Reply With QuoteNow £19,500 . . . + commission = £24,765 !
How do we stop this madness?
https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/a...lot-image-link
Bids for this tat are now up to £15,500 . . . or £19,685 with online bidder's commission.
Extraordinary.
Now £19,500 . . . + commission = £24,765 !
How do we stop this madness?
How very dare you, Sir!Originally Posted by Zephyr
Email to Trading Standards, copying the Auction House? If you're serious...
M
Those 2 little red lines are like gold fever to those who know about watches, shame not too many of us could spot it was a fake/franken.
This is going to go north of £30k I suspect, it's the fall out that will be very interesting especially as several people including yourself have warned them it's a duffer, if I was the buyer who had been duped and I then found out it was pre-warned it wasn't correct I would not be very happy to say the least...
Should this go the distance (I know!) and the hammer comes down, does anyone here know the consequences? For the vendor, valuer, manager, director? Would Trading Standards, Rolex, the Police even get involved when, inevitably, the back comes off and the cheapo 2824 or whatever is revealed in all it’s glory?
I only ask for a difinitive and water tight answer as Bongo may just fire up his clowns car and rattle across to Northampton to put his ‘DRSD in!
It would be good if this thread were easily found in the search engines, perhaps with some keywords.
Humbert & Ellis Rolex Double Red Sea-Dweller 1665 5790055 Lot 356 www.the-saleroom.com A GENTS AUTOMATIC STEEL CASED DIVERS WATCH
As it happens I would expect this thing to have a 1570-badged Rolex 1575 calibre inside it.
Taking the back off would not change the conclusions that may already be reached from the evidence before us.
Yes, there would be ramifications in the event of sale though most likely only civil in nature. I would probably be willing to provide technical assistance on a pro bono basis.
The failure thus far to engage with correspondents clearly identifying their credentials is surprising.
Let us hope the sale is pulled before the hammer falls.
I tried a google search earlier using keywords & zilch? Wonder if VRF has picked it up? As for what's inside, mine is pretty much identical (see pics) to the offending article (with the carefully sandpapered effect) and a cheapo but accurate 2824 lurks inside.
I like to think that someone out there is bidding it up with a view to make mischief as the thought of some poor (or rich) sucker getting lumbered with this is really quite tragic.
This lot have form btw, came up during the search mentioned above.
unbelievable - its as fake as snow is wet and cold - hope it gets pulled soon - at very best its a franken with non original parts pretending to be something it isnt
been artificially 'aged' too (read run across a rough surface a couple of times)
everything is wrong, crown, case, insert, before even looking at the dial could be a service one that someone was lucky to find and put in a fake watch - movement may be real which is why they are thinking its legit?
a mate of mine has a fake one of these and its the same - its of course not scratched to death so looks too new for the era - a nice hommage if you like as nobody would take it for the real thing ever
someone please phone them up and record the conversaion for us: HUMBERT & ELLIS LTD - 01327 858465
Last edited by Xantiagib; 14th June 2018 at 08:48.
It's now at £21,000 or £26,670 with commission, through the-saleroom.com
Auction starts at 11:00.
The telephone number on the company's website is 01327 359595 and I'll see if I can find time / circumstances to make a call.......but they've had enough messages sent in different ways already!
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 14th June 2018 at 10:07.
My goodness!
I have just telephoned and spoken with a gentleman, who knew of the comments made but said that there had been massive interest in the watch and that the sale will be going ahead.
I asked why, bearing in mind the multitude of messages sent well in advance of the auction, my own providing my credentials and inviting a response, there had been no attempt to engage. There could be, of course, no meaningful answer.
A verbatim record of the telephone call, conducted on speaker-phone, is available to me.
So what would be the implications to a person of winning the auction then immediately rejecting it on the grounds it is a fake?
Cheers..
Jase
Typically? Messy, expensive and good for no-one.
I hope the eventual buyer realises quickly.
Their T+Cs:
All lots are sold as shown, with all faults, imperfections and errors of description. However, if within 7 days of the sale of any lot, the buyer gives notice in writing to the Auctioneers that the lot sold is a forgery and if within 14 days of giving such notice, the buyer returns the lot in the same condition as it was at the time of sale, to the Auctioneers premises and there is shown, to the satisfaction of the Auctioneers, that having regard to the catalogue description, the sold lot is a forgery, the Auctioneers are authorized to, and will, rescind the sale and refund the purchase price received by them. This right is limited to the buyer and may not be assigned.
I wonder if their get out clause is that they haven’t described it as a Rolex but as a steel diving watch.
If that’s the case they must have known a along.
Cheers..
Jase
Disgraceful conduct, frankly.
Currently £21k
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Oh my word.......estimate 2-3k.
Predicted results:
Seller=win
Auction House=win
Buyer=lose
Not with Haywood on the case!
I'd say this thread alone will have a reputational impact on the seller. That can be costly.
So he aknowledged that there was big buzz that it's fake but there is big bidding interest in the lot so they will just go ahead? What kind of auction house is that...
Late in the day I know, but there's nothing you can do to make it show up on their feed - they must either retweet your message or reply to you.
Good thing that I screen-grabbed it then ;-)
TK, not sure if EP is still handing out temporary bans for swearing but no sense in testing him...
I bet it is - the scum, most of the other watches listed mention the make in titles.... can't see trading standards liking this one bit
Seems like the auction house have the attitude of more fool the seller, yes you should do your due diligence but they are the ones offering it up in the first place.
Any self respecting business would have walked away from this watch and not allowed themselves to get involved with all the hassle that is coming their way..
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
On 4th June I completed the web contact form on the auction house's own website. Here is a screen grab of it, with the full text of my submission on the yellow "sticky" :
On 6th June I emailed this to the address published on their website :
On 9th June I wrote this "comment" on the company's Facebook page :
I also tweeted them that day :
On 12th June I wrote to the company through Facebook messenger :
I tried to speak with the valuation team / proprietor earlier this week but was told that no one was available.
About half an hour before the auction started (perhaps an hour and a half before the watch itself was offered), I called again and this time received an audience. The conversation being on speakerphone has been minuted thus :
HE : "Hello, can I help?"
HM :"Good morning, yes. A bit of advice if you could please. I've sent messages through your website contact page and through email, and through your Facebook message, and left a comment on your Facebook page about a lot in today's sale, the Rolex Double Red Sea-Dweller supposedly, which is INcorrect. I've not had a response to anything and the sale still seems to be going ahead. What could I do to try to save you and the potential bidders from going through with that transaction?"
HE : "Um...well...it's not for me to comment."
HM : "Then whom could I speak to, because I've sent messages through all the correct media - your website contact page, email, Facebook page, even Twitter and not had a response to anything, which is unusual."
HE : "As you may be aware we've had a huge amount of interest, um, and as a consequence of that, um, there's a lot of people ready to press the button."
HM : "But if the item is incorrect - and I sent through my credentials for..."
HE : "Well have you...Look, we're just about to start the sale. It's not for me to say. It's not my business..."
HM : "Well that's why I sent it, er, days ago, I think it was the 4th, 5th and 8th were the dates of those early correspondences...er...if it goes ahead the publicity and so on that would arise from it is going to be horrific, particularly when it's on record that all those contacts have been made. I invited correspondence. I gave my credentials at the time. I sit on two of the trade bodies of the jewellery industry..."
HE : "It's up to Mr. Humbert to respond to you if you feel so... I can't speak to you. It's not my business. I'm aware of your interest but, er...we're about to start the sale so it will go ahead, the watch will be offered so that's all I can tell you at this stage."
HM : "Ok, so my messages were received, you've confirmed that much."
HE : "I believe so, yeah."
HM : "Thankyou very much. Ok. Bye."
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 15th June 2018 at 00:49.
Was that the final price Chris?
It was, with no interest whatsoever in the room and, clearly, no further bids at all once lot 356 came up. The auctioneer was asking for interest at £22,000 and when that was greeted with shrieks of silence, lowered to £21,500 and then settled on the opening bid of £21k.
M
Thinking about this, it smacks of a potential money laundering scam!!
I hope whoever put that bid in is ahead of the game and will be paying in equally ludicrous monopoly money
one final thought on this debacle is.....
imagine somebody brought it in for an appraisal with lowish expectations and the auction or one of their staff maybe / possibly bought it themselves at a very reasonable price not being very good at telling the difference from genuine and thinking they will have a nice earner... only to have a nasty surprise themselves upon receiving the news which they ignored and then pressed on to pass the 'hot potato'.
Monsieur Poirot.
Not having much knowledge (or any) in identifying fake watches can anyone explain to me if the watch is an out and out fake or is it a genuine watch with service (but real Rolex) replacement parts or a genuine watch with non-genuine parts? Are the parts that actually have Rolex stamped on them fake?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All parts you see are fake, nothing is genuine rolex.
Wow! That truly is frightening.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Further developments this morning, following certain third parties seeing the material posted last night. Very satisfying.
Will report what I can, when I can.
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 15th June 2018 at 11:45.
Ooh - looking forward to an update.
Excellent news!
Looking forward to hearing this!
Sound like an intriguing twist.
Quite.Sound like an intriguing twist.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
In before it uncovered super deep money laundering system as Wolfman mentioned.
I'm really hoping it was bought by Rolex
Bated breath...
Scandal and intrigue - all well founded
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I have followed with interest! And continue to follow...good work all and especially HM
Following eagerly
Eagerly following.
Breath bated
Well done to those who raised the issue with the auction house especially HM, hopefully your input and collected evidence will help the buyer retrieve their funds (if it’s not some laundering scam) and highlight the auction house for what it is..
I started the thread because I thought it was a genuine DRSD but had doubts over the guide price, It’s been a real eye opener what has followed, not just the level of fake but the attitude of the house to follow through with the sale.
I look forward to any updates!
Posting Permissions
