Reply With QuoteIs the lawsuit not for unfair dismissal, but evidence of the grey-dealing is submitted for background?
Full story here, but what's always been known: https://atelierdegriff.com/2021/02/1...o-grey-market/
I wonder if there's much can be done or whether it's actually illegal...
Is the lawsuit not for unfair dismissal, but evidence of the grey-dealing is submitted for background?
I think whistleblowers are protected.Originally Posted by blackal
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Actually, you're correct. I speed read it as I'm running late. Still be interesting to see the outcome and if there's further action.
I can't edit title from my phone!
Not a surprise, but interesting that this is being put in the public domain through legal action. I will watch with interest.
D
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I cannot get the paperwork off PACER - the defendant filed for the paperwork to be sealed after that site got the story - anyone else have better luck getting it?
https://www.scribd.com/document/4943...1-00775-0001-0
Here is the full document
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
SUZANA KRAJISNIK ) )
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) ) No.
1:21-cv-00775 C.D. PEACOCK, INC., ) SEYMOUR HOLTZMAN, ) individually, ROBERT ) Trial by Jury Demanded BAUMGARDNER, individually, ) DYOL HILL, individually, ) CHRISTOPHER CROTEAU, ) individually, & YINGXUE DUAN, ) individually, ) ) Defendants. )
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Suzana Krajisnik
(“Krajisnik”
or
“Plaintiff”
), by her attorneys, the Garfinkel Group, LLC, complain against Defendants C.D. Peacock, Inc.
(“C
DP
”)
, Seymour Holtzman
(“Holtzman”)
, individually, Robert Baumgardner
(“Baumgardner”)
, individually, Dyol Hill
(“Hill”)
, individually, Christopher Croteau (Crote
au”)
, individually, and Yingxue Duan
(“Duan”)
, individually, for (1) terminating her employment in retaliation for whistleblowing and refusing to engage in flagrant illegal activity that violated state and federal law, in violation of the Illinois Whistleblower Act, 740 Ill. Comp. Stat. 174/1,
et seq.
(“IWA”);
(2) firing her and committing common law retaliatory discharge; and (3) engaging in racketeering, in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961
et seq
, and in support thereof, states:
Further:
Holtzman. 2.
The heart of the Scheme was a conspiracy by the Defendants to illegally sell Rolex watches to foreign grey market resellers in order to enrich themselves. In order to further the Scheme, the Defendants conspired to violate numerous federal and state laws including but not limited to racketeering, money laundering, mail, wire, immigration, and credit card fraud, and Illinois sales tax evasion.
Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 15th February 2021 at 12:16.
I mean we all knew it was happening. Could this be the start of the end of this practise? If people start going to prison/being given huge fines, perhaps Rolex and co. will step in. Although maybe it'll just end up with more brand boutiques? Another case of the dishonest spoiling it for the honest.
Can't help feeling Rolex are partly responsible although I also look at their watches as "limited edition" of sorts. As with most limited edition items you can get one for a premium but getting one at retail isn't likely.
I don't understand how it's actually illegal to sell for a chosen mark-up. Distasteful to buyers, but illegal?
Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk
Maybe under the counter pay offs and kick backs? Not declaring tax? Breaching contract between Rolex and AD? I’m sure there’s a lot of illegality involved
looks like they we money laundering, Tax evasion, using false IDs etc - but I think Rolex USA are quite strict regards selling to greys (I can’t comment it it’s illegal though).
There was a lot of illegal activities happening even if you discard the whole part about selling to greys.
Just clickbait then.
Technically it was reason why these things happened, if you read the document. In order to facilitate sales to greys the watches were purchased by employees credit card and shipped out of state to avoid tax among other things.
In the UK - not only is it not illegal to prevent this type of mark-up, it's strictly prohibited for the maker to attempt to enforce price bands. There were a few big cases a couple of years ago where various companies were fined for doing it. However from a practical point of view, it would need someone to take a case against one of the big watch makers to see any practical change in the industry.
(note I'm not talking about fraud or not declaring tax - just the mark-up aspect).
How were Rolex defrauded?
I appreciate that a coach and horses were driven through all the agreements they had with the AD but presumably they still got paid?
Paul Thorpe is all over it
I am pretty sure in the US you can set price/stockist - is deemed to enhance competition between brands rather than canabilise own sales.
That's an interesting read.
Surprised an AD would sell any popular models to the gray market. Usually, it's the model's AD's are forced to take in order to get the popular models
I wanted to buy a particular model from a newerish company 20 years ago and only one model for resale. They wanted me to buy their pastel colored dial ladies models also. Said no thanks
AD's have to take close to the whole inventory of models or a large enough of the manufactures models in order to get the more popular GMT's, Sub's etc.
They put the others that are hard sells out the back door
Manufacturers don't like it, but they created the situation in the first place. Don't see anything illegal about it, but I'm not a lawyer and maybe missing something.
