Small Claims Court - Handling Stolen Goods

HHarry

*Please move if this is the wrong forum*

Last week on the 29th January an item of jewellery was stolen from my home by my step-son, and sold to a local jewellers.

My wife visited the jewellers on the 30th leaving a description of the item and her details.

It has been confirmed today by the Police that the item has been scrapped.

I am after advice on whether it is worth pursuing a claim against the jewellers to recover the cost of the item.

I understand that ID would have been provided and that he would have signed a decleration stating that he was the owner, and that the jewellers would say that they have bought in good faith.

However, with over 50 years of experience, I would expect the jewellers to question the ownership of the item on the basis that my step-son does not fit the profile of someone who would normally own an antique pocket watch, and that a legimate owner would be unlikely to accept £300 for a £2000 watch.

Additionally, the fact that the watch was scrapped so quickly (within 24 hours), and wasn't put up for sale would appear to point to someone who knew what they had purchased.

I appreciate that this is an emotional reaction, based on anger and fustration, but is there anything I can do?

Thanks, HH.

agrinnall

Seems to me your issue is with your SiL, it's him you should be getting the money from, if he wants to take it up with the jeweller that's up to him.

I don't understand why the watch was scrapped, was it simply for it's metal content? That would surely point to someone who doesn't know what it was worth, because presumably the scrp value won't be anywhere near £2000.

shaun_from_Africa

because presumably the scrp value won't be anywhere near £2000.

It's not uncommon for old watches to have the majority of their value from the precious metal content of their cases and straps. (unless it's a rare or highly collectable item).

With the current high price of gold, it would only need the watch to have 2 or 3 of ounces of 18 carat gold (and with some of the old chunky watch straps, this is easily possible) for the scrap value to be up near the £2000 mark.

HHarry

You're probably right about recovering the money from step-son, but with no money and no address it's not going to acheive something.

The watch was platinum, so would be worth something as scrap, but that's my point; why would a jewellers, with 50 years experience, scrap a £2000 watch, unless they had a fair idea it was stolen?

yangptangkipperbang

Have to agree with the previous post - something doesn't ring quite right here.

If a watch is worth £2000, that is the value of the watch as a complete entity. Its scrap value - even if it was made of solid gold, would be minimal.

shaun_from_Africa

I buy quite a lot of stuff from auction houses (it's mainly unclaimed lost property and stolen/recovered goods).
I don't buy jewellery but know a couple of people who do, and they often buy watches purely for the scrap value of the cases & straps.

A 1940's or 50's watch can have a mechanism that is only worth a few hundred pounds (or far less if broken) but have an extremely high scrap value. This is especially true of pocket watches which were manufactured in their tens of thousands, and which can have low quality movements but heavy cases.

Crazy_Jamie

I think a degree of bluntness is required at this point. I entirely understand where the suspicions are coming from here, but you would require significantly more than suspicions to succeed in a claim against the jeweller. The fact of the matter is that you do not have any positive evidence to show that the jeweller knew or should reasonable have known that the item was stolen. The declaration signed by your son in law is utilised precisely so that the jeweller does not have to decide whether or not a seller is the 'type of person' to own a particular item. In the circumstances there is nothing to suggest that you would have anything close to reasonable prospects of succeeding against the jeweller in a civil action.

The reality of the situation is that the only reason you are even considering this is because you do not consider an action against your son in law to be a viable option, either because he would not have the money, the family impact of bringing a claim, or a combination of both. The fact of the matter is that your emotional reaction needs to be aimed at your son in law. In the absence of any direct evidence, which at the moment you do not appear to have, any pursuit against the jeweller would be a fruitless endeavour.

Russe11

So the item was not insured then?

shaun_from_Africa

Russe11 wrote: »

So the item was not insured then?

With most insurance companies, it wouldn't matter if the watch was insured or not if the OP's step-son was living in the house or had keys to it at the time they stole the watch.
Theft from people living in the insured property is usually one of the exculsions given in insurance policies.

Nukumai

HHarry wrote: »

It has been confirmed today by the Police that the item has been scrapped

What, exactly, do you mean by "scrapped"? I ask because if, for example, the precious metals were melted down, then the jeweller must surely have to at least recompense you for the value of the metals extracted (recognising that the "value" of the watch might not be solely attributable to the precious metals content).

I speak with no particular knowledge of these circumstances, but I would have thought that any liability on the part of the jeweller will likely rest on the extent of the legal protections afforded him by way of the documentation pertaining to his purchase of the watch from your son-in-law.

Generally speaking, I doubt that a seller can pass on better title to property than the seller himself possesses (which in this case was none, as the watch was stolen).

HHarry

Thanks for the replies.

Jamie - you've pretty much summed up how it is. My thoughts are that because it is a civil matter, I only have to prove that on the balance of probabilities they knew it was stolen. I felt that their experience of the jewellery market should have made them suspicious of the transaction, and there was no attempt to recover the watch or contact the Police to confirm they had had it, despite being giving details within 24hours.

As I say, I'm angry at the moment, but I just want all parties involved to take responsibility for what they've done.