 846,000 it suggests it was probably very late 2001 or more likely 2002.

Obviously I assume a Rolex UK employee in her position would not lie about this, and she also added that if required, she/Rolex could confirm this to any prospective buyer. Even to the point if they wanted to go in to St James Sq. with the watch they would then be abe to inspect it and say this watch is a 2002 version.
So I am a very happy bunny!
Good job I didn't liable the dealer eh!
And now I can ask top price for it with confidence.

Proving their is a god; mixed in with the original price list was the fax copy I sent the dealer. Specifcally requesting "they order for me a completely new watch direct from the Rolex Factory, specifically not one that has been lying on a shelf for years. On the basis that they are fully Authorised Rolex agents. And that I understand it will take 7 days for them to get the watch from Rolex"

So for the cynical posters: Actually the Rolex dealer could have been in serious do dos had he knowingly supplied an 11 year old watch to a customer, who in writing specifically only wanted a new one" direct from the factory".
My dear little nephew who is both a US Attorney and a UK Barrister said he'd have to check it out [as he specialises in Corporate Tax law] but he felt as a minimum the Dealer would have had to compensate me for the difference in value befteen a 2002 and a 1991 Submariner - which he felt was the minimum reasonable thing to do. And if the Dealer proved difficult then start looking at "misrepresentation of fact within the fullfillment of a contract" - OK I didn't follow everything as I was waiting for a definitive from Rolex plus these lawyers rattle of statue, precedence and case law like rattle snakes; But it sounded awfully like Fraud. Not to mention there apparently could be a possibility that I could force the dealer to 'perform the contract' namely supply a squeeky clean Submariner - naturally I would then have to return the old watch!
Er that I felt would be pushing it as the new its now £24K against £8.5 to £10K [not sure of best 2nd hand valu yet?] But little lawyer said he'd have to look it up as different types of assets are treated differently - I said yeah but Ive had 10 years use enjoyment out of it. He replied |I understand that but it depends how this has been classified could be that or could be a simple sorry you knowingly flooged of an 11 year old watch that was not worth £16770 on that date. So go and supply a new one as contracted and you can have the old one back your customr shouldnt suffer becuase the price of gold has gone up and no you can't rely on Equity to protect you, as you 'didn't come to court with clean hands' . I guess translated it means OK you the dealer lose out because you tried to cheat a customer and it backfired in your face!

And to all the sympathetic posters - appreciated as I was feeling a little hard done by.
It also not a bad idea for all buyers to check this out in writing and keep it in case it all goes nasty in future!


What would I expect directly from Rolex well obviously now we know its not 11 years older nothing ; but had it been a 1991 watch directly nothing, as they are 3rd Party to the contract. But indirectly, as I went out of my way to check the dealer was an Authorised Agent/Dealer; bluntly so I could buy with utter confidence and peace of mind!
I would have expected them to force the dealer [threaten to take away their dealerhip] to do the honourable thing of putting right the transaction financially. And if they couldn't make the dealer do it, as a gesture of goodwill for not policing their Dealership network properly; they could have offerred me a lovely discount on the new replacement Submariner [circa up to the dealers normal markup i.e. at Dealer cost ]- which they could have supplied direct to me.

dude, i see a really good therapist. she is in the US, but does do phone sessions.

if not that, you should look into seeing a dr. asap.

[Tony-GB]

Originally Posted by RIPLEYXL9

Well the plot thickens. :) :) :)
The good news is the Head of Customer Services has checked that yes "X" was used in 91,92, & 93 for certain Rolex's so she thinks the prospective buying dealer [who is not an AD] just picked the date that would have the lowest value.

She also confirmed that various models use different letters for differnt years and that Rolex dont publish the full specialised list for confidentiality and to frustrate would be counterfieting. She also confirmed that the Letter "X" was used for my model in the last half of 2001 and 2002.

