Double post.
Last edited by Redwolf; 22nd October 2018 at 04:16.
What a strange seller. Leaving aside the issue of whether it’s fake / refinished or not, once discourse has opened he then basically created a second contract by offering you the refund. This offer was accepted by your return of the watch to him. I think personally accepting the watch back from him again was a mistake and you should have left it with him and sought legal advice until refund received.
Anything occurring?
Yes, many of us have responded to a totally pointless thread.Originally Posted by village
n2
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
I'm sorry you found this to be a totally pointless thread but I found many of the responses to be very useful.
I did make the seller aware of this thread and invited him to join the forum (assuming he is not already a member) and comment, but he has chosen not to do so.
Sean's comment below sums up the seller.........
"It sounds like this is a guy with a modest bricks & mortar antiques business that includes a few watches, so it's probably unlikely that many other forum members will be shopping at his premises anytime soon--it's not like it's WF we're talking about here".
After careful consideration I am letting the matter drop and hope that the seller has followed this thread and will think carefully before selling another dubious watch.
I did take advice on the legal standpoint and there is no problem in publishing the email exchange which is all factual.
Determining categorically that the watch is a fake is another matter. The consensus of views on this forum and another is that in addition to the redial which is not in dispute the movement is also not a Favre Leuba movement - so fake. There are differing opinions regarding the case/case back.
The problem from a legal angle is that I would have to prove the watch is a fake 'beyond reasonable doubt' to a layman and without the support of an expert witness this would be difficult. As things stand all comments made in this thread are 'opinions' only.
Last edited by Jack Norman; 22nd October 2018 at 14:59.
The watch has a fake movement, you think it'll be difficult to prove? You rather have somebody else get duped than naming the seller? They won't sue, as they have 0% chance of winning.
But hey, come here for free advice but then chicken out to protect the community from such things happening again? Be our guest.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
So your full disclosure will be that you are selling a fake? How is that not going to get taken down by ebay when people report it. Without knowing these circumstances I likely would myself if I saw it. That watch is fit only for the bin. Your tact and discretion while commendable are misplaced here, the seller doesn't deserve them. He should refund you and apologise and then that would be the end of it. Forcing you to recoup your losses by reselling it isn't a great solution IMO.
Last edited by Padders; 22nd October 2018 at 14:43.
Originally Posted by Jack Norman
I intend to cut my losses by putting the watch (which actually keeps good time) on ebay for a £40 Buy It Now with full disclosure and that will be the end of the matter.
OK point taken comment removed and the watch will go into the bin.
I agree with Raffe here.The watch has a fake movement, you think it'll be difficult to prove? You rather have somebody else get duped than naming the seller? They won't sue, as they have 0% chance of winning.
But hey, come here for free advice but then chicken out to protect the community from such things happening again? Be our guest.
Also just shoving it onto ebay as a fake won't really work either IMO.
Edit: I see you are binning it, best answer all round, although the dealer is still able to move these things on.
Cheers,
Neil.
No I think you missed the main thrust of my point. I am with you, you shouldn't have to take a loss. If the dealer wont see sense then he should be persuaded to think on his sins. You are the victim here. I understand that you have concerns over the legal stand point. In your situation I don't see that you can be touched if you were to name the seller, link to pictures of the watch and ask for comments. I would think this would be more persuasive than asking him to see reason since that doesn't seem to getting the result you deserve. I certainly wouldn't be rushing to do business with such a character. He doesn't deserve or warrant your tact.
I intend to cut my losses by putting the watch (which actually keeps good time) on ebay for a £40 Buy It Now with full disclosure and that will be the end of the matter.
OK point taken comment removed and the watch will go into the bin.
Last edited by Padders; 22nd October 2018 at 14:49.
Let one of the residents of Mods and Wreckers have it to play with.
I intend to cut my losses by putting the watch (which actually keeps good time) on ebay for a £40 Buy It Now with full disclosure and that will be the end of the matter.
OK point taken comment removed and the watch will go into the bin.
Sorry my earlier comments were deleted by me accidentally.
This watch is using a Duomatic case, Sea Chief we’re manual wind pieces. Duomatic were always autos with mostly A.S 1916 movements. Sea Chief/Kings used the In house Cal.25x series too, as well as A.S Ebauches. Never did FL use such a piece of shit movement such as the one pictured.
The only original thing about this FL is the case and caseback and possibly the crown.
You could say it’s a franken watch but fake? No.
AND this CAN be proved by a simple email to FL (they do answer the general public because I talk to them a lot) which is an EXPERT view imo, you’ll get to talk to the brands vintage curator of their old and more modern collection. If this isn’t good enough proof then what is?
