What to do

[SStewart 13]

you advise him based on your personal convictions, and that's useless to someone who doesn't want to loose $4100 (minus container***

You are right, my advice is based on my personal convictions. I think stealing is stealing even if it done with a stolen credit card. I also think it is wrong to keep stolen gear even if you did not know it was stolen when you bought it.

The container he keeps, the cypres has already been returned, and the combined value of the two canopies is probably less than what he will pay his lawyer to fight this. so my advice is also practical.

I guess I am just taken aback by those that would advise him to keep the gear; Instead of doing the right thing he should try to find some legal loophole so he can keep someone elses property?

[dgskydive 0]

Quote

So the cardholder is out nothing, the credit card company is out nothing, the dealer loses the gear and is never paid, and the thief gets away with the gear.

Did the dealer out right own the gear? Most dealers I know sell used gear on consignment. They dont actually own the gear. If this gear is on consignment, then the dealer owes the original owner.

I dont think they have any legal right to go after the OP. He did nothing wrong.

Dom

[SStewart 13]

The gear was all brand new when sold, the dealer owned it outright and has all the invoices from Precision, Aerodyne, and SSK.

[dgskydive 0]

Quote

The gear was all brand new when sold, the dealer owned it outright and has all the invoices from Precision, Aerodyne, and SSK.

If it was a custom rig, they should have taken partial payment along the way. Then they would have found out that card was stolen before the rig was finished and this wouldnt have happened to them.

If it was stock rig that they had on the shelf and it was a one time sale. They should have only sent the rig to the address that matched the credit card. That is what the 3 digits on the back of the card are. If they sent it to a different address that doesnt match the card, then they are S.O.L.

Threatening the FBI is hollow. The OP did not commit any type of fraud or steal anything. He is not liable to the gear store.

Im not a lawyer, but I did work for a gear store that had things like this happen in the past. After getting burned, they wanted emails and copies CC's and DL's to send to a different address for customers that they didnt know.

Dom

[Jeffwxyz 0]

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advise, but here is what I logically see in this. I am not trying to give an opinion, I am just trying to show the logic.

1. If the original dealer is not trying to double dip after a tax write-off or an insurance claim, a compromise should be worked out between the dealer and Eric.

• Eric should have to pay the full amount lost by the dealer and not the retail price. The difference between the wholesale and retail price needs to be considered. There should be no profit made by the dealer from Eric.

• Consideration should be made toward the depreciation of the gear when Eric purchased it. If the dealer did get the gear back as soon as Eric first purchased it, he could not sell it for the new price.

2. If the dealer did make a tax write-off or an insurance claim, and gets the gear back, then he has a moral obligation to either return the insurance money or pay the tax /else again work on a compromise with Eric to pay the difference in the gear cost.

This amount to pay should consider:

• Depreciation of the gear when Eric purchased it

• Markup from wholesale price

• Any benefit to the dealer involving a tax write-off or insurance claim

Something on the order of a 50/50 compromise considering the suggested adjustments to the total amount of money involved above needs to be considered.

Furthermore, the part of any possible negligence on the dealer's part needs to be considered. The dealer should have to eat some of the money if there was neglience. These two points should be considered in possibly shifting the 50/50 compromise to Eric's favor.

• Did the dealer check an ID?

• Why when Eric checked the stolen database did he not find this gear? Should have the dealer renewed the listing?

One way or another, Eric should not have to eat the whole amount. If Eric simply gave the gear back to the dealer, the dealer could then sell it. Eric, then would have nothing and the dealer something. There is something wrong with that.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

The card holder did not report the card stolen until after the charge had been made. Just imagine a whuffo getting hit with an unauthorized charge of over $5000 worth of skydiving gear. The gear was shipped after the charge was approved. Then the charges were reversed and the card holder was credited for the unauthorized charge. The dealer followed proper procedures.

So the cardholder is out nothing, the credit card company is out nothing, the dealer loses the gear and is never paid, and the thief gets away with the gear.