Furthermore she could see that my specific serial number was shipped from ROLEX Switzerland to the Rolex AD in the City I bought it in Germany in March 2002.
As they have seen the watch 4 times [service etc. and fiitting an additional link] she is positive the watch I bought in is a genuine 18ct Rolex Submariner, and it was shipped to Germany in 2002 by the Rolex factory/distribution and it was made in either the last half of 2001 or the the early months of 2002. Apparently its very difficult to determine the exact month of manufacture without a special request and a reason
Personally in light of the fact it all fits I am totally happy because I can now represent the watch fairly and with total confidence to any Buyer as a 2002 watch, as i have confirmation fro Rolex it was shipped to Germany by the Rolex factory in early March 2002 and an invoice from a Rolex AD stating 8th March 2002.
Whether it was made on the bench in November 2001 or Jan 2002 to be honest I dont think matters one jot - after all the Rolex system it self states it a 2001 or 2002 Watch!
Actually as she pointed out, as its a a very high serial number > 846,000 it suggests it was probably very late 2001 or more likely 2002.

Obviously I assume a Rolex UK employee in her position would not lie about this, and she also added that if required, she/Rolex could confirm this to any prospective buyer. Even to the point if they wanted to go in to St James Sq. with the watch they would then be abe to inspect it and say this watch is a 2002 version.
So I am a very happy bunny!
Good job I didn't liable the dealer eh!
And now I can ask top price for it with confidence.

Proving their is a god; mixed in with the original price list was the fax copy I sent the dealer. Specifcally requesting "they order for me a completely new watch direct from the Rolex Factory, specifically not one that has been lying on a shelf for years. On the basis that they are fully Authorised Rolex agents. And that I understand it will take 7 days for them to get the watch from Rolex"

So for the cynical posters: Actually the Rolex dealer could have been in serious do dos had he knowingly supplied an 11 year old watch to a customer, who in writing specifically only wanted a new one" direct from the factory".
My dear little nephew who is both a US Attorney and a UK Barrister said he'd have to check it out [as he specialises in Corporate Tax law] but he felt as a minimum the Dealer would have had to compensate me for the difference in value befteen a 2002 and a 1991 Submariner - which he felt was the minimum reasonable thing to do. And if the Dealer proved difficult then start looking at "misrepresentation of fact within the fullfillment of a contract" - OK I didn't follow everything as I was waiting for a definitive from Rolex plus these lawyers rattle of statue, precedence and case law like rattle snakes; But it sounded awfully like Fraud. Not to mention there apparently could be a possibility that I could force the dealer to 'perform the contract' namely supply a squeeky clean Submariner - naturally I would then have to return the old watch!
Er that I felt would be pushing it as the new its now £24K against £8.5 to £10K [not sure of best 2nd hand valu yet?] But little lawyer said he'd have to look it up as different types of assets are treated differently - I said yeah but Ive had 10 years use enjoyment out of it. He replied |I understand that but it depends how this has been classified could be that or could be a simple sorry you knowingly flooged of an 11 year old watch that was not worth £16770 on that date. So go and supply a new one as contracted and you can have the old one back your customr shouldnt suffer becuase the price of gold has gone up and no you can't rely on Equity to protect you, as you 'didn't come to court with clean hands' . I guess translated it means OK you the dealer lose out because you tried to cheat a customer and it backfired in your face!

And to all the sympathetic posters - appreciated as I was feeling a little hard done by.
It also not a bad idea for all buyers to check this out in writing and keep it in case it all goes nasty in future!


What would I expect directly from Rolex well obviously now we know its not 11 years older nothing ; but had it been a 1991 watch directly nothing, as they are 3rd Party to the contract. But indirectly, as I went out of my way to check the dealer was an Authorised Agent/Dealer; bluntly so I could buy with utter confidence and peace of mind!
I would have expected them to force the dealer [threaten to take away their dealerhip] to do the honourable thing of putting right the transaction financially. And if they couldn't make the dealer do it, as a gesture of goodwill for not policing their Dealership network properly; they could have offerred me a lovely discount on the new replacement Submariner [circa up to the dealers normal markup i.e. at Dealer cost ]- which they could have supplied direct to me.

Jeez- I wish you'd stuck to not posting!

[breitlingherst]

Originally Posted by RIPLEYXL9

Well the plot thickens. :) :) :)
The good news is the Head of Customer Services has checked that yes "X" was used in 91,92, & 93 for certain Rolex's so she thinks the prospective buying dealer [who is not an AD] just picked the date that would have the lowest value.

She also confirmed that various models use different letters for differnt years and that Rolex dont publish the full specialised list for confidentiality and to frustrate would be counterfieting. She also confirmed that the Letter "X" was used for my model in the last half of 2001 and 2002.

Furthermore she could see that my specific serial number was shipped from ROLEX Switzerland to the Rolex AD in the City I bought it in Germany in March 2002.
As they have seen the watch 4 times [service etc. and fiitting an additional link] she is positive the watch I bought in is a genuine 18ct Rolex Submariner, and it was shipped to Germany in 2002 by the Rolex factory/distribution and it was made in either the last half of 2001 or the the early months of 2002. Apparently its very difficult to determine the exact month of manufacture without a special request and a reason.

In the past you could date watches based on their serial numbers. Z serial started around late 2006.... M serial around mid 2007. Since when did Rolex use different letters based on case material??????????????

http://sweepinghand.co.uk/useful-inf...erial-numbers/

While the watch may have been shipped in 2002, it may have been manufactured in 1991 and just sat at Rolex; Patek had similar issues in the past. just think how many more people purchase a SS Sub than a Gold Sub? not uncommon for these models to sit around since far fewer buyers. warranty does not start until watch is purchased so its a "new" watch until the papers are filled out. if you're this paranoid about representing the watch to a prospective buyer, then just state warranty papers are dated 2002.

[smallcandle]

You should make your posts longer...

[Micha]

Originally Posted by smallcandle

You should make your posts longer...

x2

[T.S.Eliot]

Originally Posted by smallcandle

You should make your posts longer...

I actually was not able to finish it

[versatile1]

Originally Posted by smallcandle

You should make your posts longer...

[ChuckFinlay]

X prefix still dates to 1991, not sure how she got 2002 which were I believe K's

http://www.qualitytyme.net/pages/numbers.html

And here

http://www.oysterinfo.de/en/detailin...mern/index.php

X Serial for sale, 1991

http://www.chrono24.com/en/rolex/18k...acturerIds=221

So now I'm completely confused

[watchupee]

Oh thank god! Now I can sleep tonight. In al seriousness I'm glad it's sorted.

[Welshwatchman]

Very odd indeed.

Keep the letter from Rolex since potential informed buyers will need their minds easing and then some.

Out of interest, can you post a few pictures to see if it actually looks like a 2001/2002 model?

It will be quite easy for us to tell.

Also, it is possible to mistake a K for an X, eyesight being what it is.

[R_Ongjoco]

The problem is the watch could be new, but old stock. Since Rolex doesnt divulge their numbering system, no one is 100% sure when the watch was made. The dealer may have given you a brand new watch that they just received, but could have been really old stock from Rolex.

[Casey VP-26]

Wow!!!!!

[tedscott3]

This is the type of post that I hoped not to see when I first came here. It seems 99% of the people around here are serious about watches, but not too serious. They enjoy them for what they are. In my opinion once you get to the point that this person has got to it just isn't fun anymore...

[cajunron]

Rolex will never tell you the age of a watch. If it has never been purchased, and it is sitting in an AD's case, it IS new to Rolex, regardless of how long it has been sitting there.

[~JJ]

Interesting, lets see some pics.

[jvo300]

I read through all of this and feel like I just wasted my time. So after all that there was never an issue?

[RIPLEYXL9]

Originally Posted by jvo300

I read through all of this and feel like I just wasted my time. So after all that there was never an issue?

Yep hopefully it was [becuase that means it really is a 2002 watch] but I apologize for wasting your time, only managed to get confirmtion this afternoon but some are now doubting it..

[The D]

OP has a collectors item on his hands by the sounds of things.

[Yanks213x]

I think his watch was really a tudor that had the dial switched and then it transformed into a sea monster

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by RIPLEYXL9

Any advice much appreciated.
In 2002 I bought a 16618 Rolex 18ct Solid Gold Blue Dialled Submariner.

Basically the Euro price had changed in our favour so the German price of the 16618 was a little cheaper. My wife happened to be going to Germany so we found the watch in stock there and I specifically asked the retailer if he was an official Rolex Agent, which he said he was and I'm pretty sure I checked with Rolex Germany.
I also said I definitely wanted a brand new watch direct from Rolex, and one that had not a] been sold and returned by a customer, or b] not been sitting around in a shop for ages, like the ones you see at Duty free Airports.

I was very particular about this; as at the time our local Rolex agent openly advertised that you can buy a Rolex and if you don't like it can return it and swap it for another one within 3 days. SO being super fussy me I though well what id someone dropped it say an our luxury deep velvent carpet I doubt if it would mark it but the kinteic energy of a gold Submariner hitting the deck wouldn't be very good for the movement. So I want an absolutley squeeky perfect model.

I negotiated everything with a chap who was the owner of the store.
My wife went there and picked it up. She said it looked utterly pristine no fingermarks etc. When she got back I would concour with her - it was perfect. The only thing I might have picked up on was the green cardboard outer box the watch came in, maybe the pointed edges might have looked the tiniest bit worn - no worn is too strong a word. But definitely not tatty. The Wooden box was utterly pristine too. So as my wife had kindly gone to pick it up, I said nothing.

After I had the watch a week I realised that the strap was on the last peg hole and although perfect for me - as we go to the Caribean every year; I though what if my wrist swell a bit I have no expansion slot left. So decided to get another link. I ordered this from the German dealer and it was delivered. Obviously I wasn't going to mess with it so took it to Rolex London and they kindly fitted it FOC, and also said it was the wrong link but they had changed it FOC. I asked them whilst they had the strap off to check my serial number was correct and that the watch was brand new, never registered to another owner and genuine. All was fine! and they offerred to put it on the Rolex database in case it was ever stolen.
Time went by......
As I have another watch for daily use, it basically sits in the safe apart from the bi-monthly outing to keep things moving for say an evening out. So I decided to sell it. As it add up on our insurance policy.

Not knowing the price I rang around getting values that ranged pretty wildly; when one lady from a sort of 'fringe' dealer asked for the serial number. I was reluctant to give this to her - for fear of scamming cloning or whatever crap they get up to nowadays. In the end we compromised on just the 1st alphabetic initial - apparrently that decodes the date!
To cut the story down, she says that means its not a 2002 watch but a 1991 one! Er 11 years older! Frankyl I thought she was talking nonsense until I checked a few website via Google all saying 1991!

Today I checked with Rolex London who say it could be made between 1991 and 1993 and because the number is very high [within that range] its most likely a 1993 model.

When I said to the lady in Rolex London, well when I brought it in and you changed the bracelet [which she could confirm] and asked your technition to check it was brand new and not registered to any other previous owner why the hell didn't he say, by the way it was mage in 1991/3! She replied well a lot of people buy preowned models and if they say they bought it new we don't like to correct them in an open office as it might make them embarressed! NO ....... comment!

And that I should check that this dealer is an official rolex agent, with Cologne and speak to the dealer. Sadly by now they had shut.
I rang back the london dealer, who said if it was a 2002 model then the price would be £8,500 but if it was 1991 then it would be £7,500! But I had another dealer who offerred £10,000 for it based on a 2002 birth year. What will this news do to his price, maybe it would put him off being the highest bidder completely.
Proportiaonately it would make it £1,250 less.

So what do you think I should ask Rolex to do?
Being me I probably had confirmation he was a Rolex dealer in writing or by email but hell I have changed computers 4 times since then and moved companies. There is also a dam good chance I wrote asking for him to confirm it was brand new straight from Rolex; but did I keep that paper once I'd got the watch and it looked perfect and especially after Rolex London had seen it!
Probably I just distilled down the paperwork to keep the iinvoice for the watch, all certificates, mini brochures and the extra link invoice and then trashed the rest.

Well I feel totally conned - if at the time they had told ne it was 11 years old themost I would have paid was 1/2 price - and to be honest I was doing so well then I would probably have turned it down.

Any views help appreciated
Has this happened to anyone else.

SO advice to anone buying a Rolex, get the current years number from Roex put in writing to the dealer you only want this years model, then take it to Rolex London the day you get it and get them to cerifiy its what you are buying

I'm sorry, but that's 5 minutes I'll never get back......

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

I'm sorry, but that's 5 minutes I'll never get back......

I feel the same way sitting here waiting for answers.

[Anthony808]

X serial dates to 1991. K dates to 2001. Your watch appears to be approximately 22 yrs old.