Don’t let this idiot seller get away with it. The money you paid you could have gotten a really nice example of a genuine unmolested piece. Follow it through YOU WILL WIN.
Ps did you open the watch in store? If not you have more leverage because you only would have found out when you got home anyway.
Good luck
Adam.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I did take your point and as mentioned above did invite the seller to comment but didn't accept my invitation.
Thanks Adam,
No I did not open the watch in store.
I did try contacting them via their online contact form a couple of weeks ago but it would not send.
I have just tried again and it has gone through OK.
Jack
Last edited by Jack Norman; 22nd October 2018 at 15:30.
Pm sent.
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Don’t just bin it, get video footage of smacking it with a hammer and send it to the dealer.
You should at least tell us the town where this seller is so no one else gets stiffed... I can't believe after 3 pages of this we are none the wiser..
Pics are now with Favre Leuba and I await their comments.
It may already have said (that's the trouble with long threads) but if it's been sold as something it's not ie no mention of re-dial, then surely it can be returned for a full refund as it does not match its description: "As described The goods supplied must match any description given to you"
The layman in me can't see it being any different to thinking you've bought an original vintage car only later to find out it's been resprayed, imperfectly, and in a different colour to the original.
A little tip Jack......don't ask anymore questions on here and expect anything other than to be blown right of the water.
Last edited by reggie747; 22nd October 2018 at 18:52.
yes you should.
I always thought a frankenwatch was one that was put together using parts that may be originally made/used by the manufacturer - in this case F-L?
This watch may have a genuine case, but the rest has been added to the watch to make it look genuine.
If the dial has dial feet that fit this movement, it was never in an F-L watch, and neither were the hands. And therefore it is a fake F-L.
OP, good luck finding any restitution.
Last edited by bobbee; 22nd October 2018 at 19:40.
Well.... going through this thread was like watching a good film only for the ending to be completely crap and ruin the whole experience
No, they don’t. There are (apparently) more words that break the rule than comply with it!! But I haven’t counted to check
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_before_E_except_after_CNo, they don’t. There are (apparently) more words that break the rule than comply with it!! But I haven’t counted to check
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
The watch didn’t have to be described - the OP saw it and bought it.
That wouldn't stand up in court.
Why not? He didn’t buy it online based on a description. He walked into an antique dealer and bought a watch they had on display. He has since found out the watch has been maintained using aftermarket parts and stevie wonder seems to have refinished the dial.
I would say if the case and case back are genuine then you would have trouble convincing anyone it is a fake.
This.Well.... going through this thread was like watching a good film only for the ending to be completely crap and ruin the whole experience
For some reason this thread reminds me of Graham’s Brexit watch.
"Chief" being one of them. The I and E come after a C.No, they don’t. There are (apparently) more words that break the rule than comply with it!! But I haven’t counted to check
Why not, no description was given. Did you read the thread? As sandman has said he walked into a shop, saw it and bought it.
It says Favre Leuba on it so he can reasonably expect it to be a Favre Leuba.
It is not a Favre Leuba.
When Favre Leuba come back and say it is not a Favre Leuba he should, in my opinion, press the dealer for a full refund and if this is not forthcoming use MoneyClaimOnline (effectively the small claims court) to get it back.
He should also name the dealer that sold him a fake watch.
+1 interested as well
Has he named the dealer yet?
No they don't. They come after an H
Mark
So it's "I before E except immediately after C" is it..? :)
Yes, if you look at the link above, each example is immediately after C
Mark
My point - made with tongue firmly in cheek - was that the rule doesn't say "...immediately after C". Anyway, it's a rubbish rule, with thousands of discrepancies :)
Rather like the TV show Lost, the thread started out very promising, and then simply failed to deliver in all aspects.
Last edited by jimmbob; 24th October 2018 at 11:00.
This was on QI. There are 21 times more words that don't comply with this rule than do, as such, schools now no longer teach it. A bit like Brontosaurus.No, they don’t. There are (apparently) more words that break the rule than comply with it!! But I haven’t counted to check
There are no 'I's or 'C's in brontosaurus... ;-)
Haven't you heard??
Thank god there are no Es in them either.
Can you imagine one on the dance floor at Cream, whistle and glowsticks at the ready?
:)
With obligatory T shirt
Meanwhile, the experts at FL gather to examine the photographic evidence
...but then if you stayed until after the credits it suddenly got really funny again.Well.... going through this thread was like watching a good film only for the ending to be completely crap and ruin the whole experience
I fear the OP will be non the wiser if Favre-Leuba reply in French
Last edited by Suds; 24th October 2018 at 18:29.
Just bin it and get a life. You win some, you lose some.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote