Stolen books...What to expect? 0

[CBT]

You mean somebody could buy the art to X-Men 1, claim they didn't know it was stolen and keep it? Yep, that's what I mean.

If a seller sells something that turns out to be stolen, the onus should be on him, not the buyer.

 

What onus are you referring to?

 

The police are coming and taking that which you are not allowed to own, away from you, and giving it back to the person who owns it.

 

The dealer has the onus to make you whole, and you can pursue him accordingly. He CANNOT keep the money from selling stolen goods.

 

But, it's not on the guy who got robbed to worried about any of that. He just gets what is his, back, because its his.

Edited November 23, 2016 by CBT

[kav]

You mean somebody could buy the art to X-Men 1, claim they didn't know it was stolen and keep it? Yep, that's what I mean.

If a seller sells something that turns out to be stolen, the onus should be on him, not the buyer.

The only thing you can do is run for congress and change the law. The law says once stolen property is located, it is taken and given back to the owner.

Let's create a scenario based on what you think should be the law. Stolen property is sold to a dealer. He doesn't know. Buyer buys it. Dealer dies, has no heirs or estate. Property is found to be stolen. Buyer gets to keep it-onus is on dealer, who is now dead. Actual owner is SOL.

[CBT]

The only thing you can do is run for congress and change the law. The law says once stolen property is located, it is taken and given back to the owner.

Let's create a scenario based on what you think should be the law. Stolen property is sold to a dealer. He doesn't know. Buyer buys it. Dealer dies, has no heirs or estate. Property is found to be stolen. Buyer gets to keep it-onus is on dealer, who is now dead. Actual owner is SOL.

 

That is just money laundering, except with goods instead of cash. A legal transaction, cannot undo the original crime. Possession of stolen property will always be illegal, as it should be.

[kav]

yep

[VintageComics]

You mean somebody could buy the art to X-Men 1, claim they didn't know it was stolen and keep it? Yep, that's what I mean.

If a seller sells something that turns out to be stolen, the onus should be on him, not the buyer.

The only thing you can do is run for congress and change the law. The law says once stolen property is located, it is taken and given back to the owner.

Let's create a scenario based on what you think should be the law. Stolen property is sold to a dealer. He doesn't know. Buyer buys it. Dealer dies, has no heirs or estate. Property is found to be stolen. Buyer gets to keep it-onus is on dealer, who is now dead. Actual owner is SOL.

 

Is Shadroch maybe specifically talking about Original Art which may have been stolen from Marvel's offices and is now making it's rounds?

 

 

[kav]

You mean somebody could buy the art to X-Men 1, claim they didn't know it was stolen and keep it? Yep, that's what I mean.

If a seller sells something that turns out to be stolen, the onus should be on him, not the buyer.

The only thing you can do is run for congress and change the law. The law says once stolen property is located, it is taken and given back to the owner.

Let's create a scenario based on what you think should be the law. Stolen property is sold to a dealer. He doesn't know. Buyer buys it. Dealer dies, has no heirs or estate. Property is found to be stolen. Buyer gets to keep it-onus is on dealer, who is now dead. Actual owner is SOL.

 

Is Shadroch maybe specifically talking about Original Art which may have been stolen from Marvel's offices and is now making it's rounds?

 

If so you can always find a case that's on the edges of the law with no clear answer but that has no impact on the clear cases. The Supreme Court can decide in cases where stuff is unclear.

If officers showed up at your house to recover stolen property you would get nowhere explaining to them that in 1962, comic book art was maybe stolen from Marvel offices and-

[CBT]

 

Is Shadroch maybe specifically talking about Original Art which may have been stolen from Marvel's offices and is now making it's rounds?

 

 

I dont know, but if there is PROOF it was stolen, then Marvel would certainly be able to reclaim it. That's valuable stuff, so it would essentially be a court case against the owner. With many changes of hands, that's a big long messy litigation party.

 

I doubt Marvel wants to sue collectors anyway.

[ThreeSeas]

Twenty years ago, one of my neighbors stole a couple of my dads guns and sold them to a pawn shop. After we found them, and went to the shop with the police, my dad had to pay the shop what they had paid the thief, to get them back, even though they were my dads property. I am not sure how it is in the rest of the country, but here in Michigan that is how the police told us it works. If my dad did not pay the shop, then he would not have gotten his property back. This did not feel right to me.

