Three Rolex watches reported to have been obtained with stolen cards / identities in London, mid-April 2017.
Case numbers : OF42K937, 008T6324 & A885W051
At the risk of becoming even more boring.....again I wait for comment from the "papers prove a watch isn't stolen" gang :
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7...psjb1ffzhg.jpg
Haywood
There might be some value in a receipt with the customer's name on (not many receipts actually have this) and it was that same first owner selling to me....but it still would not guarantee that the watch had not been reported lost / stolen by that same person, fiddling their insurers, nor would it prove that it was the same watch in all its parts as the one which had been originally bought.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramis9
Receipts, papers.....they don't actually serve much purpose and certainly shouldn't provide all the assurances which are perceived and perpetuated merely through being restated by the ignorant on watch fora daily.
Will I charge more for a watch with papers? Of course, because I am a dealer and if buyers value a watch with papers more highly than one without, I will serve the market however potty its rationale --- and I will have had to pay that little bit more myself, too.
It is nonsense upon stilts!
H
Jwsus
Sent from my SM-G930F using TZ-UK mobile app
What's the best register the public can check a serial number against Haywood?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk