Sold a Speedy Pro with mismatched case and movement

[Aquavit]

Back in September 2014 I bought an Omega Speedmaster Professional "Moonwatch" from a fellow TZ'er, advertised on SC as "perfect condition Moonwatch" from the early 2000's. It came on a 1479 bracelet, which I prefer to the more modern iteration, it was offered without box and papers but had been serviced in 2013 and had a more recent pressure test, the service had apparently been carried out by Brendan at Webwatchmaker.

On receipt of the watch I found it to be less than "perfect condition" but was not too unduly worried as a bit of wabi on a Moonwatch is good right? I emailed Omega with the serial number and they confirmed that the watch was dated 2000 and had been to France service centre in 2013. I thought this a little odd as I was led to believe by the seller that the watch had been serviced by Brendan, but no matter it still appeared that a service had been done in 2013 albeit without any case refinishing and that it was still covered by a warranty.

Fast forward a few months, the watch suddenely developed an irregular habit of stopping even when only just fully wound but with another spin of the crown would get going again. Not to worry, Omega tell me it was serviced in 2013 so must still be under warranty, knowing that Brendan was indisposed through illness I didn't even bother checking with him and sent the watch back to Omega UK.

After a little delay Omega came back to me to say that the case and movement serial numbers don't correspond and because of this are unable to work on the watch. Obviously I'm more than a little disturbed by this news so I contact the seller advising him of the problem and asking if he can give me any more information to establish the provence of the watch. He replies how sorry he is to hear of the problem, the watch was working perfectly for the few months he had it and gave me the name of the TZ'er who he bought from - let's call him seller B.

I contact seller B who responds quickly with confirmation of selling the watch and provides a link to his original sales post. Two things are immediately obvious from this, that there was a substantial uplift in the price and that the serial numbers of the watches (both visible on the seperate sales posts) are different. Seller B also confirms his belief that Brendan had serviced the watch so I send an email to Brendan (seeing that he is recently back in circulation) but Brendan cannot find any reference to having serviced the watch even though I gave him two names of previous owners (seller B and the TZ'er he bought from).

Phew! This is getting complicated - bear with me. In the meantime Omega are corresponding and saying that whilst the watch did go to France service centre they have no record of it having being serviced. They suggest that the watch is returned to Switzerland for futher investigation. I agree to this and a couple of weeks later I hear from them with a condition report: "the presence of strong traces of shocks and wear and tear, the watch needs a full maintenance service, the lubrication is dry, presence of foreign bodies in the movement, the hands are damaged". Omega also advise that the movement number will be engraved on the case to overcome the mis-match of serial numbers. All this comes with a price tag of £440. So much for a "perfect condition Moonwatch serviced in 2013".

This is where I'm at with it, I've messaged my seller advising him of my findings and asking for his explanation as to the mis-matched serial numbers, he has not responded to my request even though he has been on-line here since he received my message.

There is strong evidence to suggest that the watch I bought was not the one he bought from seller B and supposedly sold on to me.

So, what do I do?

[kungfugerbil]

Ooh. We do love a bit of intrigue.

The good news is that for a sizeable-but-not-ridiculous service cost you will end up with an immaculate serviced watch that is documented and paperworked and kosher with Omega. In some ways that's better than the way it was when bought.

Obviously the down side is that someone has told you porkies and probably inflated their sale price through nefarious means. Bad form.

I would see what the person you suspect of mischief has to say - privately - and if they continue to dodge and weave then name and shame.

I'll sharpen the pitchfork just in case.

[vekslak]

reading through your post twice.. name and shame, simple as that...

[tekbow]

reading through your post twice.. name and shame, simple as that...

Yup. Bad form. Too much dodginess from sellers in the last lot of months.

not all of them obviously, but quite a few stories have been highlighted

[Mouse]

On the face of it, it seems like you've been put through a lot of grief, and to end up with a decent watch will cost yet more grief, not to mention money.

