What to do

[ozzy13 0]

Ok lets clear this up
Right off Websters online dictionary

steal

Function:
verb

Etymology:
Middle English stelen, from Old English stelan; akin to Old High German stelan to steal
Date:
before 12th century

intransitive verb1: to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice

2: to come or go secretly, unobtrusively, gradually, or unexpectedly

3: to steal or attempt to steal a basetransitive verb

1 a: to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully b: to take away by force or unjust means c: to take surreptitiously or without permission d: to appropriate to oneself or beyond one's proper share : make oneself the focus of

2 a: to move, convey, or introduce secretly : smuggle b: to accomplish in a concealed or unobserved manner

3 a: to seize, gain, or win by trickery, skill, or daring bof a base runner : to reach (a base) safely solely by running and usually catching the opposing team off guard



fraud
Pronunciation:
\ˈfrȯd\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English fraude, from Anglo-French, from Latin fraud-, fraus
Date:
14th century

1 a: deceit , trickery ; specifically : intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right

b: an act of deceiving or misrepresenting : trick

2 a: a person who is not what he or she pretends to be : impostor ; also : one who defrauds : cheat b: one that is not what it seems or is represented to be

Ok so the original guy that ordered the rig DID both steal and commit fraud. by Websters definition of both words

The guy that Eric bought from may or may not of committed fraud depending on if he knew it the gear was stolen.

Hope that clears thing up for people

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[Remster 30]

Quote

Right off Websters online dictionary

The law doesnt really care about Websters when talking about legal definitions.

Remster

[ozzy13 0]

Quote

Quote

Right off Websters online dictionary

The law doesnt really care about Websters when talking about legal definitions.

I completely understand that. People here were arguing about what meant what. So Id thought Id give them a clearer picture

I don't think anyone in this tread knows what will happen. Unless they are a lawyer in both states that it is happening in. Thats who can REALLY give advice here. Everything else is just talk!!!

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[jsreznor 0]

Quote

Quote

i'm amazed how many people don't know the difference between fraud and theft.

the OP has fraudulently procured fraudulent items [aka items not really what they were supposed to be], not stolen items. anyone who disagrees should do some research on legal terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_card_fraud

ah...i see how it reads. the correction is better

[ozzy13 0]

Quote

Quote

Right off Websters online dictionary

The law doesnt really care about Websters when talking about legal definitions.

ok you made me want to look further

This is off this web site
http://dictionary.law.com/

fraud

the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. A party who has lost something due to fraud is entitled to file a lawsuit for damages against the party acting fraudulently, and the damages may include punitive damages as a punishment or public example due to the malicious nature of the fraud. Quite often there are several persons involved in a scheme to commit fraud and each and all may be liable for the total damages. Inherent in fraud is an unjust advantage over another which injures that person or entity. It includes failing to point out a known mistake in a contract or other writing (such as a deed), or not revealing a fact which he/she has a duty to communicate, such as a survey which shows there are only 10 acres of land being purchased and not 20 as originally understood. Constructive fraud can be proved by a showing of breach of legal duty (like using the trust funds held for another in an investment in one's own business) without direct proof of fraud or fraudulent intent. Extrinsic fraud occurs when deceit is employed to keep someone from exercising a right, such as a fair trial, by hiding evidence or misleading the opposing party in a lawsuit. Since fraud is intended to employ dishonesty to deprive another of money, property or a right, it can also be a crime for which the fraudulent person(s) can be charged, tried and convicted. Borderline overreaching or taking advantage of another's naiveté involving smaller amounts is often overlooked by law enforcement, which suggests the victim seek a "civil remedy" (i.e., sue). However, increasingly fraud, which has victimized a large segment of the public (even in individually small amounts), has become the target of consumer fraud divisions in the offices of district attorneys and attorneys general.


Stolen

the crime of possession of goods which one knows or which any reasonable person would realize were stolen. It is generally a felony. Innocent possession is not a crime, but the goods are generally returned to the legal owner.

That answers alot right there

With that said sorry eric if you cant work something this the dealer hit me up. I will chip in too

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[SStewart 13]

On an earlier post I said that the gear was no longer listed on the USPA website stolen gear list. I was contacted by headquarters and it is in fact still listed under the stolen gear archive link at the bottom of the page.
When they updated the website last summer only gear stolen in the last two years was imported to the new list and everthing before that went to the archives. They said they will import everything else as soon as time allows.

I checked the archives today and here is Erics gear;

Stolen December 24, 2004. Nitron 150, SN 83341003, blackberry, lemon, jade; Smart 160 reserve, SN 258373, white; Cypres 2, SN 11950.