DON
I believe that some main agents would commonly sweeten a parcel to a grey dealer: a steel Daytona, Submariner or whatever for every so many big gold / gem-set pieces taken. In other instances one might imagine that a premium well above RRP might have been enough to tempt a main agent to sell the hot model to the grey dealer. One might ask how such payments were processed.
I can see the temptation, if you are an AD manager you will be on a decent salary but nothing huge. The temptation to sell the watches to yourself and then sell on making huge marks up must happen. I just would not be stupid enough to tell anyone about it especially not the staff.
One assumes the 'hot watch' would be shown in the AD accounts as sold at list price. The passing on of that watch to the grey, the profit made and how that is split between those involved would presumably be a private transaction between the grey and the seller.
In the case in question the deposit was taken on the staff member's credit card, the watch was 'sold' then the balance on the RRP paid into the till in cash. Rolex warranty registered under false names
Into their personal accounts, then they can transfer the RRP payments to the store to make it all look legit. Papers can be in any made up name.
This is interesting. Know of an AD in a very small country (only AD in that country, only 1 branch) that sells Rolex watches at a mark up to their customers. Want to report them but I just have no idea how?!
People in the country are happy though as they get to pay grey prices (maybe slightly less) and buy direct from an AD.
Is this a country where graft is a normal way of life?
Is the AD doing anything different to way society works in the country?
Not excusing it but 'when in Rome .......'
I guess you could drop a line to Rolex Switzerland or Rolex UK - they could probably join the dots if they wanted to.
What’s their contact email?
Nothing criminal about selling watches to the grey market. That is just breach of their contract with Rolex and as such a civil matter. The whistleblower reported the AD for criminal activity in their attempt to hide the breach of contract and then they fired her for it. So the actual case at hand is a wrongful dismissal case, which may also have criminal (prosecutors going after ADs for tax and wire fraud etc) and civil cases (Rolex terminating AD contract and seeking redress) coming later.
waitinglistsareus@rolex.com
Hopefully some good spins out from this, not just with Rolex!
RRP means recommended retail price. MSRP is manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Both are suggested and the AD presumably had no obligation to sell at that price. Anything else would be price fixing surely?
There is an AD in Toronto which openly sells daytonas for 2.5x retail and you require you to have an engraving on the caseback to purchase. Been going on 3 or 4 years and reported multiple times, nothing seems to have happened.
Sucks but what can you do?
Not watches but jeans. I remember in the mid 1990's Tesco sourcing genuine Levi 501's from Mexico and selling them for twenty something quid. I bought a couple of pairs. They were normally about £55 which was pretty eye watering 25 years ago.
Levis opened a lawsuit against Tesco and Tesco basically lost. A quick google search brought up this summary:
"The High Court yesterday ruled that a decision made by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in November did not conflict with either domestic law of Community law. The ECJ had ruled that the retailer was not allowed to source Levi jeans outside the European Economic Area and sell them at low prices without the brand owner’s consent.
Tesco bought jeans from wholesalers in the US, Canada and Mexico, countries where they are sold more cheaply. The jeans were then sold in the UK at about half the price recommended by Levi Strauss. The US-based manufacturer took legal action against Tesco, claiming that the cost cuts and the fact that its clothes were sold in supermarkets affected its trade mark-protected brand. The European Court accepted Levi’s argument."
If the AD has no obligation to sell at that price, then why would they (for example) ask the customer to pay £10,500 for a ceramic Daytona (and have that amount on the receipt) and ask for a separate bank transfer of £8k into their personal bank accounts (or cash)?
Rolex rule with an iron fist. I've heard stories of reps checking receipts to look for discounts.
It's widely known that being able to purchase a SS Sports model (at RRP from an AD) is meant to be a 'reward' for loyal clients or a gift to start a relationship with the next big spender.
The AD in question here was probably trying to have it both ways while appearing to be operating within the terms set out by Rolex.
Blimey! Rolex is omnipotent, isn’t it?
EXCLUSIVE: Rolex dealer rubbishes racketeering lawsuit (February 23, 2021)
https://www.watchpro.com/exclusive-r...ering-lawsuit/
"The whole purpose of mechanical watches is to be impertinent." ~ Lionel a Marca, CEO of Breguet
What else would we expect the dealer (and dealer’s lawyer) to say? They will attempt to rubbish the claims.
Can't say I'm surprised this goes on. The employee/whistle-blower must have been hard crapped on by the store to do this
Sent from my SHT-W09 using Tapatalk
I think this is the most recent update to the Peacocks saga in the FT today.... couldn't see on thread so hopefully not repeating
https://www.ft.com/content/a7cbc3b7-...4-51cedd5e9a29
Sent from my SM-A536B using TZ-UK mobile app
Subscribers only.
https://archive.vn/cnTOV
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
I have a free subscription to the FT through work and I have to say this was one of the dullest articles I have ever read.
Posting Permissions