If it's at all possible at this late stage, I think I'd be wanting to return the watch to the seller and get my money back.

[Guitarfan]

The seller you bought from has done a "bait and switch" with a known good watch and a frankenwatch. That's decit, and wrong in every way.

Name and shame.

[Webwatchmaker]

It seems to me Vekslak that someone, knowing I was ill and unable at that time to defend myself has falsely claimed that I serviced this watch.

Since you emailed me I looked through all my past emails and stored records and found no reference whatsoever to having serviced this watch.

One of the sellers (seller A I think) did once contact me for an estimate to make a case for a Breitling but that was all.

You state that Omega Fr. saw the watch but also have no record of servicing it.

Further, your most recent response from Omega would seem to show that the watch was in fact never serviced and is in a very poor state.

It does get complicated. Each blaming the other!

I agree that you should make TZ aware of the sellers in question.

At least you might then get an explanation for why the movement seems to have been swapped.

This is generally an honourable Forum and we all I am sure would like to keep it that way.

Brendan.

[DB9yeti]

If it's at all possible at this late stage, I think I'd be wanting to return the watch to the seller and get my money back.

Worth a try. Or a contribution to the servicing costs by the seller, not because the watch needs a service (as that could happen to anyone who sells a watch!) but because there has been foul play here.

If not, Villain post and name and shame or this will happen to the next person who buys from them.

[Daddelvirks]

Yep, we have been here before, and most votes did go to the "name and shame" option.

This is not done, Always be accurate and honest in the discription of your watch, lying isn't an option.

Daddel.

[Swissz]

Is there a SN engraved on the lug of the case? This number is a miss-match to the SN on the movement?

[Papa Hotel]

Can we have links to the original two sales threads?

Your post is pretty easy to follow, but a look at what was originally sold, then sold to you, and what you actually received would be helpful to get to the bottom of this.

[walkerwek1958]

Someone's been a bit economical with the truth here!

With a complete Omega service and refinish, the watch will be back to where it should be in terms of condition, but the buyer will be a few hundred quid lighter. He bought the watch in the belief that it had been recently serviced correctly, and that's clearly not the case.

Given the disparity between the description and the item, the seller should be prepared to stump up at least half the cost. Trying to chase the previous seller down the chain isn`t the issue; if you sell something YOU have to take responsibility, you can`t chase the guy you bought it off if you've owned the watch for a while.

I get worried about the 'catch and release' attitude from some sellers. 'I`ve just taken this in trade and I`m passing it on' is no excuse; once you own the watch YOU are responsible for it's condition etc. It's a bit like pass the parcel, when the music stops it's in your lap.

In my view, this can be easily resolved if around £250-£300 changes hands in the right direction.

Paul

[IanM]

Can we have links to the original two sales threads?

Your post is pretty easy to follow, but a look at what was originally sold, then sold to you, and what you actually received would be helpful to get to the bottom of this.

Easy to find the later sales post with a search and mysteriously the link to the pic that presumably shows the serial no. Is no longer valid

[Guitarfan]

We're not talking about lying about a service here, we have two different serials = two different watches, one of which has a non-original movement.

"Seller A" has fraudulently(?) sold a frankenwatch under the premise of a 'good' watch, gaining money and the good watch in the process. How anyone can think Aquavit gaining a couple of hundred quid towards a service completely fixes this I don't know!

Within this community, I would want to know who the person who did the bait and switch.

[Papa Hotel]

Easy to find the later sales post with a search and mysteriously the link to the pic that presumably shows the serial no. Is no longer valid

I had a cursory look but decided I couldn't be arsed, the lazy in me just wants the OP to post the links. I can't be doing with all this cloak and dagger stuff, if there's evidence out there let's have full disclosure.

[893bet]

Easy to find the later sales post with a search and mysteriously the link to the pic that presumably shows the serial no. Is no longer valid

I tried and failed to find a for sale moon watch from early 2000s, with out box and papers, claiming service in 2013!

I don't think money towards service solves either. The watch is not genuine and servicing or re engraving doesn't solve that.

[Kingstepper]

We're not talking about lying about a service here, we have two different serials = two different watches, one of which has a non-original movement.

"Seller A" has fraudulently(?) sold a frankenwatch under the premise of a 'good' watch, gaining money and the good watch in the process. How anyone can think Aquavit gaining a couple of hundred quid towards a service completely fixes this I don't know!

Within this community, I would want to know who the person who did the bait and switch.

Agreed - don't think a few hundred pounds should change hands and it be forgotten.

[OldHooky]

Within this community, I would want to know who the person who did the bait and switch.

+1. In recent days there have been a couple of instances of dodgy dealing, so for the sake of TZ members it would be good to have sight of the threads and all the facts.

[Aquavit]

Thanks for the replies, my thoughts on this were coalescing around A) sending the watch back and getting a full refund B) asking the seller to fund the service costs (he made around this much on the price uplift). This pre-supposes that the seller responds - so far he hasn't.

To further clarify the issue I will now post links to the original sales threads, here is my sellers post: http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...ster-Moonwatch and here is the watch my seller bought and "passed on" to me: http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...Moonwatch-OHPF

It can be clearly seen that the serial numbers are different, my watch SN begins 77 (to which the movement SN doesn't match), the other watch SN begins 48.

[Martin123]

Seems to me that seller B needs to respond to the claim it was serviced by Brendan, which is denied.
Is it the case the movement changed between seller B and A? The photos from the seller A have been removed.

[Alansmithee]

The seller you bought from has done a "bait and switch" with a known good watch and a frankenwatch. That's decit, and wrong in every way.

Name and shame.

Bait and switch is when they get you in with one thing and then sell you another *but you are still aware of what you are buying* - this if it went down in the way described is just straight forward fraud.

[arthurDALEY]

+1. In recent days there have been a couple of instances of dodgy dealing, so for the sake of TZ members it would be good to have sight of the threads and all the facts.

Agreed there, perhaps you could even blur the names until all the facts are looked at ?
Do we need another "pippen gate"

Cheers

Wayne










interesting kettle terence

[seikopath]

I've been stiffed by a monkey on here, outed the bugger on h and v, got plenty of flak in the process ( all that 'respected member ' bullshit ) but i would still do the same again. important for transparency. alot of people on here won't go public when they have problems, this only paves the way for more members to have problems in future. if the seller won't reply to you, then open a thread in h and v stating your case and naming him.

[arthurDALEY]

I've been stiffed by a monkey on here, outed the bugger on h and v, got plenty of flak in the process ( all that 'respected member ' bullshit ) but i would still do the same again. important for transparency. alot of people on here won't go public when they have problems, this only paves the way for more members to have problems in future.

Maybe not then


Cheers

Wayne













interesting kettle terence

[daveyw]

I don't normally like to get involved in "name and shame" or dispute posts but good forum members usually do some good policing of bad sellers. Your situation sounds bad and people should know who you bought it from and they should be given a chance to respond.

[~dadam02~]

I have to say this, on top of the other recent issues on this forum, is becoming rather alarming. I do hope you can get to a satisfactory outcome OP and what a nightmare situation you've been thrust into.

[Watchfreek]

Sorry to read about your predicament. I hope it gets resolved amicably but am in agreement with the majority on here that you should name and shame. They should not have lied about having the watch serviced by a well known and respected watch maker on the forum.

[Mitch]

Just for clarification from the OP.

How did it come about that you thought this was the same watch as sold by seller B? The person who sold you the watch never claimed this in his advert and the watch was clearly a different one.

Different claimed year and different and visible serial number in his photo.







