• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Stolen vehicle traded in for another vehicle and then stolen vheicle sold to new owne

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

dwatson12255

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Rhode Island
A friend (supposed) of mine borrowed my car and returned the next day and told me that it was stolen from him by a woman he took on a date. The woman happened to be a adult dancer. I reported the vehicle stolen and after a month and a half heard nothing from the police. I then saw what I thought was my vehicle being driven near my residence and decided to run a carfax. The report stated that my vehicle had a new registered owner. I called the police and they sent me to the DMV to investigate. The enforcement unit provided me with the new owner information and I in turn gave the information to the police. Two weeks later the police informed me that they had recovered my vehicle. Twenty minutes after the call I was called by my frends girlfriend who informed me that a woman had called her and said that the police had stopped her in my vehicle and that it was towed by the police to the impound. The det. in charge called me four days later and told me that he returned the vehicle to the new owner because she had purchased the vehicle legally and that I had in fact traded in my 2000 Lexus rx300 with 120k in the next state for a 1999 Dodge Intrepid with 184k and then the dealer sold my vehicle to a person in my state.. They claimed that my signature matched on all the sale forms and title. Even though I told them of the call I received they told me that I had to go the state where the vehicle had been traded and have that state's police investigate further because there was no crime committed in my state. The other state's police said that they could investigate the fraudulent sale that took place in their state but could not assist in recovering my vehicle from my state. The original friend who borrowed the car was arrested in the Dodge intrepid by my state police for operating a vehicle with improper tags and registration. I informed the local police of this new information and they still refused to recover the car stating that I had to go to the dealer and make a claim for compensation for my vehicle. What is wrong with this picture
 


dwatson12255

Junior Member
Insurance had just lapsesd

insurance was not in-force. PD at first thought I was doing insurance fraud but they know now that there is no insurance claim and I paid cash for the vehicle
 

Mass_Shyster

Senior Member
Your friend borrowed your car, and failed to return it. Since he had your permission, this was not theft.

You can sue your friend for the value of the car, you can sue the current possessor for the value of the car, or you can sue the current possessor for the return of the car.

The police are not interested in sorting out who didn't return the car to whom.

theft, n. 1. The felonious taking and removing of another's personal property with the intent of depriving the true owner of it; larceny.
 

dwatson12255

Junior Member
My friend had permission to use the car but not to sell it

The police have determined that my friend forged all the sale documents and in turn took a trade in for the vehicle inserting a forged signature on all the trade in documents so they have determined that he is guilty of fraud and since he took possession of another vehicle as a result of this fraud he is also guilty of theft from the dealer. I have just googled this issue and most say: A thief can not convey good title since he never had ownership of the vehicle in the first place. So the title he conveyed was voided by this fact and since the title was voided all sales that resulted after this fact are deemed void even if the new owner was innocent of any wrong doing and simply purchased the vehicle. If the rightfull owner knows where the stolen item is and pursues the recovery of that item then the police have to return the item and the purchaser has to seek remedy from the dealer who sold them the item. Is this not correct?
 

dwatson12255

Junior Member
They are saying

a stolen item is still stolen no matter how many times it is innocently transfered and or purchased. I sort of believe this because if this was not true no one would ever have to buy cars we could all just go to amall see a car we like steal it and trade it in for another vehicle. Why would i need a dealer or an owners permission to take his property
 

ShyCat

Senior Member
I think it's kind of odd that the first thing the OP did upon sighting his supposedly stolen car is to run a Carfax report. :rolleyes:
 

dwatson12255

Junior Member
Actually the OP was me.

Why is it odd. Losing a vehicle valued at $10,000 would prompt most people to use any means at their disposal to find it. I would have consulted a Ouija board if I had one! I began to feel really frustrated after a month and a half of calling the PD about my car and them telling me it was still stolen. I had an active carfax account so I took a chance and ran the report in hope that it would reveal something and my intuition proved correct. I ran the report 10 days after the new registration was reported to carfax. If I had run it any earlier I would have found nothing and probably given up my search for the vehicle. Seeing a vehicle that looked like mine with the same bumper scrape, in hindsight, seems like Divine Intervention and proved to be very auspicious. Also if the DMV had done their job and prevented the vehicle from being registered, since it was on the "Hot List", I would have never been able to track it down.
 