 

On a side note, the thief that stole the guns was arrested for it on a Friday night just a few days after we recovered the guns. The judge had already went home for the weekend so the cops released the thief and told him to come back on Monday and the proper paperwork could be done. Well, after he got home he called me and was crying and said he did not want to go to jail, I told him it was out of my hands. Then of course he left the state and has never come back ever since. I'll still never understand why they released him after he told the cops yes he did take them and sell them for cig and booze money. So to this day he has a warrant out for his arrest.

I wanna say these were new or uninformed cops. That cannot be the law.

 

I wish it was not the law, but that is how it was explained to us. The detective at the police department told my dad that the pawn shop had to be reimbursed so they were not out any money and my dad would have to get the money back from the thief. I cannot remember if it was the Michigan State police or the county guys who handled our case. The pawn shop was in the next county over. It was not a large amount of money, around a hundred dollars or so. I told my dad it was probably worth it to be rid of the thief as he fled to Florida, the thief's sister told me, and never came back.

[kav]

Twenty years ago, one of my neighbors stole a couple of my dads guns and sold them to a pawn shop. After we found them, and went to the shop with the police, my dad had to pay the shop what they had paid the thief, to get them back, even though they were my dads property. I am not sure how it is in the rest of the country, but here in Michigan that is how the police told us it works. If my dad did not pay the shop, then he would not have gotten his property back. This did not feel right to me.

 

On a side note, the thief that stole the guns was arrested for it on a Friday night just a few days after we recovered the guns. The judge had already went home for the weekend so the cops released the thief and told him to come back on Monday and the proper paperwork could be done. Well, after he got home he called me and was crying and said he did not want to go to jail, I told him it was out of my hands. Then of course he left the state and has never come back ever since. I'll still never understand why they released him after he told the cops yes he did take them and sell them for cig and booze money. So to this day he has a warrant out for his arrest.

I wanna say these were new or uninformed cops. That cannot be the law.

 

I wish it was not the law, but that is how it was explained to us. The detective at the police department told my dad that the pawn shop had to be reimbursed so they were not out any money and my dad would have to get the money back from the thief. I cannot remember if it was the Michigan State police or the county guys who handled our case. The pawn shop was in the next county over. It was not a large amount of money, around a hundred dollars or so. I told my dad it was probably worth it to be rid of the thief as he fled to Florida, the thief's sister told me, and never came back.

Think about what this means. If someone sold the Mona Lisa and the cops said well he has to be reimbursed. That makes no sense. Pretty sure these guys just didn't know the law.

[CBT]

Twenty years ago, one of my neighbors stole a couple of my dads guns and sold them to a pawn shop. After we found them, and went to the shop with the police, my dad had to pay the shop what they had paid the thief, to get them back, even though they were my dads property. I am not sure how it is in the rest of the country, but here in Michigan that is how the police told us it works. If my dad did not pay the shop, then he would not have gotten his property back. This did not feel right to me.

 

On a side note, the thief that stole the guns was arrested for it on a Friday night just a few days after we recovered the guns. The judge had already went home for the weekend so the cops released the thief and told him to come back on Monday and the proper paperwork could be done. Well, after he got home he called me and was crying and said he did not want to go to jail, I told him it was out of my hands. Then of course he left the state and has never come back ever since. I'll still never understand why they released him after he told the cops yes he did take them and sell them for cig and booze money. So to this day he has a warrant out for his arrest.

I wanna say these were new or uninformed cops. That cannot be the law.

 

I wish it was not the law, but that is how it was explained to us. The detective at the police department told my dad that the pawn shop had to be reimbursed so they were not out any money and my dad would have to get the money back from the thief. I cannot remember if it was the Michigan State police or the county guys who handled our case. The pawn shop was in the next county over. It was not a large amount of money, around a hundred dollars or so. I told my dad it was probably worth it to be rid of the thief as he fled to Florida, the thief's sister told me, and never came back.

Think about what this means. If someone sold the Mona Lisa and the cops said well he has to be reimbursed. That makes no sense. Pretty sure these guys just didn't know the law.

 

pretty sure they just didnt want to deal with it.

[comicwiz]

So if I buy a book on eBay from an established dealer and it turns out to be stolen, I'm on the hook?

 

Yes. It can't be a bonafide sale if it's stolen property.

[woowoo]

Here in C.A If i buy 20k worth of books and they are stolen than i am out of luck and they take them from me and return them.

 

If all you had to do was say i did not know they where stolen and i get to keep them this would happen a lot.

[kav]

yep

[comicwiz]

So if I buy a book on eBay from an established dealer and it turns out to be stolen, I'm on the hook?

 

Happened to me. Bought a book on eBay that was stolen from a well known dealer. In the end I returned the book to the dealer and I'm out over $2K. Up to me to recoup it from the seller.

 

That's entirely different.

You bought it from the thief. In my hypothetical, why should the seller get to keep my money?

 

The seller shouldnt, and can't, but it's on you to sort it out. If you possess stolen property and refuse to turn it over, you would be arrested. The police will take the stolen property away from you, period.

 

I'm right with you on the need for this to be the way it ought to be.

 

However, I have dealt with law enforcement authorities at multiple levels, and in different areas of jurisdiction for a single matter of theft by deception, and my experience was very much one where I had to persist in finding a detective that was willing to treat the situation with the seriousness it deserved.

 

Practically everyone I spoke with told me it was a civil matter and flat out told me there was nothing they could do to help. The one detective who was willing to help needed a smoking gun to press charges, even though he knew this person, and the whole area knew him as a crime of opportunity scammer. I don't want to divert attention from the OP's issue here, but I've written about the story here if anyone wants to read more about the experience.

[VintageComics]

There is so much petty crime that in all seriousness, it's easier and more efficient to let people go and persecute the really 'bad' ones than to consistently persecute everyone.

[KryptoMayor]

Twenty years ago, one of my neighbors stole a couple of my dads guns and sold them to a pawn shop. After we found them, and went to the shop with the police, my dad had to pay the shop what they had paid the thief, to get them back, even though they were my dads property. I am not sure how it is in the rest of the country, but here in Michigan that is how the police told us it works. If my dad did not pay the shop, then he would not have gotten his property back. This did not feel right to me.

 

On a side note, the thief that stole the guns was arrested for it on a Friday night just a few days after we recovered the guns. The judge had already went home for the weekend so the cops released the thief and told him to come back on Monday and the proper paperwork could be done. Well, after he got home he called me and was crying and said he did not want to go to jail, I told him it was out of my hands. Then of course he left the state and has never come back ever since. I'll still never understand why they released him after he told the cops yes he did take them and sell them for cig and booze money. So to this day he has a warrant out for his arrest.

I wanna say these were new or uninformed cops. That cannot be the law.

 

I wish it was not the law, but that is how it was explained to us. The detective at the police department told my dad that the pawn shop had to be reimbursed so they were not out any money and my dad would have to get the money back from the thief. I cannot remember if it was the Michigan State police or the county guys who handled our case. The pawn shop was in the next county over. It was not a large amount of money, around a hundred dollars or so. I told my dad it was probably worth it to be rid of the thief as he fled to Florida, the thief's sister told me, and never came back.

 

This is how it works in California too. Pawn Shops (lobbyist) have made it so that Victims have to pay second-hand dealers the purchase price to recover their stolen items. Some stores make it their policy to return stolen items to their rightful owners for free to avoid bad publicity. If (and that's a big if) a Suspect is arrested, the Victim can seek (and will usually get) restitution.

[comicwiz]

You mean somebody could buy the art to X-Men 1, claim they didn't know it was stolen and keep it? Yep, that's what I mean.

If a seller sells something that turns out to be stolen, the onus should be on him, not the buyer.

 

The buyer would have to prove it was a bonafide sale. I believe a similar discussion on the topic of stolen art emerged when Al Plastino's Superman art reappeared. His original intentions were for it to have been donated to the JFK library decades earlier. There were quite a few people on these boards who felt DC didn't have any legal obligation even though media coverage at the time referred to the art as "stolen", but DC did eventually purchase and donate the art anyway.

[comicwiz]

First post so bear with me if I ramble.

 

Back in August I sold about 1200 gold,silver, and early bronze age books to a guy that turned out to be a scammer. Gave me a check on a fake bank account. I was stupid I know.

 

He sold the books immediately to one of Ebays biggest most respected comic sellers.

I tracked my books down by comparing my own scans of the books to the ebay sellers and without a doubt are my old books. Local police contacted the ebay seller and he said he did indeed purchase my books from the scammer. He said he separated the high grade to sell on ebay and has put the low grade aside. He told the police here that he would be willing to give me back whats left. Those he hasn't sold. He has already sold thousands of dollars worth of my books.

 

My question: should I just be happy to get back only the lower grade items that he can't sell anyway? Should I expect some compensation for my items that were sold? I think he was probably selling them without the knowledge of them being stolen. Maybe I should consult a lawyer for advice. Just seems to me the ebay seller should not be entitled to any profits on books that were stolen property.

 

If anyone has any past experience in anything like this I would be interested in facts or just opinions. Thanks

 

 

Based on your account of what happened, you have the benefit of one thing that isn't always a given. Cooperation and testimony that the eBay seller did indeed purchase your books from the person who wrote you a bad cheque.

 

This, combined with the police report, are all you need to prove the books the eBay seller sold are stolen property.

 

The onus is on the eBay seller or dealer who bought the stolen property to return everything, and for the items they already sold, they either recover them, or compensate you for them. On the latter resolution, just keep in mind, by them compensating you financially, they are saving themselves the time/expense of tracking down stolen property, so it would be advisable they keep this arrangement completely transparent by backing-up their offer with proof of what those items sold for on eBay.

 

In your discussions, you should set a date for your items to be returned and emphasize the need to act quickly as with each passing day, your chances of recovering the stolen property becomes more difficult. It's remotely worth mentioning that if he hasn't already, all the buyers should be notified to avoid further victims.

 

While I understand your concerns about any/all potential reprisal, the amount of time that has passed from your original deal is worrying, and the eBay seller needs to get off the pot.

 

I personally wouldn't bother pursuing the matter civilly. Instead, be prepared to post a fact-based public warning online naming the original scammer, and this eBay seller if your conditions & tems aren't reasonably met.

[sacentaur]

Twenty years ago, one of my neighbors stole a couple of my dads guns and sold them to a pawn shop. After we found them, and went to the shop with the police, my dad had to pay the shop what they had paid the thief, to get them back, even though they were my dads property. I am not sure how it is in the rest of the country, but here in Michigan that is how the police told us it works. If my dad did not pay the shop, then he would not have gotten his property back. This did not feel right to me.

 

On a side note, the thief that stole the guns was arrested for it on a Friday night just a few days after we recovered the guns. The judge had already went home for the weekend so the cops released the thief and told him to come back on Monday and the proper paperwork could be done. Well, after he got home he called me and was crying and said he did not want to go to jail, I told him it was out of my hands. Then of course he left the state and has never come back ever since. I'll still never understand why they released him after he told the cops yes he did take them and sell them for cig and booze money. So to this day he has a warrant out for his arrest.

I wanna say these were new or uninformed cops. That cannot be the law.

 

I wish it was not the law, but that is how it was explained to us. The detective at the police department told my dad that the pawn shop had to be reimbursed so they were not out any money and my dad would have to get the money back from the thief. I cannot remember if it was the Michigan State police or the county guys who handled our case. The pawn shop was in the next county over. It was not a large amount of money, around a hundred dollars or so. I told my dad it was probably worth it to be rid of the thief as he fled to Florida, the thief's sister told me, and never came back.

 

This is how it works in California too. Pawn Shops (lobbyist) have made it so that Victims have to pay second-hand dealers the purchase price to recover their stolen items. Some stores make it their policy to return stolen items to their rightful owners for free to avoid bad publicity. If (and that's a big if) a Suspect is arrested, the Victim can seek (and will usually get) restitution.

 

Correct - here in California, the lobbyists got a law on the books (Business & Professions Code) to "protect" the second-hand dealers who make their living handling such goods.

 

Purchases are documented via pawn slips, so the law is also intended to encourage pawn shops to work with the authorities in order to identify the perpetrators.

 

Seems like Michigan has a similar law.

 

Whether we agree with the law or not, there it is - those disparaging the police here via pure speculation simply don't know what they're talking about (par for the course these days, I know).

[kav]

I stand corrected . I hadn't considered corruption in the actual system.