Proper procedures for non-signature (phone/internet) transactions require getting the code from the back of the CC and address to process the transaction.
If the retailer does not do this, then the 'game is off' for fraud claims.
If they have the signature, that can be used to get the fraudulent claim resolved.
Since you say the CC company did not credit the retailer, then it looks like the retailer did not fulfill his contractual obligations with the merchant account to avoid fraud. If this is indeed the situation, the retailer gave away the gear. It was not stolen.

Quote

Now the thief sells it to someone else and it is discovered 4 years later when the cypres2 goes in for service.

SSK already returned the stolen cypres to the dealer. Eric should man up and send the rest back to the rightful owner as well.

Wow! Just think - anyone can list their gear or someone else's gear in the 'stolen files' of USPA or SSK and get it sent to them years later.
Police reports anyone?

Quote

It doesn't matter if he knew it was stolen or not, you can not keep stolen property regardless of how it came into your possession.

It is just unbelieveable that some people on this thread are suggesting that he should just keep the stolen equipment. What is he going to do with it? Keep jumping it even though he knows it is stolen? Sell it to someone else who will then be in possession of stolen property?

He needs to give it back, there is no other way.

Eric needs to get a lawyer.
Enough time has passed, that one can assume this was written off as bad debts on taxes.
I even think SSK might be in trouble for sending property back to someone else based only on a 'stolen property report' and not a police or fraud report.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[ozzy13 0]

Well my understanding is that Eric only checked the container and that was not stolen. He didn't check all the other components. If your wife's company was notified of the equipment that they got taken was located i think they would want it back too. Dont you think?

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[Katherine 0]

Quote

We found out that the person we shipped to did not live at the apt complex and was waiting for the UPS truck to deliver the gear, he got the gear and disappeared.

Right, so UPS just gave the rig to someone waiting outside the apartment with no ID?

Sounds like the dealer shouild have persued his claim against UPS.

Really sorry Eric is getting screwed. The dealer got screwed over all that time ago, which does suck, but is it really the ethical thing to do to now screw over some poor guy who bought the gear in good faith?

Leeds University Skydiving Club
www.skydiveleeds.co.uk

[Baksteen 84]

There is no guilty party in this argument - only two victims.


The container [Eric] keeps, the cypres has already been returned...

Exactly what is this combined value of the two canopies?

Split the difference perhaps?

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

It seems pretty cut and dry to me. I do feel sorry for Eric, he did not know he was buying stolen equipment. But that doesn't mean he should keep it.
Unfortunately it sounds like he will spend more on an attourney than what the gear is now worth. If it were me I would just give it back, he has nothing to gain from keeping it and that gear will always have the stigma of being stolen.

Okay, this puts light on a number of issues. Thanks for posting it.

What remains is that there are a number of people who have conflicting claims to the equipment.

It is not fair to lay all the loss on Eric.

That's just saying that it all comes down to a game of musical chairs, which is not as it should be.

It seems unlikely that we will find the original perpetrator of the fraud. But, in fact, the entire ownership history of this gear is really needed to know who should be liable for what.

UPS might have had some culpability for the problems. I don't know the original shipping terms. It might be that the receiver "proved" his identity to the standards for the UPS delivery.

The credit card company should have been held more accountable at the time of the purchase.

Business insurances should have been involved. The amount of money is not trivial.

The seller on ebay that Eric bought from should surely be involved. That person seems to have totally dropped out of the picture, leaving Eric stuck all alone. But if the gear is deemed stolen, then that person sold stolen gear, which is also a crime.

Various statutes of limitation might come into play.

It isn't clear to me that SSK did the right thing by sending the AAD to the dealer. When SSK got the AAD, its ownership was contested. Simply sending it to one or the other of the claimants doesn't seem like the correct course of action. The status of the equipment should have been frozen at that time pending adjudication of the claims. It seems to me that SSK should have held the AAD and notified some authority of the apparent conflict. SSK should have tried to remain a neutral party, but instead, they allowed themselves to become tangled in the matter by sending the AAD to the dealer.

