Reply With QuoteHi I’m j that r is talking about and he’s right about me being worried but with the help of h m who is an absolute gent and now the watch has gone to great home I for one couldn’t be happier
I’ve been collecting watches for a while now, and every time I think I’ve hit the sweet spot of satisfaction with my collection I seem to see something of interest.
Around the turn of the year, I was more that happy with my consolidated main group of Hulk, Airking, Monaco, Datejust TT, Speedmaster Panda, aerospace, Emergency and Breightlight colt.
In my opinion all avenues are covered here, with bracelets, rubber, leather and colour variation too.
picture url
Fast forward to March and baselworld and the Rolex GMT on jubilee looked amazing. I really liked it and so did my son, who commented how it was the only Rolex he really liked. I thought that I could get one and eventually it could be his, and so spent the launch day visited AD’s locally to put my name down (at 4 places in the end) but was told “3 years mate” and as time went by saw how stupid pricing was getting, and realize that it’s unlikely I’ll ever get one, turned towards an older GMT.
I dallied with a 2 tone for sale locally but it looked rough, and I know I really wanted a Pepsi bezel.
I watched the furore of Ally’s GMT and thought it could have been the watch for me, as a keeper but then it want.
I thought the time had maybe passed but continues to look around.
I was away on holiday in July and as a regular on The Rolex forum, I’d started reading a thread on there about a GMT with a history.
A chap on the forum (who we will call J) had swapped a gold Omega constellation for a GMT and then some time later, decided to trade in elsewhere and when the dealer flipped the bracelet off, found a horror story.
Wow. How bad does that look??!
J had bought the watch in good faith and never had the bracelet off and as such, had no idea.
J had been on TRF asking for help and assistance and was met wit various advice (my favourite was “it’s stolen and worthless”) and J was worried he’d lost a ton of cash.
J decided that IF it was stolen, or lost, he would rather do the right thing and get it back to its rightful owner and seek recourse with the person he got if from. Very honourable.
Enter stage left our own forum expert Haywood Milton, taking the watch in to confirm originality and try and find its real identity, successfully confirming via voodoo and black magic (ok by using the movement serial number cross reference with the butchered case number) and then offering to send the watch back to Rolex in an attempt to get the serial number re-stamped or if a midcase would be required. To cut a long story short, the watch isn’t on Rolex’s stolen/lost register (but had been lost in its earlier life)
It could have had the serial no. altered to change its ID or perhaps a crack-handed repairer in the mould of “the butcher of Rye” could have been at work, but alas we shall never know.
After a few weeks the watch was returned with paperwork however Rolex have declined to complete any work on the watch as it now conforms to their idea of “heavily modified”
During this period, I’d PM’d J saying I might be interested in buying the watch should he be able to verify everything we’d discussed and agreed a deal in principle.
We met up today and I’m now the owner of this:-
J even had a spin over to see me to deliver as I had a silly day on.
The Pepsi insert is already planned, and a case/bracelet refurb is planned too.
J has become a member on here and I’m sure he won’t mind me saying that we are both happy with the deal.
Hi I’m j that r is talking about and he’s right about me being worried but with the help of h m who is an absolute gent and now the watch has gone to great home I for one couldn’t be happier
Haywood has helped me numerous times over PM, a real credit to the forum J sounds like a guy I’d like to deal with, great read and welcome to the forum mate
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by fordystar; 22nd September 2018 at 21:39.
wow great read and fantastic result in the end. Great to see the spirit of the forum is alive and well.
Firstly, cracking collection!
Sorry if I’m being dim, is the badly engraved number correct, or was it an attempt to hide the original?
And did Johnny get anywhere with the previous owner?
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
yes the badly engraved number was to mask the original but we now know the correct one
Nice story, great to see everyone happy at the end. One of the reasons I like to frequent this form is the help offered by a lot of the forum members. Cracking collection also.
Interesting story and welcome to the forum J.
One question, what does "heavily modified" mean from that statement by Rolex? Was it just the engraving or anything else?
So if the new (congratulations btw) and old owners, as well as HM's through his sterling efforts know the previous and correct serial number, as do Rolex presumably, why don't they want to service it?
What a great end to this story!
I was struck by Johnny.h's wish to do the right thing from the outset, so was willing to try to help him.