Last edited:

CdwJava

Senior Member
I suspect that what is causing a problem for the police is the trail of paperwork that apparently indicates that the vehicle was sold legally. You may have to make a fraud or forgery report with the agency of jurisdiction where these documents were presented for the sale of the vehicle. Interstate auto theft and embezzlement issues can be quite tricky.

I can empathize with the local cops because they are looking at a car that you reported stolen, but the person in possession can apparently produce paperwork asserting legal ownership. On its face, that makes a case for theft rather difficult. The underlying fraud or forgery (of your signature) might first have to be shown. Whether your local police are simply out of their element, or that they cannot make a case for theft under the current circumstances.

And had it been reported as stolen prior to being re-sold, the sale would likely have been halted because of the "stop" in the system. So, I suspect that the vehicle had been sold prior to the friend telling you that some stripper stole it from him. Of course, why didn't HE report it stolen to the police??

Ultimately, it might be a good bet to sue the friend for the car as the burden of proof in a civil case is much lower than in a criminal matter.
 
Last edited:

Mass_Shyster

Senior Member
a stolen item is still stolen no matter how many times it is innocently transfered and or purchased. I sort of believe this because if this was not true no one would ever have to buy cars we could all just go to amall see a car we like steal it and trade it in for another vehicle. Why would i need a dealer or an owners permission to take his property
But it wasn't stolen. You let him take it. That makes it a civil matter.
 

las365

Senior Member
The fact that OP initially loaned the car to the perp doesn't mean that there have not been any criminal offenses committed.

It may not be theft, but it is conversion and it is not legal, criminally or civilly. Forgery and fraud are criminal matters, too.
 

dwatson12255

Junior Member
Incident Report filed prior to sale

The police now have my signature from documents I signed when I bought the vehicle. The other state is investigating the forged documents and is now in contact with my state police to verify that my friend was stopped in the Dodge Intrepid I supposedly traded in my lexus for. My local police admitted that my name was on the original DMV registration doc and can see it was altered and a woman's name put in its place. They also know that the Dodge is parked in the driveway where my friend and the woman live. My Lexus was traded the same day I let my friend use the car but the original stolen vehicle report was filed two days before my Lexus was sold to the new purchaser. My major concern is that they gave the Lexus back to the purchaser without ever investigating anything and then instructed me to pursue an investigation with the other state's police Department. They told the new purchaser not to get too comfortable with the Lexus because the case was not over. (why give the car back to her then)

The fact that I received a phone call from my friend's girlfriend informing me that a woman called her and said that she was pulled over in the vehicle (20mins after the police called me to say they recovered my vehicle) is beginning to lend credence to my allegation that my friend, the woman who has the Dodge registered and the woman who purchased my Lexus are all connected somehow. I told them that getting copies of all three cell phone records will prove this fact. They made me sign a sworn statement to this. If they fail to properly investigate the situation properly I may have to sue the police as well.
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
If they fail to properly investigate the situation properly I may have to sue the police as well.
That will not happen. Not only do the police NOT have a legal DUTY to competently investigate a crime, they are not even legally required to do so.

Unless they made some sort of a promise to you that they would take a specific action, I do not see that you have any grounds to sue them for not resolving a case in the manner you wish they would.
 

dwatson12255

Junior Member
Very Comforting Thought

If the police are not obligated to act competently or to legally pursue a crime, then what is their function?. What other agency enforces laws if they are broken? I was under the belief that the police were obligated to advocate for victims of crime to prevent citizens from the self help measures we used when the west was young. Should I have pursued the matter my self and taken a bat to my friends head and then take my vehicle back from the woman and do the same thing she did. I bet the police would have pursued me if I took matters into my own hands and went after these clowns. When we had horses folks would simply hang the horse thief and recover the nag. I thought our society had evolved beyond this. I am disheartened by your statement considering you are an officer of the law.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top