Has anyone proposed having a "Stolen Leica" forum

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There's nothing to stop any of us creating a Stolen Leica Forum should we want to do so  - but obviously its unlikely to be under the umbrella of the LUF. However I'm sure that it could be linked to in posts about say, a stolen Leica. I do agree though that any such forum would have to be actively maintained and any malicious posting would need to be ascertained and dealt with. One solution might be to post the theft report reference and relevant police contact?

[andybarton]

You'd get into a massive Data Protection black hole if you were to do that.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Gibbo]

But I'm still waiting for someone to come along and explain why it's not a good idea!  

 

 

Merely doing as you requested 

[marcg]

I think we may be trying to reinvent the wheel here.

 

I've just telephoned the Art loss Register http://www.artloss.com/en and asked them if it's possible to register cameras on their database.

 

The Art Loss Register tell me that yes it most certainly is possible and not only that people already do register their stolen cameras on their database. The Art Loss Register also tell me that there are a number of auction houses which routinely search their database when they receive expensive cameras for sale in order to check out their bona fides.

 

So it seems to me that there is already an established mechanism in place which is well known in the art world where losses caused by theft can be registered – including works of art and other items of value such as furniture, looted cultural objects and other things including cameras and lenses, are registered and available to be searched by commercial entities, public authorities and private individuals..

 

Of course it may be that the majority of people reading the threads on this form have not heard of the Art Loss Register but that is easily rectified by putting up some banners at the top of the site and calling it to the attention of anyone who comes here and complains that their cameras or camera lenses (or elephant skin bags) have been stolen.

 

The great thing about using the Art Loss Register is that they are already extremely well known and respected internationally and their systems are already in place and presumably they are tested and secure.

 

There is a small fee for registering the loss. If an item is recovered then I think that a percentage has to be paid – but if an item is insured I would certainly expect the insurers to cover their fee. In fact I'm sure of it.

Edited April 6, 2018 by marcg

[pebbles]

 

It means that you are the lawful owner.

 

In Anglo-Saxon jurisdictions, an item which is stolen and then resold and resold and resold always remains the property of the original owner.

 

I really don't see how Christie's could legally justify at least not informing the police that they had sold a stolen item and who the purchaser was.

 

If you want the camera back then I think that you should approach Christie's and the police about this. I'm quite sure they would be reluctant but at the end of the day they may effectively be breaking the law by assisting in the handling/retention blah blah of stolen goods - which happens to be treated more seriously than the initial theft.

 

There is a legal theory that the money that you make from selling on stolen goods does itself become stolen – and any goods you buy with that stolen money also become stolen. We're becoming quite esoteric now.

 

In most European jurisdictions, a purchaser in good faith obtains title to the item becomes the lawful owner. Markets in France and Italy – and I believe, Switzerland are good places to sell on stolen art for that reason. A purchaser in good faith can be fairly confident of becoming the owner of an item even though it might be stolen – although there is a fairly high bar as to "good faith".

 

Once you become a good faith purchaser and the stolen item belongs to you you can then move into Anglo-Saxon jurisdictions and sell the item there and pass on good title because you have under a different jurisdiction become the legal owner.

 

In the UK we used to have "market overt" which was a quaint idea wherein items bought at particular locations during particular daylight hours became the owner of a good faith purchaser for value even if the item was stolen. This is no longer the case.

 

The French operate a good-faith purchaser for value system in respect of private sales so that if your camera or artwork is stolen and it is sold in France then you can probably kiss it goodbye.

 

As a final little amuse-bouche, the French reserve the Anglo-Saxon system for government/publicly owned property and so that means that if you happen to buy an artwork which was stolen from the Louvre, even though you buy it in good faith, it remains stolen and it can be taken away from you so that you lose the artwork and you lose your money.  

 

I think that's what Egalité means in French jurisprudence!  No flies on the Fwench!!  

 

 

The Anglo-Saxon system is called "nemo dat quod non habet"   - no man can give what he doesn't have.