One option I considered along the way was whether the case number had been compromised by wear or damage, as does happen occasionally, and that nothing more sinister had followed than that a clumsy hand had re-engraved the number, trying to be helpful.
This theory was supported by pointing out the following:
The remnants of the original number appeared to run the entire length of the re-engraving.
It transpires that the re-engraved number is in fact very close to the original.
As for Rolex UK, the situation now is very different from 15 years ago. A renumbered watch then, if unidentifiable but otherwise thought correct, could be renumbered again with an entirely new number in the format "BEX091204", BEX being the abbreviation for the old service centre at Bexley and the six numbers denoting the date of application. In the trade you will see one of these very occasionally; it usually flummoxes those who don't know about the practice!
It seems that the new regime at Rolex UK has a different approach and I believe that their interpretation of "heavily modified" here relates to the case number alone.
This is a watch which, with full disclosure and provenance, might always be sold at a discounted price but will probably always then find a buyer.
Haywood
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 24th September 2018 at 09:49.
Thank you for your reply. I still find Rolex's nervousness about it a little precious but understandable in a world of highly convincing fakes.Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton
What a great end to this story!
I was struck by Johnny.h's wish to do the right thing from the outset, so was willing to try to help him.
One option I considered along the way was whether the case number had been compromised by wear or damage, as does happen occasionally, and that nothing more sinister had followed than that a clumsy hand had re-engraved the number, trying to be helpful.
This theory was supported by pointing out the following:
The remnants of the original number appeared to run the entire length of the re-engraving.
It transpires that the re-engraved number is in fact very close to the original.
As for Rolex UK, the situation now is very different from 15 years ago. A renumbered watch then, if unidentifiable but otherwise thought correct, could be renumbered again with an entirely new number in the format "BEX091204", BEX being the abbreviation for the old service centre at Bexley and the six numbers denoting the date of application. In the trade you will see one of these very occasionally; it usually flummoxes those who don't know about the practice!
It seems that the new regime at Rolex UK has a different approach and I believe that their interpretation of "heavily modified" here relates to the case number alone.
This is a watch which, with full disclosure and provenance, might always be sold at a discounted price but will probably always then find a buyer.
Haywood
David
Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations
I’m absolutely over the moon Haywood, and agree completely that with provenance kindly provided with your great assistance it should be easy to move On ( at a discounted price of course)should that Ceramic Pepsi ever become reality.
Thanks for your help with this, as I only saw it on the Rolex forum when you became involved!
Thanks for the insight. Really useful info and happy parties all around.What a great end to this story!
I was struck by Johnny.h's wish to do the right thing from the outset, so was willing to try to help him.
One option I considered along the way was whether the case number had been compromised by wear or damage, as does happen occasionally, and that nothing more sinister had followed than that a clumsy hand had re-engraved the number, trying to be helpful.
This theory was supported by pointing out the following:
The remnants of the original number appeared to run the entire length of the re-engraving.
It transpires that the re-engraved number is in fact very close to the original.
As for Rolex UK, the situation now is very different from 15 years ago. A renumbered watch then, if unidentifiable but otherwise thought correct, could be renumbered again with an entirely new number in the format "BEX091204", BEX being the abbreviation for the old service centre at Bexley and the six numbers denoting the date of application. In the trade you will see one of these very occasionally; it usually flummoxes those who don't know about the practice!
It seems that the new regime at Rolex UK has a different approach and I believe that their interpretation of "heavily modified" here relates to the case number alone.
This is a watch which, with full disclosure and provenance, might always be sold at a discounted price but will probably always then find a buyer.
Haywood
Should anyone be a member over on TheRolexForum and want to have a read......
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=615199
This is a cracking story! Great history.
Ps - I hope you manage to source a pepsi bezel!
Kudos to all concerned, especially Johnny.h & Haywood - exemplary conduct.
Very interesting also, in terms of the serial number protocol, service marks etc.
Amusing to see the initial hyperbole on the Rolex Forums - that reactionary, stating-opinion-as-fact behaviour is part of the reason I tired of frequenting that website, even though there are a lot of very knowledgeable posters. In fairness, they did come around in the end and it’s understandable why many jumped to the conclusions they did.
Posting Permissions
