Legal row over classic bike “may cost £100,000”

[Bob]

A battle between rival collectors over a 50 year old motorcycle threatens to cost them £100,000 (NZD 260,000) in legal fees.

The dispute concerns a 1955 250cc Velocette MOV racebike. The bike was stolen from South Staffordshire farmer Anthony Barrett in September 2003. It disappeared, until it was purchased by noted collector John Marston, to add to his collection of some 70 classic machines. It is understood the purchase was from a legitimate dealer.

Mr Barrett, after searching auctions and sales without success, posted an advertisement on Ebay, offering £5,000 for the bike’s return. When this failed, he posted another advertisement. The contents of this prompted Martson to sue for libel, as the advertisement “severely damaged” his reputation, causing “considerable hurt and distress.”

Marston is suing for £50,000 (NZD 130,000) damages. With expenses this could cost both sides £20,000 (NZD 53,000)– the estimated cost of a replica machine, but that would ‘lack authenticity’.

[HenryDorsetCase]

pretty cut and dried innit?

You can't give better title than you've got, and title (in the legal sense) does not pass. So if the thing was stolen the legitemate owner can demand its return. If the punter who bought it was genuine, he can demand his money back from his vendor. The loser in the deal is the auction house or whoever he bought it from but rroviding they werent negligent they might be insured.

Two wealthy guys scrapping over something is always entertaining though.

[PirateJafa]

The bike was wasted on them anyway if it wasn't getting ridden.

[Patch]

would've thought that there is a register of sorts to check for 'hot' bikes before dealer traded/purchased it - unless they were involved somehow

[Griffin]

collecting is not as therapeutic as once thought then huh?

[Winston001]

pretty cut and dried innit?

You can't give better title than you've got, and title (in the legal sense) does not pass. So if the thing was stolen the legitimate owner can demand its return. If the punter who bought it was genuine, he can demand his money back from his vendor. The loser in the deal is the auction house or whoever he bought it from but providing they werent negligent they might be insured.


Yeah so there has to be more to it. Bloody journalists half reporting cases. :Oi: Maybe English law provides clear title in certain situations - not sure of the law here but the Police regularly auction lost goods and they wouldn't do that if the true owner could sue them for conversion.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Yeah so there has to be more to it. Bloody journalists half reporting cases. :Oi: Maybe English law provides clear title in certain situations - not sure of the law here but the Police regularly auction lost goods and they wouldn't do that if the true owner could sue them for conversion.

True but clear title could not pass in the case of stolen goods (as in the story): Speculation on my part though.

[Winston001]

Hmmm just had a quick look at English law. Nothing is quite as clear as we'd think. It looks like the farmer has to prove the bike was stolen and did not leave his hands lawfully. Nothing said about his insurance company or the police which leaves me wondering if he didn't report it stolen.

It also sounds as though he named the collector in the second Ebay post and said nasty things about him. If the collector innocently bought the bike, then he can certainly sue for defamation. Of course he doesn't own the bike.......but I suspect there is more.

In France and Germany an innocent buyer takes good title. Roman law huh!

[Ixion]

Y Maybe English law provides clear title in certain situations - not sure of the law here but the Police regularly auction lost goods and they wouldn't do that if the true owner could sue them for conversion.

Market overt is one example. Dunno how thta would relate to a bike though.

[Winston001]

Market overt is one example. Dunno how that would relate to a bike though.

Struth Ixion, how do you know about market overt?? :first: It doesn't apply in Britain, more of a European concept.

[avgas]

This is no LE Velo.....wouldn't it have been obvious that it was stolen?

[Ixion]

Struth Ixion, how do you know about market overt?? :first: It doesn't apply in Britain, more of a European concept.
It did apply in Britain until 1995. Abolished then but not retrospecively. A sad loss after nearly 1000 years.

EDIT: Except in the Duchy of Normandy (which is technically not part of Britain), and maybe the Isle of Mann

[Winston001]

It did apply in Britain until 1995. Abolished then but not retrospecively. A sad loss after nearly 1000 years.

EDIT: Except in the Duchy of Normandy (which is technically not part of Britain), and maybe the Isle of Mann

Ta. Learn something every day. I suppose you pick up this stuff as you wheel across the sky strapped to your ball of fire. :eek: