The Story with Details
Stolen. Found. Gone Again.
This story is a long read, are you sure you are into this? Don't worry, I've included the important parts in bold.
About $5,000 Worth of Items Were Stolen From My Garage
Earlier this year, on July 17, 2007 someone entered the garage of my home in Sugarhouse and stole my road bike, lawnmower, line trimmer and hedge trimmer. When my wife and I discovered what had happened, we immediately contacted the Salt Lake Police Department. When they arrived, they took a report, assigned me a case number and informed me that if I had anything like a serial number for the bike to fill out and mail in a form to them. We had recently moved there, and in the chaos of the move, I could not find the serial number. I asked the police about the likelihood of recovering my stolen items, and I was informed that it was slim to none. They suggested that I check the local pawn shops and eBay.
Almost Two Months Later I Find My Bike on eBay
Disheartened, and believing there was little hope I still would periodically do searches on eBay for my bike. I was about to give up searching for my stolen items when on Monday, September 3rd, my bike appeared on eBay posted by a seller [Ed. Omitted by request 10/15/07] along with two other bikes of high value. It appeared that they had swapped components on my bike including the wheel set, seat and pedals, in an attempt to make it look different. Having found my bike, I contacted the person who originally sold me my bike, 4 years ago, in a long shot attempt to see if he still had record of the bike's serial number. Fortunately, his insurance company did, and I turned it in to the police along with a detailed description of my bicycle and any identifying marks and parts.
The SLCPD suggested that I try to see the bike in person, and so I contacted the seller and tried to make arrangements without him suspecting that I might be the rightful owner. I claimed I was from California, out of fear of possible retaliation and the chance that he would use whatever means to evade police and get rid of my bike. Not being a very good liar, I assumed he didn't buy my story as he didn't respond to my requests. Worried that the listing would sell before I could get his info, I did a little searching on the internet and was able to find his phone number, do a reverse phone number search, and discovered that his contact information in Sandy, Utah. I got this information to the police and the detective assigned to the case went to the seller's home and positively identified my bike frame on Thursday, September 6. He contacted me from the seller's home to let me know that it was indeed my bike, he was going to seize it and that he would contact me again, after he investigated further. The seller claimed he had bought the bike from a friend who bought it from a pawn shop, and the officer was going to track it down.
Spreading the Word Results in Another Victim Finding His Bike
Being extremely excited about finding my bike, I sent out an email to everyone in my cycling club, with details about how I found my bike, links to the other two bikes that were also listed by this seller, and tips on things everybody should do to help recover their property if stolen. This email was quickly sent around to other cyclists and even included in a cyclist's blog. (Sidenote: I was in a Canyon Cycles in Olympus Hills and I was surprised that most of the people in there had gotten my email.) As a result of this viral communication, another cyclist was able to identify his stolen bike as one of them listed, and he contacted the South Jordan police department on Monday, September 10.
I Was Certain I'd Get My Bike Back and Help to Potentially Take Down a Crime Ring
I didn't hear anything from the detective the Friday after, or on the Monday after, but my last impression was that he was going to seize my bike and I would be able to get it back. He informed me that there were others involved including a pawn shop and he was going to begin tracking them down. On Tuesday morning I got a call from the detective telling me that he was unable to seize the bike because the eBay seller had proof that he was the rightful owner of the bike, and that I no longer had any claim to my stolen property.
As you can imagine I was dumbfounded.
He informed me that had I turned in the serial numbers of the items stolen within 10 days of the theft, that they may have been able to recover it. However, as a result of HB's 133 and 402, the police claimed that all that a pawn shop has to do is report the serial numbers in a state run database, and if the item doesn't turn up stolen within 10 days, the pawn shop has the right to sell the item. Once the item has been sold, the police claimed they could no longer seize the item, the pawn shop is in the clear, and the new owner has rightful title to the stolen items.
Background to the Theft and How the Salt Lake DA's Office Allowed This To Happen
Apparently, the thief turned in my bike and my hedge trimmers to a local pawn shop hours after I reported the theft. He has sold over 300 different items to pawn shops in the past two years, and appears to be homeless. The pawn shop followed the rules as mandated by this law, entered the serial number into the database, and when it didn't turn up as stolen within 10 days they chopped up my bike and sold it (and presumably the other bicycles that were listed on eBay) to an intermediary. The intermediary then sold my bicycle the seller on eBay. I have since spoken directly to the seller, and he has tried to take action to make things right with me. He believed that he was working with an honest pawnshop, and after two of his bikes were listed as stolen, him and his friend contact the pawn shop, who was unwilling to refund their money.
Unfortunately, because of a gross misinterpretation of this law by the SLC DA's office, which they justified through established case law often referred to as a 3rd Party Purchaser in Good Faith, or a Bona Fide Purchaser. Because of this, the police allowed the pawn shop, the intermediary and the eBay seller to sell my stolen items in the clear. Unfortunately, the other claimant of the other stolen bike was in the same boat as I was, as he didn't turn in his serial number on time either and thus loses out on a bike worth at least $4,000.
The problem is, Bona Fide Purchaser applies only to someone who has 'entrusted' an item to another person or business. For example, had I actually pawned my bicycle and then the pawn wrongfully sold my bike before the holding period was up, then I would have to claim to my bike because I had entrusted it to the pawn. Since I never entrusted my property to anyone, since it was stolen, this law doesn't apply. It seems inexcusable that the DA's office could so grossly misinterpret this, and when confronted still maintain that they would still advise the police to not seize stolen property that has gone through pawn shops.
The bottom line for crooks and pawnshops is that they can easily clear stolen items, and the bizarre twist is even when everybody acknowledges an item is stolen, the original owner has no hope of seeing it again. This shortened holding period, easy and lenient requirements for recording sold items, combined with this rule of law all go against good judgement. Knowing that pawn shops are a common place for fencing stolen goods, it seems that the requirements for them to sell property should model after how titles are handled for real estate and vehicle purchases. In these cases, if the titles are not clear, the title companies are ultimately held responsible.
For someone like the eBay seller, who is just trying to make some extra money, and doesn't want to sell stolen items, even if it is legal, he also is a victim. He has since promised to me that he will no longer deal with pawn shops.
What Needs to Change
- The design of this bill makes it easy for a pawn shop to clear stolen items. Fortunately (or so I thought), I had the serial number to my bike. Like most people I know, and likely yourself included, I have no idea what the serial numbers are for my lawn mower, hedge trimmer and line trimmer. In fact, I wonder if they even have serial numbers. Because of this law, because I don't have serial numbers, even if I am able to correctly identify the items, or if circumstances would indicate that they are my stolen items I can't claim them after 10 days, if at all.
- The very nature of pawn shops seems to be rife with stolen items, and it makes little sense to make their requirements for pawn shops more lenient. In fact, an ordinary business that isn't classified as a pawn shop or second-hand store would likely remain liable for selling stolen items.
- Such a short window for pawn shops to clear potentially stolen items seems counterintuitive and may even encourage theft. An unscrupulous pawn shop may even have incentive to form burglary rings given the ease of gaining title to property.
- The onus should be on the pawn shops to make sure that items aren't stolen, and they should ultimately continue to remain responsible for purchasing stolen items. Businesses can find ways to protect themselves in these instances. If a homeless person is routinely coming in with lawn mowers, bicycles, golf clubs and hedge trimmers that obviously came from someone's garage, and if a pawn shop were ultimately liable, they would naturally inform the seller they weren't going to buy from him anymore.
- The real issue is that any one of us can fall victim to this law with little recourse. If you haven't written down your serial numbers for everything you own, and it goes to a pawn shop, after 10 days you can no longer claim it. I have yet to meet a person who has serial number for their line trimmers, mowers, etc. The detective shared with me his opinion that he didn't think that pawn shops should even be allowed to do business. I don't have an opinion on this, but they certainly shouldn't be allowed to business as they do now.
Update 3/7/2008:
I met with Rep Lockhart, Sen Ross Romero and members of local law enforcement and owners of pawn shops in late January who sit on a panel that has oversight over pawn shops (and now antique and second-hand stores). I was able to relate to them the above story and they made attempts to enhance the law to better protect citizens, while also bringing other avenues of selling stolen items under the requirements of the law, that include a police monitored database.
While they were willing to clarify the concept of the original victim and also to enhance the database, there is still a long way to go. Pawn shops were resistant to extending the holding period to a more standard and reasonable 15 business days, or to take further steps to verify the addresses of people who pawn items so that it makes it easier for police to track them down. And while law enforcement seemed to initially support the idea of a public facing database, pawn shops were resistant.
It is good that there is an oversight committee, and that they are working to better enhance the database, but there is still need for more.
All other evidence and miscellaneous junk...
2007 House Bill 402 - Sponsored by Rebecca Lockart
http://le.utah.gov/~2007/bills/hbillenr/hb0402.htm
Note lines 278-370
related to:
2006 House Bill 133 Third Substitute - Sponsored by Rebecca Lockart
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2006/bills/hbillenr/hb0133.htm
Note lines 99-222
The eBay listings of seller [Ed. Omitted by request. Additional information available by request. 10/15/07]