lamborghini reported stolen after i bought it

Something about this entire situation sounds very strange to me. The fact the car was bought and sold twice, and remained with the OP for 3 months before the leasing company realized they weren't getting paid and something was wrong. I get the feeling that there is something going on here that we aren't aware of.

 

The law is quite clear about whether or not a Licenced Car Dealer can sell a stolen car to someone and I couldn't find anything there in that mentioned dog bites.

Roy has taken money from 360 for something he did not own.

The title he gave 360 is therefore defective.

Roy has publically Posted that he is worth 150 Million Dollars so he obviously has the assets to return the money he accepted for this stolen car.

Roy may or may not be covered by insurance for his error in selling a stolen car to 360.

This is not nor should not be 360's problem.

IMHO 360 is entitled to an immediate refund.

I find Roy's posting that 360's recourse should be with someone else very troubling.

The bottom line remains would you buy a car from a licenced dealer who is acting as Roy is in this case and not immediately refunding the money he received for selling a car he didn't own as it was previously stolen?

I wouldn't nor do I feel Ferrari Chat should keep him as a sponsor. This is how I feel. Other's may feel differently.

 

You're saying you know of an exotic car dealer that would just cut a check out of their own pocket rather than require the steps necessary for them to be able to file a proper insurance claim?

 

Rumor has it the guy who fled the country and defrauded the lease company did this with three cars not just this one. One was an F-40 and I believe a 430 spider!! He took alot more than $50k more like $750k

 

By reimbursting 360 spider (Josh) then he is admitting fault. Most insurance carriers would not pay him back as he has prejudiced their position. This would need to run thru insurance beofre anyone gets paid. Plus Roy did nothing wrong so the insurance claim wil most likely be denied.

 

I agree. A simple thanks, but no thanks and a ban seems like a good way to do business. This might be a simple issue if the guy was selling Hotwheels, but he isn't. He sells ultra-high dollar hardware and doesn't conduct himself in a manner that reflects that.

There is an epic amount of proof for this as can be found via the search function.

 

There is no question in my mind what so ever that anyone who sold me a stolen car would immediately reimburse me upon learning that the car they sold me was stolen. None.

I would never deal with anyone who wouldn't.

Whether or not Roy has insurance to cover his error and omission is an entirely separate matter.

As an aside my insurance company immediately reimburses me for any loss, subject to deductible I suffer and then goes after anyone who may be responsible for that loss.

Roy sold a car he did not own. IMO he immediately owes 360 the money he received from him for this car.

Roy may or may not have insurance to cover Roy's actions/mistake/error/omission but once again it's not 360's problem.

We're re-plowing the same ground.

 

Selling someone a car you do not own, receiving money for a car you do not own, and Publically Posting that 360 should sue someone else is proof of:

"Roy did nothing wrong..." ?

 

I'm glad i bought a Honda Pilot and had a nice smooth purchasing experience

hope all works out for all parties involved

 

The lack of reading comprehension skills in this thread is awesome to behold. I mean how many times does it have to be said that the car was never reported stolen for that to sink in? How many times does it need to be said that the title was clean? How many times does Roy have to say "please, sue me so my insurance can pay Josh and go down the line, this is why we pay these people, let's use them"? More than a few people like to create sensational drama where there is none. Someone pointed out it was odd that Roy is the center of drama so often. The way I see it, Roy is the target of BS created drama so often.

 

Ignorantia juris non excusat ("ignorance of the law does not excuse").

IMHO, ignorance isn't a valid excuse to avoid liability in this instance, just as it can't be used as an excuse with the law. Roy didn't know the car was "stolen" but since he sold it, the liability is his.

However, this doesn't stop Roy from going to the Las Vegas dealership and exacting what he's due from them, as they ignorantly sold Roy a "stolen" car.

I would imagine the LV dealership will have to file an insurance claim since they cannot sue/prosecute the former owner.

I don't think anyone acted in bad faith here but the circumstances are most unfortunate for everyone involved. I hope it can be remedied for 360, Roy and even the leasing company.

Steve

 

First off: A guy who does not even subscribe to OUR SITE can hardly call out for a ban of one of our best sponsers! Try pulling $50 bucks out of you pocket and subscribing before you tell us how to run our forum!


How is Roy not conducting himself as an honest and professional in this matter? From day one when he found out what happened he has advised his client ( Josh) to get atty to get the ball rollin. He even said get an atty and sue me and I will sue them so on and so on. In a matter such as this you do not just cut a check because you have money. This is a business. If a dealer did that anytime there was somekind of issue then guess what? They wouldn't be in business to long would they? Roy cutting a check WOULD jepordize his insurance companies postion to defend him from this suit. END OF STORY. Roy feels like **** of course but what dealer would:

1. Cut a check when they are NOT negligent in turn jepordizing their insurance companies position to defend them? In turn also showing they are at fault by paying.

2. Advise their client (Josh) to sue them to help him out! Only because they feel so bad they were ALL defrauded due to the Idiots at the leasing company who released clear title to a guy on three cars they owned.

IMO: Roy is one of the biggest assets to exotic car world in the country. He gives 100% money back garuntees to his customers if you do not like the car he ships to you. What other dealer is the country has a 48 hour money back policy no questions asked?

I heard once of a car he sold that had an issue months after the purchase. Even though sold "as is" and Roy under "no obligation" paid out of his own pocket to fix that unknown issue for his customer. Name another dealer who would do that?

He is true Lamborghini enthusist. Has contacts all over the country, sells most cars for under market, alwasy returns phones call quickly, and always does the right thing for his customers.

I for one stand by Cats Exotics and Roy personally. If he is banned for getting defauded along with everyone else and then telling his customer to sue him then PLEASE BAN ME AS WELL cause I want no part of this site if that is how we treat people who do the right thing.

As for Josh. I feel horrible for you. I could not imagine what I would be doing right now if the cops took my car and I had clean title. You should feel lucky that this happened with Roy instead of another dealer. He will do everything to help you and alot more than any other delaer would I assure you.


Good Luck to all with this BS situation all around

Mike

 

Nope.

The car was reported stolen.

360 was stopped by the Police and the car was impounded as a stolen car.
The person who stole the car from the first leasing company can not convey proper title so the title was not clean from that point onwards.

Roy may have a claim assuming he has "error's and omission" insurance but that is Roy's issue/problem not 360's. Roy may have recourse against the dealer he bought the car from but once again that is not 360's problem. Roy owes 360 immediate reimbursement to 360 as he sold him a previously stolen car.

No matter how many times you post things that are not true they remain untrue.

 

I have not read anything here or in another thread that would suggest Cats should be removed from Fchat.

I don't know Roy nor have I done any business with him.

I suggest, while everyone is entitled to their opinion, we wait until this is all sorted before passing judgment. I think it's safe to say that we all want the best for the people wronged and the criminal(s) brought to justice.

360Spider, while we have all opened up with assistance here, maybe you could introduce yourself with a little history. Is English your native language?

 

BEST POST. This post should be a pre-requisite for anyone before they are allowed to express their opinion.

 

can someone please give me the name of that leasing company? I suddenly have an urge to buy a few more toys and then move to mexico. thanks

 

360spider says:

Roy says:

I'm inclined to believe Roy on that one. Just as you're inclined to back what 360spider said.

360spider says:

Roy says:

Roy is taking advantage of his legal rights and the lawyers and insurance company he pays good money for. Josh is stirring the pot with what appear to me to be twisted half truths and created drama.

Looking at this thread and having to make a choice as to who I believe It's not hard to choose between the guy who doesn't know what to do in case of flat tire and is still asking how to find a lawyer three days after the fact or the dealer who has bent over backwards to make customers whole, each and every time I've seen a complaint made.

 

The good news is that the Police report is public record as is the Writ Issued in LV and they both speak for themselves.

The other good news is that people can read this thread and other threads about Roy and judge for themselves whether or not they want to buy a car from him.

All is good.

 

This might be one of my favorite F-chat threads ever. It has everything. Drama, comedy, people's fortunes being tossed about and toyed with and laughed about. "I'm gonna sue you", "You should sue me", "Let's all sue each other", titans of F-chat going at it "I'll never buy a car from him", "I did NOTHING wrong!!!" , etc. etc.
Epic. I'll be curious as to this situation's resolution. In any case, it's a hell of a good read, like Dominick Dunne on crack.

 

I like Dominick's books but I'm not sure that Crack would have been his Drug of Choice.

 

LOL, a savvy point.

 

Did you actually read the entire thread? The car had clear title with no liens reported at the time of sale.

 

I do not know you and do not think I have ever dealt with you. It has been rumored that you are wvery wealthy and own many multi million dollar business's. If that is true, I sure hope you have many good lawyers helping you protect your property and investments. You continue to make INCORRECT statements here..so to try and make it clear ONE MORE TIME for your cloesd mind I will...

1) The car was NOT and IS NOT stolen.

2) The car had and STILL has a clean clear and legal title. WHICH JOSH and his LAWYER have in their possession!

3) There was a CIVIL not CRIMINAL court order to pick the car up.

4) JOSH was not arrested, not booked AND will not be charged with any crime. He was most likely "detained" briefly as the Police have the right to do in any situation. I would say as an ex-police officer of 11 years, most likely for their safety till they were sure he was not threat to him. After ALL they have no idea how he would react to the taking of his vehicle. Pretty run of the mill stuff.

5) The insurance companys that we all pay for will be the end parties to deal with this. There is no WAY any smart business man would fork out the loss and then try to go after their insurance company on their own, you would have lost before you even got started. READ YOUR POLICY folks...all POLICYS require you to report a possible loss, (which has been done) they further require and demand YOU HAVE NO CONTROL over wheter a insurance companies settles or goes to court, you further have NO CONTROL as to wheter they accept or denie the claim till after their investigation. Which I hate to say, but most likely since there was no negligfence, my insurance company will probably DENIE his claim. THAT is way I suggested to him to not waste time and money and go to the source...but he is as he has been told more than welcome to start action against CATS EXOTICS.

6) For you to claim "ANY DEALER I DEALTH" with would give me my money back..BS BS BS what you going to hold a gun to their head and threaten them..come on, if you truly are such a succesful business man RE-read this whole thread and relize the matter is being dealth with in the way it should be.

FYI for everyone, the rumor is correct that this "scum bag" person that fled the country DID do this with a total of THREE cars. ALL with the same leasing company. There may be a conversion with the Lease Company and this guy, I dont think so, but stranger things have happened. I do KNOW for a fact that the leasing company has stated over and over again that they had this guy as a long term customer for the last 5 years. They had no issues with him in the past. YES they sent out non stamped, non lien issued titles...FRIKIN STUPID for what ever reason they did it. Then one way or another they got a JUDGE, probably with some BS song and dance to issue these orders and pick up the cars, (yes all three were picked up with in the week, two in Cali and one out of state) the other two were sold by other dealers in the same way I sold this one. I can ALSO tell you that one of the cars HAS ALREADY been re-turned to the buyer via a California Court Writ and the Judge told the leasing company to file against their client and/or this current customer, but they have no clam to the car at this time. I have been in contact with the other buyers lawyer, WHO as well is confident to have the car returned with in the next 48 hours after a hearing schedule today in their state.

I fell bad for JOSH but it is he and only he that must start the ball rolling and get into court and have the writ oevr turned! AFTER ALL he is the LEGAL TITLE holding owner of the car, NOT me.

I can only guess that the leasing company took a chance at getting these cars back, hoping that one or all three of these end users would either not have the means (money) to fight them, or would just go away...well they lost on two so far, but may win on one if JOSH does not get to work. I can also guarantee you the leasing company has been paying for these lawyers everyday of the year on their payroll...so why not roll the dice and see what happens. ANY company would do the same, try what ever method, no matter HOW weak to re-coupe their cost...plain old smart business sense.

SO FOR you to keep on saying I SOLD A STOLEN CAR is out and out BS and you have no idea of LAW and FACT and just pop off with ignorant in-correct statements.

 

So when was the car reported stolen?

 

Looking into my crystal ball I see...

Josh will sue Roy. Roy's insurance company will cover the refund. Roy's insurance company will sue the LV dealer and get their money back. LV dealer will sue Leasing Company because they were negligent and started the whole thing by sending the thief the clean title. That's if Josh does what any half intelligent lawyer, internet forum poster or Lamborghini enthusiast/dealer would tell him to do. Months from now this will just be a nugget of ammunition for the Roy Cats Haters LLC which they will toss around as a reason people shouldn't do business with Roy;

"Remember when Roy sold that stolen Gallardo to that guy?"

"What happened?"

"Roy got the sh*t sued out of him."

They will forget the details and just spin it up, like they have done with every single mistake Roy has ever made, ignoring the facts that Roy has proven time and time again by his actions that's he's willing to do anything short of cutting his own nuts off to make a customer whole when there is an issue with a car he sells.