The Latin/Napoleonic system is called "possession vaut titre" - possession means ownership

 

 

 

Some of this may have changed since I last looked at it carefully several years ago.

 

I'm afraid there is more to the story than that. After it had been stolen I told the police the name of the person I suspected of stealing it giving them my evidence. They went and visited the person who of course denied it.The police came back to me saying they felt sure I was right but not having the camera meant they could not pursue it. By the time Christies sold the camera two years had passed. The police requested Christies to supply the name of the purchaser. They went to see him to learn that he had died. His widow said that she had sold the camera for cash to someone she did not know and had not obtained a receipt. If that camera was now on a Leica Forum website with its serial number and the name of the police station that recorded the theft it would at least alert the Leica enthusiasts on this site, who I am sure are honourable, that a member's camera was out there and if they saw it offered could contact the member. I am sure there are many movements of Leicas by members and a site that could be quickly referenced would seem to make sense. Andy's caveats are fair enough but I respectfully think they could be overcome to every forum member's benefit.

[marcg]

I'm afraid there is more to the story than that. After it had been stolen I told the police the name of the person I suspected of stealing it giving them my evidence. They went and visited the person who of course denied it.The police came back to me saying they felt sure I was right but not having the camera meant they could not pursue it. By the time Christies sold the camera two years had passed. The police requested Christies to supply the name of the purchaser. They went to see him to learn that he had died. His widow said that she had sold the camera for cash to someone she did not know and had not obtained a receipt. If that camera was now on a Leica Forum website with its serial number and the name of the police station that recorded the theft it would at least alert the Leica enthusiasts on this site, who I am sure are honourable, that a member's camera was out there and if they saw it offered could contact the member. I am sure there are many movements of Leicas by members and a site that could be quickly referenced would seem to make sense. Andy's caveats are fair enough but I respectfully think they could be overcome to every forum member's benefit.

 

Well this is a sorry story. A very convoluted set of circumstances – and I suppose that it is no great comfort to you to know that you still own the camera – unless it has been taken across the channel and sold on in France or Italy! 

Edited April 6, 2018 by marcg

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Convoluted is definitely a word.

 

I'm just trying to get my head around this situation.

 

• A camera is stolen from Tony's car.
• The police "know" who did it, but can't pursue it because the suspect didn't have the camera? Really? Was there any other evidence apart from Tony's suspicion? Sounds like you can get away with theft if you fence the stuff on the way home...
• Two years later, someone buys said camera at Christies.
• Christies know it to be stolen, having been told the serial number two years previous to the sale, even though there was no evidence that the camera was going to be sold through them and it being highly unusual to deliberately sell stolen goods through such a prestigious auctioneer. Yet they still sell it.

• How did Tony know that Christies had sold the camera?
• Did they phone him up and say "You know that camera you reported to us as being stolen two years ago? Well, we sold it yesterday"

• And the widow of the person who bought it at the auction then sells the camera, for cash, to someone she doesn't know.

 

Sounds like the plot of a TV programme.

[pebbles]

Andy you are clearly questioning the facts so perhaps I haven't explained sufficiently.

 

1. The camera and another item were stolen from my car when it was loaned to a chauffeur at a famous London hotel..

2.  About six months later I found this other object in the chauffeur's own car. That was sufficient evidence for the police to question the chauffeur.

3.  I did not know about the Christies sale until I Googled the camera's serial number, whereupon I found it had been sold some time previously.(Even now If the serial number is Googled the sale still appears on the Christies site.) - I have just this moment checked.

4. Christies said they did not know it had been stolen as they no longer checked the police stolen property list. (On the theft when I sought to notify Christies that it had been stolen they said they did not have their own list but used that of the police.

All the facts are exactly as I have said and I retain all the correspondence with the police. If it had been any old knocked about Leica and of no sentimental value I would have not been so keen to find it.

One day it will turn up and I would like to think that Leica Forum members would support me in getting the camera back and for which I should be most grateful..

[pebbles]

You'd get into a massive Data Protection black hole if you were to do that.

Are you sure that is right Andy ? The police officer I spoke to said there is already a site in one of the Eu countries. I'll have look.

[andybarton]

Why not start one yourself, if it's that simple, Tony?

[marcg]

I would suggest that these thing to do is to have a dedicated thread pinned somewhere on this forum. There could be pinned links in each forum which would direct to the lost or stolen thread.

It doesn't need a whole forum.

 

People that then post up what they have lost or had stolen, including any details they like to give and including a photograph if they wish. However, I would suggest strongly that they register their stolen equipment with the Art Loss Register and then link to it or give reference number for that entry.

 

In that way, Leica enthusiasts have an opportunity to get to know about the theft but also salesrooms and police forces around the world have an opportunity to interrogate the Register.

 

I can't see this raises any Data Protection issues and it seems to me to be the best way of making sure that a loss or theft is as notorious as possible.

Edited April 9, 2018 by marcg

[marcg]

Incidentally, I would suggest that the lost and stolen thread would be strictly moderated so that it would contain only descriptions of lost or stolen items. It would not be a discussion thread.

 

If anyone identified a lost or stolen item, for instance, on eBay, then they would post about it in a separate thread linking to the entry in the lost and stolen thread.

 

This would keep the lost and stolen thread clean, uncluttered and factual

[Gibbo]

Isn't the extra administration one of the negatives already mentioned in the thread?

[marcg]

There is scarcely any administration burden.

 

I have administered a very large UK consumer forum for more than 13 years.

 

If the administration on this forum wanted to talk to me about it I would be quite happy to help to set up and to administer it for a year or so.

 

In that case it would probably be necessary to create a lost and stolen sub- forum and to grant restricted moderator rights in respect of that sub- forum alone.

 

The form could be configured so that any posts were automatically placed on moderation and would not appear until they were approved by a moderator.

 

There would be a set of instructions placed in the first post informing people that the forum was only to be used by the owners of lost or stolen property – and that useful information about these items should be posted elsewhere in that forum.

 

There would be a suggested checklist of information which was required including: –

description, serial number, last seen, police informed yes/no, Crime Reference Number Issued Yes/No Art Loss Register informed yes/no

 

Brief summary of circumstances leading to loss or theft.

 

This this could be refined as time went on.

 

In fact if there was a separate sub- forum for lost and found in each item could be posted up in a new thread – the new thread title would include the serial number of the stolen item or just a few digits if that appeared to be more prudent.

 

Furthermore, using an auto Tweeter, news of the item could be tweeted out automatically to a dedicated lost and stolen Leica equipment Twitter account which would soon attract a lot of followers, I expect.

 

I believe this is a vbulletin forum and there are automatic tweeting plug-ins available for it.

 

I have been using one of my own forum for years and it is extremely successful.

 

You can see how it works here https://twitter.com/Real_CAG

(shameless plug  )

 

Edited April 9, 2018 by marcg

[andybarton]

Marc

 

You need to read the earlier posts from last week or the week before.

 

It's not as simple as Tony thinks it is.,

[marcg]

Sorry, I think we crossposted.

 

I'm trying to figure out who in this thread is Tony and what he is saying about this.

 

Any chance you could post the quotes?

[andybarton]

Sorry, Tony = Pebbles

[andybarton]

Two words... Data. Protection.

[marcg]

Please tell me what the data protection issues are. I have to deal with data protection issues every day and am afraid at the moment I don't see it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[marcg]

I've looked through the thread to try and understand the objections which are being raised by Tony/Pebbles and am afraid I can't notice them.

 

I'd be really interested to understand what the Data Protection issues are – but I don't see that there are any.

 

I can certainly see a minor issue with people not updating their thread if something is recovered – but I don't see that that has particularly serious consequences.

Edited April 9, 2018 by marcg