The point here is that if you are buying used gear you should check the stolen gear list here on DZ.com AND the USPA list (it may not be listed on both) Also check the stolen gear archives at USPA for any gear over two years old.

[likestojump 3]

Dude, it's nearly impossible to see the tiny "Archived Stolen gear reports" in th very bottom of the section. I never even noticed that, and I check that section all the time. This is like having a sticky-note sized sign for highway exits.

[ozzy13 0]

As a more experienced jumper I can see them looking threw all those listing. But a newer jumper I don't think so. Im not even sure I would even after reading this tread. My general practice is to have the gear sent to a rigger and have them do a inspection and if the gear is good I buy it. I think to tell or ask someone to look threw the archives and the updated one then the one on DZ.com is a little much. Then again the other option is what Eric is going threw.

I say just buy new and be done with it!!

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[SStewart 13]

Quote

Dude, it's nearly impossible to see the tiny "Archived Stolen gear reports" in th very bottom of the section. I never even noticed that, and I check that section all the time. This is like having a sticky-note sized sign for highway exits.

I agree, and I will be pressing HQ to get the list up to date. The majority of stolen gear is over two years back. But this change only happened last summer. Before that all the gear that is now in the archives was listed.


Edit to add: I have just been informed that the link was only added this morning so that is why you did not notice it before. They are working on it.
Scott

[Snowball 0]

Quote

Here's the facts!! a few days prior to Christmas 2004 a "Skydiver" calls to purchase a new rig -- he says his Mom is buying it for him. He provides the Mom's name, c.c.#, phone # & address. A call was made to confirm the charge was ok with the Mom. Yes, more than one individual was involved in this. The amount is approved and the order shipped. Late Jan 2005 the full amount is deducted from the merchants account as this was an unauthorized charge. The card having been stolen. The gear is then reported stolen and was published in parachutist. If indeed Eric had checked s/n's he would have found his cypres 2 listed as stolen on SSK's list. It's an unfortunate situation but the bottom line is the dealer was not paid for the gear & it's become stolen equipment.

Did Mom work for the credit card company?


You guys are SOL the statute of limitations has run out on this.

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/limitations_by_state/Oregon.html#8

[labrys 0]

Quote

You guys are SOL the statute of limitations has run out on this.

So, (lawyer?) snowball, does the SOL mean that no claims can be filed or just that the original thief can no longer be held accountable?

Owned by Remi #?

[Snowball 0]

Quote

Quote

You guys are SOL the statute of limitations has run out on this.

So, (lawyer?) snowball, does the SOL mean that no claims can be filed or just that the original thief can no longer be held accountable?

Well statute of limitations means that if a claim or accusation has not been done within the specified time period then the perpetrator got away with it. The person wanting to open it up again has no recourse. They vary from state to state. It is very similar to your ability to contest charges on your credit card. You have to do it within a specific time period or else the deal is off. The only crime that does not have a statute of limitations is murder.

[Braz933 0]

You are correct sir!

[davelepka 4]

Quote

I have just been informed that the link was only added this morning so that is why you did not notice it before. They are working on it.

So in this case is appears that the Op did indeed perform his due diligence. Does this change your tune any in regards to his position? Are you still under the impression that he should be the sole party to incurr a loss?

What is your opinion on the issue that the dealer is only entitled to the recovery of the wholesale amount of the gear, minus the current value of the returned Cypres, minus the depreciation of the use before the OP came into possesion, minus any insurance monies collected by the dealer on this equipment, minus any tax advantage or write-off the dealer excerised as a result of the debt?

What dollar figure would that be? How much would it cost to allow the OP to keep the remainder of the gear (as the Cypres has been returned)?


You have expressed no shortage of 'ethical' outrage over the fact that this gear has not been boxed up and shipped right back. You do realize that this would result in a $4100 loss for the OP, and depending on the above factors, and whatever the dealer can sell the now used equipment for, a substantially smaller loss for the dealer. Does that sit right with you?

Isn't the OP, also a skydiver, just as much your 'brother' as the dealer in this case? Why should one suffer more of a loss than another?

In reality, the dealer, an established businessman with a credit card merchant account, made an error in his processing of the charge. The procedures and checks put in place by the credit card companies are there to limit this sort of thing. If the dealer had followed the proper procedures, the credit card company would have not have reversed the charge.

Conversely, the OP, who did check the incomplete USPA stolen gear list and found nothing, did not check with SSK. Doing so would revealed the stolen Cypres, and cast a negative shadow over the rest of the rig, and the deal itself.

The end result is errors on both ends. I, for one, would be more forgiving of errors in a deal with one private citizen making a purchase from another private citizen, as opposed to an established businessman conducting a transaction via a credit card merchnat account, but that's just me. Either way, I ask you to justify the OP taking all, or anymore than half, of the actual loss in this case (which is what would happen if he simply returned all the equipment)?

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Quote

You guys are SOL the statute of limitations has run out on this.

So, (lawyer?) snowball, does the SOL mean that no claims can be filed or just that the original thief can no longer be held accountable?

Not a lawyer, but if the property is considered stolen (not sure if it is stolen or not-the fraud argument is interesting) then it is still considered "possesion of stolen property". If the original thief got rid if it quickly, then he might be free and clear. But stolen property remains stolen property forever.
BUT- that link is for statute of limitations on civil matters. Criminal SOLs are a little different. In WI it's 3 years on misdemeanors and 7 years for felonies. The value of the rig would probably make it a felony (theft or fraud).

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[SStewart 13]

You have mis-understood the post Dave, The USPA website was updated last summer (2008) at that time the stolen gear listed prior to 2007 was sent to the archives and a link to the archives was not established until a few days ago after I sent an inquiry to HQ. Prior to last summer the gear in question was in fact listed on the website and in Parachutist magazine.
So at the time the OP bought the gear all 3 components (main, reserve, AAD) were listed as stolen. If he would have checked the list he could have notified the owner that his gear was being sold on Ebay.
The OP has stated that he only checked the serial numbers on the container and not the other components.

As far as the rest of your post I have already stated that I feel sorry for situation he is in and it is really too bad that he did not run the serial numbers before making the purchase. However, in my opinion the only right thing to do at this point is to return the gear to it's rightful owner. His beef should be with the person he bought it from not the dealer who was robbed.

I really have nothing more to add, it's a bummer deal for everyone involved (well, except for the thief who so far has not been caught)

[dgskydive 0]

Who was the rightful owner again?

Dom

[Braz933 0]

---------
..minus any insurance monies collected by the dealer on this equipment, minus any tax advantage or write-off the dealer exercised as a result of the debt?
--------

This question has yet to be answered, and to me, it makes all the difference!

SStewert... What did the dealer do to recover the loss?

Assuming the dealer recovered the loss through insurance\tax advantage..he should just let it be. After all, the gear simply represents money to the dealer. The gear has no other intrinsic value to the dealer. If he recovered the money, he has no further need of the gear.

Here is the ending I propose:

The dealer should be more careful when doing business with credit cards...and walk away.

The OP should be more careful when buying used gear...and walk away.

[Goody_23 0]

Quote

On an earlier post I said that the gear was no longer listed on the USPA website stolen gear list. I was contacted by headquarters and it is in fact still listed under the stolen gear archive link at the bottom of the page.
When they updated the website last summer only gear stolen in the last two years was imported to the new list and everthing before that went to the archives. They said they will import everything else as soon as time allows.

I checked the archives today and here is Erics gear;

Stolen December 24, 2004. Nitron 150, SN 83341003, blackberry, lemon, jade; Smart 160 reserve, SN 258373, white; Cypres 2, SN 11950.

The point here is that if you are buying used gear you should check the stolen gear list here on DZ.com AND the USPA list (it may not be listed on both) Also check the stolen gear archives at USPA for any gear over two years old.

You explain this well. However if I ever have gear stolen and I would like it returned I would post my "stolen gear ads" on as many websites as humanly possible so there are no excuses on why a buyer "could not find the stolen gear ad". Also the dealer didnt even take the time and effort to maintain his ad. In the dealers own words "The gear was on a USPA stolen list at one time...", therefore were they really concerned with trying to get the gear back??
Just because this jumper is nice enough to consider even sending the gear back to an unworthy company who didnt take the time to set up and maintain stolen gear ads is mindblowing to me. The gear company should lick their wounds and call it a loss. (cost of business with poor payment policies).
1. I hope if the company got insurence money they realize they would be hurting a fellow jumper by demanding the gear back. Therefore letting him keep the gear.
2. If the gear shop honestly recieved no insurence money then make a deal as to this guy will become a salesman for their gear store, or does another type of work publicising the store (in order to repay a small amount of the gear to the store, and keep the gear)

In any case I see it as your gear! If it turns out you are forced to return the gear please post details on the gear store. I try to uphold the morals that if a company will nickle and dime you for something that is not your fault, I will do the same to them by negative publicity. None of my fellow jumpers will ever buy from this gear store.

SKYDIVING = HAPPY

[shropshire 0]

Quote

Who was the rightful owner again?

No .. Who's on first

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

Quote

On an earlier post I said that the gear was no longer listed on the USPA website stolen gear list. I was contacted by headquarters and it is in fact still listed under the stolen gear archive link at the bottom of the page.
When they updated the website last summer only gear stolen in the last two years was imported to the new list and everthing before that went to the archives. They said they will import everything else as soon as time allows.

I checked the archives today and here is Erics gear;

Stolen December 24, 2004. Nitron 150, SN 83341003, blackberry, lemon, jade; Smart 160 reserve, SN 258373, white; Cypres 2, SN 11950.

The point here is that if you are buying used gear you should check the stolen gear list here on DZ.com AND the USPA list (it may not be listed on both) Also check the stolen gear archives at USPA for any gear over two years old.

You explain this well. However if I ever have gear stolen and I would like it returned I would post my "stolen gear ads" on as many websites as humanly possible so there are no excuses on why a buyer "could not find the stolen gear ad". Also the dealer didnt even take the time and effort to maintain his ad. In the dealers own words "The gear was on a USPA stolen list at one time...", therefore were they really concerned with trying to get the gear back??
Just because this jumper is nice enough to consider even sending the gear back to an unworthy company who didnt take the time to set up and maintain stolen gear ads is mindblowing to me. The gear company should lick their wounds and call it a loss. (cost of business with poor payment policies).
1. I hope if the company got insurence money they realize they would be hurting a fellow jumper by demanding the gear back. Therefore letting him keep the gear.
2. If the gear shop honestly recieved no insurence money then make a deal as to this guy will become a salesman for their gear store, or does another type of work publicising the store (in order to repay a small amount of the gear to the store, and keep the gear)

In any case I see it as your gear! If it turns out you are forced to return the gear please post details on the gear store. I try to uphold the morals that if a company will nickle and dime you for something that is not your fault, I will do the same to them by negative publicity. None of my fellow jumpers will ever buy from this gear store.

SSK already sent the CYPRES to the dealer. If the dealer was already compensated (insurance etc) he should send it back to the OP.

Which brings up the question of what should be shown as the "contact" for the stolen gear listing.

If gear was stolen, it should be reported to the police.

When stolen property is discovered, it should be held or sent to the police, not to the person reporting the theft. In fact, you should hold the gear and contact the police as the first step in the process. They will tell you what to do next.

It would be an easy thing for someone to list all kinds of gear on the stolen list, and if everybody just starts sending him the "stolen" gear we discover, we are just helping him commit his crime, which is unwittingly committing a crime ourselves.

After all this discussion, how long do you think it will be before someone tries exactly that? Please don't tell me that only honest people use the stolen gear list. I already know that only honest people use credit cards.

So I propose that we should insist that stolen gear be reported to the police, and that the police should be listed as the "contact" on the stolen gear list. That goes to protect all involved - the sellers, the buyers, and the people who discover the allegedly stolen gear.

[ozzy13 0]

I was talking to another gear store about all this. He stated that its SSK policy, If gear is on a stolen list they automatically send the product to the Dealer. ( SSK didnt say this , A dealer I know said it) You also have to remember that SSK is in Germany not in the US so their laws are different then ours.

I find it funny that a lot of questions were answered here but one was not.

DID THE DEALER RECEIVE ANY COMBINATION ON HIS LOSSES???????

Edited for spelling

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[PhreeZone 20]

SSK is in the US, its in Ohio. Airtec is in Germany. SSK is the US service center for Cypres units where as Airtec is the original manufacture.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

I was talking to another gear store about all this. He stated that its SSK policy, If gear is on a stolen list they automatically send the product to the Dealer. ( SSK didnt say this , A dealer I know said it) You also have to remember that SSK is in Germany not in the US so their laws are different then ours.

I find it funny that a lot of questions were answered here but one was not.

DID THE DEALER RECEIVE ANY COMBINATION ON HIS LOSSES???????

Edited for spelling

SSK is in LEBANON, OHIO, USA. AIRTEC is in Germany.

If the stolen gear lists had the information for the police, that's where SSK would contact. I don't think the contact info for the person originating the listing should be included at all.

Do you have a problem with the idea that the police should be involved when you allege theft?

Don't you think it would help to avoid fraud in the stolen gear lists themselves?

[ozzy13 0]

Ok thanks I thought they were in Germany. Sorry

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!