Mitch

[JasonM]

Mitch, the watch in both ads was sold in GBP £

[dickstar1977]

Read this twice, difficult to see how this can be an oversight, I don't want to get in to the name and shame debate but I think as Paul has said someone has been very economical with the truth

[DB9yeti]

I received this watch as a non-runner in a trade about eight months ago. It had been serviced in July last year by Brendan at Webwatchmaker, and in fact would still be under warranty were he available, however sadly he is currently ill and unable to work.

If that's simply not true, as confirmed by Brendan...

The other seller is a well known dealer and doesn't even try to hide it. I do know of a chap on here who has just bought a Daytona off him, I'll give him a nudge to be careful...

[Mitch]

Mitch, the watch in both ads was sold in GBP £

Oops, I read the second one as Euros for some, no doubt, senility approaching reason!




Mitch

[DB9yeti]

They should not have lied about having the watch serviced by a well known and respected watch maker on the forum.

They may of course have believed it themselves and that's what needs to be ascertained.

[SIB]

Best of luck with your situation and I hope you manage to get something resolved with the person you bought the watch from. Your seller is a well known "dealer who denies he's a dealer" on this forum and may have got the watch advertised mixed up with his other stock and sent you the wrong one!

[seikopath]

They may of course have believed it themselves and that's what needs to be ascertained.

'by their actions ye shall know them'

[Papa Hotel]

SimonH was pretty honest about the watch not running and its condition when he got hold of it and my understanding from what he has written is that it wasn't him who supposedly had the watch serviced, but whoever had it before him.

[I received this watch as a non-runner in a trade about eight months ago. It had been serviced in July last year by Brendan at Webwatchmaker, and in fact would still be under warranty were he available, however sadly he is currently ill and unable to work.


Our Czech dealer appears to have made a nice profit on the watch, whether that can be taken as a comment on his integrity and adherence to forum spirit, I don't know.

Somehow, in a couple of months, the watch got into perfect condition, or at least was advertised as such.

I have my thoughts, and SimonH is coming up clean.

[DB9yeti]

Our Czech dealer appears to have made a nice profit on the watch, whether that can be taken as a comment on his integrity and adherence to forum spirit, I don't know.

He also has (at least) two watches for sale on SC right now, freshly bumped today.

No DEALER in the thread title though.

[SimonH]

I think it is reasonably obvious I am "seller B" in this affair.

As stated in my SC post, I received this watch as a trade for my Breitling B-1 from a respected TZ member and it was he, or indeed an owner previous to him, who had the watch serviced by Brendan, not I. Or at least so I was told, and I have absolutely no reason to doubt the person who traded the watch with me. Indeed, as the watch was a non-runner when I received it, he provided a substantial reduction to his original trade value. I see no benefit to him therefore in having misled me regarding the service. I have asked him if he can recall who had the watch serviced so perhaps we can get to the bottom of that mystery.

I am sure Stephen will confirm I have tried as hard as I can to help him get to the bottom of this.

One thing is certain however, the watch in Stephen's possession is not the one I sold to seller A - the serial numbers are different, the claimed age is different.

[jmarchitect]

Reading through this thread and the linked sales posts shows the following.

SimonH sold the watch for £1150 and claimed that the watch had been serviced by Brendan. jakubisko sold the watch for £1499, having swapped the movements and knackered the piece.

Seems to me the OP has already named names and Brendan's post shows that neither seller A or B are whiter than white. As for what to do now, pursue jakubisko for the full cost to bring the piece back to an acceptable condition and be ready to post a villain post if he continues to dodge his responsibility.

[vekslak]

looking at the pictures in both ad`s I do have doubts that it is the same watch unless the bezel was changed.

[Aquavit]

SimonH was pretty honest about the watch not running when he got hold of it and my understanding from what he has written is that it wasn't him who supposedly had the watch serviced, but whoever had it before him.

Our Czech dealer appears to have made a nice profit on the watch, whether that can be taken as a comment on his integrity and adherence to forum spirit, I don't know.

Correct, SimonH (who I have been in contact with) bought the watch off Dave Downing who may have been the one who had it serviced but Brendan has no record of this.

So when Eddie asked for dealers to step forward and make themselves known Jakub declined the opportunity to come clean? I didn't know I was buying from a dealer.

[itsgotournameonit]

Well.This is interesting reading and I am looking forward to a happy ending.Not sure there will be one though but one thing I do know.

This isn't going to sell until the OP gets some explanation.

http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...-178274-(Lady)

[Kingstepper]

Reading through this thread and the linked sales posts shows the following.

SimonH sold the watch for £1150 and claimed that the watch had been serviced by Brendan. jakubisko sold the watch for £1499, having swapped the movements and knackered the piece.

Seems to me the OP has already named names and Brendan's post shows that neither seller A or B are whiter than white. As for what to do now, pursue jakubisko for the full cost to bring the piece back to an acceptable condition and be ready to post a villain post if he continues to dodge his responsibility.

What has seller B done wrong. He was told by a previous owner the watch was serviced and had no reason to doubt that.

Indeed, can Brendan be sure it wasn't serviced when owned by C or D.

[IanM]

As stated. I don't think they are the same watch at all.

Seller B (Simon) has sold a watch (serial no 48) to Seller A.

Seller A has sold a different watch (serial no 77 but with a mismatched movement) onto the Op and when asked where it came from (mistakenly or deliberately) pointed back at Seller B.

[Webwatchmaker]

Sorry to read about your predicament. I hope it gets resolved amicably but am in agreement with the majority on here that you should name and shame. They should not have lied about having the watch serviced by a well known and respected watch maker on the forum.

If I had serviced this watch for either seller A or B I would have a record of it.

Not wanting to brag, but I've never had an Omega or any other repair so far, back under guarantee, apart from one ill fitting glass as far as I can recall. I test all watch repairs for days.

Not saying it couldn't happen.

It seems that my illness has been used as an excuse to cover a dodgy deal.

Shameful !

I also hope that this situation is resolved soon.

I'm not five minutes back on the Forum and this is happening.

I think it is important for the integrity of the forum to reveal the dealers in this case.

Brendan.

[Aquavit]

As stated. I don't think they are the same watch at all.

Seller B (Simon) has sold a watch (serial no 48) to Seller A.

Seller A has sold a different watch (serial no 77 but with a mismatched movement) onto the Op and when asked where it came from (mistakenly or deliberately) pointed back at Seller B.

That's it in a nutshell, of course I asked questions before buying and it was clearly stated by Jakub that I was buying the watch Simon sold to him (he also confrmed the same very recently when I started to query the provenance). All done via PM which I still have.

Just to be clear about this, SimonH has been extremely forthcoming to my requests for information and has acted in the true spirit of TZUK. The issue clearly lies with Jakubisko.

[Kingstepper]

If I had serviced this watch for either seller A or B I would have a record of it.


Brendan.

Seller B claims it was serviced when owned by seller C (or D...).

[Schofie]

I'll give you another possibility, just to throw it in there as I always like to try and assume the best. It's possible that our 'Czech dealer' has so many watches passing through his possession that he misrepresented the watch in terms of its source accidentally. However his lack of willingness to respond to the latest PMs may make this less likely.

[Papa Hotel]

It's clear that the watch sold to the OP isn't the same as the one SimonH sold to Jakubisko, despite Jakubisko's assertions that it is. Whether that is intentional deceit or a confused error is something only Jakubisko can answer. Given the discrepancy between the description and what was actually received and throw in the hassle of returning a watch to an unknown in the Czech Republic, I know who I'd be asking the pointed questions to and the nature of those questions.

The issue over the service; a previous owner to SimonH claimed to have had it done, maybe Brendan can be given those details and check it out?

[Aquavit]

This isn't going to sell until the OP gets some explanation.
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...-178274-(Lady)

Indeed, nor this: http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...p-New-pictures