It sounds to me like all of the contested equipment should have been handed over to authorities for adjudication of the claims. That's what courts are for. Maybe a small claims court could have handled the matter, which might have made the cost of adjudication less onerous.

But sticking Eric with all the liability is no more just than sticking the original dealer. There were a bunch of parties involved, and they should all be held accountable for their parts in the saga.

[BUBLHED 0]

If the gear was written off on the dealers taxes, he will have to do two things.

1 he will have to claim a profit in the amount of the current value of the gear upon getting it returned. As it was filed as a loss previously.

2 he will have to claim a profit for the subsequent sale of the gear for the price of the sale.


Lets say (just using round numbers) the wholesale value of the gear now is $2500.00 and he sells it for $4000.00 he willl have to show a business profit of $6500.00 for this gear. This is something (depending on his tax situation) that he may not fully want to do. It would probebly be in his best interest to work it out with Eric to get a little money from his canopies and he has the aad to sell. Eric should pay a SMALL amount of money to obtain full rights to the gear. That way everyone wins as best as is possible in a bad situation for both parties.

This kind of thing chaps my ass. there is no excuss for the people that committed this fraud. Now there are two innocent victoms. If the dealer will work out some sort of SMALL payment with Eric I myself as well as others have said will pitch in.

I am gearless now and can't currently jump. I'll eventually save enough to get back. I can't however stand by and let Eric lose his gear and money if I can help in any way.

Eric I don't know you, but you are a brother in this sport. If you need a hand shoot me a PM and I'll be glad to help.

Mike

ATTACK LIFE ! IT'S GOING TO KILL YOU ANYWAY!!!!

[skyjumpenfool 2]

I’d like to know the name of this dealer. I understand that he got ripped off and is trying to recoup his loss. But he’s dealing with the skydive community of which I’m proud to be a part. Eric is one of us. If this is how he treats us, I’m not sure I want to do business with him.

Most of the folks involved in this sport are really good people. Seems to me, there’s a fair and equitable solution to this problem. I think this dealer should buck up and negotiate a deal with Eric. A deal that is beneficial to both. Knowing Eric as I do, he’s seeking a resolution that is fair and doesn’t leave him holding the bag.

I’m willing to donate some of my jump money to help negotiate a fair resolution to this situation. Eric is one of ours and we take care of our own. I suspect that, in the end, this dealer is one of ours as well and will do the right thing. I know Eric will do the right thing!

I’m guessing the authorities could use the information that Eric can now provide to find the real culprit in this mess. The real thief is still out there looking to rip us off again. Someone able to pull off this scam knew something about the sport, which makes it even more important to find this person. Let’s band together as a community and use the power of this forum to find this asshole and put him behind bars. That would be the ideal solution to this messy situation.

Remember, people who rip off skydivers have a very short life expectancy!

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[likestojump 3]

Your post insinuates that the dealer is NOT part of the skydiving community. Which is quite the opposite, as the said dealer has been around longer than Eric.

Neither are valid points however, as being part of skydiving community has no legal standing in the matter of good to which the title is being challenged.

[billvon 2,400]

>So you are saying that merchandise purchased with a stolen credit card is
>not really stolen?

OK, let's take this case.

Your friend buys a rig from Square One. He gets out of the sport. You buy it from him for $2000. It's a good rig and you get a lot of use out of it. When you are ready to downsize you sell it to someone else, a newer jumper at your DZ. You sell it for $2200 since you had a lot of work done on it; minor repairs and the like. The new jumper moves to Canada, sells it to yet someone else. That purchaser checks against Canadian records, and discovers that it had been stolen before being sold to Square One.

Who do you mail the check for $2200 to?

[skyjumpenfool 2]

Quote

Your post insinuates that the dealer is NOT part of the skydiving community. .

Sorry, I didn't mean that at all. We're a very tight community! Which includes all the dealers and manufacturers. All of us. If we all work together, we can find a good solution where no one takes the brunt of this theft against our community...

One (accually several) of our brothers was ripped off. I'm pissed and I want to help.

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[easglesnest 0]

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.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

The gear is not stolen.

[likestojump 3]

I guessed right on the Ralph being the dealer :)

now, the question is - did you guys call the number provided by the "skydiver" or did you call the credit cards issuing bank and verify all the billing and possible alternate shipping address with them ? the CC company does not release that info, but will gladly verify it for the merchant. Furthermore, those cardholders wishing to ship to an address other than the one their bill comes to can nofity their credit card by placing an "alternate ship to" address on file. If you, as a merchant have failed to do any of the above, you did less than due diligence (especially considering the order has to have been $a few grand). None of this however makes the gear any less "yours" or any more "Erics"....

The above was meant to be more of a helpful suggestion than a stab at ya'lls.

[riggerpaul 1]

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.

To whom was the gear reported stolen? Were the police involved? If not, why not?

When SSK sent the AAD to the dealer, why didn't they involve the authorities at that point? If the AAD was reported as stolen to the police, that's where it should have been sent.

Anybody can report equipment to USPA as stolen. That doesn't necessarily make it true.

I'm not saying that the dealer has no claim. Far from it. But his claim is only one of the claims on that gear. They all need to be considered to resolve the matter.

When stolen property is located, it is supposed to go to the authorities, not randomly sent to one of the claimants.

This matter should be handled by the appropriate authorities. It is for the courts to decided who needs to pay whom, what needs to be paid, and to whom the contested equipment finally belongs.

Any other solution just makes the mess bigger for all parties involved.

No matter who is right or who is wrong, this matter has been handled improperly, and the result is that it is more convoluted than ever.

[ozzy13 0]

Eric I know this must be a bummer for you. Have you contacted Ebay in this matter?

Or the guy that sold you the rig?

If so what did they say?

What recourse do you have with them?

I would think since you bought stolen goods off ebay. They would have to do something.

The guy you bought it from might not know it was stolen either. So does he have info on where he or she got it from?

These are some of the thing I would be looking into.

Not saying you are not. Just saying!!

Good luck with this and I hope something can be worked out for both parties.


To the dealer I have not heard any comment on weather you have claimed a loss to recover your losses?

Did you file anything with the police?

Whats was your situation with the credit card company?
And with UPS? Did they do anything for you?

Just some questions that are going threw my head reading all this.

Answers would be nice for learning purposes>

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[nomal2day 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.

So, a kid calls a dealer on the telephone, says he wants to buy a complete new rig, doesn't need to come for fitting or choosing colors or anything, says he will provide his mom's credit card details and the dealer never even gets to see the card or the CCV code, kid provides said dealer with a random number that he says belongs to 'Mom'. 'Mom' gets a call from dealer ('Mom' could be sitting right next to kid and could be kids chick, for all that dealer knows) and says 'yeah, sure, charge it!'.

And the dealer is comfortable with making the sale like this? I feel for anybody that loses money in a bad deal, but you gotta have some basic business practices...

'To fly is heaven, to freefall is divine'

'You only need 2 tools. WD40 for when it doesn't move but should, and duct tape for when it moves but shouldn't'

[ufk22 32]

You can talk to a lawyer, but what he'll tell you is;
1.Stolen is stolen, doesn't matter where or who or how many other owners along the way, stolen gear belongs to the original owner, That is the law
2.You are screwed on this, because you'll probably never track down the original thief.
That's legal
Morally, ??????
I'd talk to the gear shop and try to work out a compromise

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

[jsreznor 0]

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

the OP has fraudulently procured items, not stolen items. anyone who disagrees should do some research on legal terms.

[Snowball 0]

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

[kawisixer01 0]

This is a fraud claim, not a bit different than if you gave your landlord a bad check or something similar. In both cases the cops would tell you "sorry it's not our problem, it's a civil matter to be decided by the CIVIL courts...."