100 million dollar jewel theft and why you should not lie about their value to save shipping costs.

[Karl_K]

"Brink's says it's responsible only for the declared value — the $8.7 million stated in the pickup manifests — but the jewelers say the cargo was worth $100 million, according to the lawsuit."

Thieves stole 22 bags of jewelry and gemstones while Brink's driver was asleep, lawsuit says

Brink's says it's responsible only for the declared value — the $8.7 million stated in the pickup manifests — but the jewelers say the cargo was worth $100 million, according to the lawsuit.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Karl_K]

The law does weird things sometimes, but I think Brinks should win this one.

 

[windblownhair]

Under-declaring made the transport costs cheaper? Insurance costs?

And thanks for posting this! That rest stop is actually one I drive past frequently, so I found this story particularly interesting.

 

[Karl_K]

Under-declaring made the transport costs cheaper? Insurance costs?

Yes to both. Shipping costs and shipping insurance costs are both based on declared value at this level.
It is also possible that if it had been declared at 100m it would have been transported differently.
At 100m it would have likely been inside a safe inside a trailer instead of just in the trailer.
The pictures are just stock photos of an armored car but the text and other sources says they were cargo in a semi trailer with just a lock.

 

[windblownhair]

Gotcha, that makes sense. Thank you for the explanation. And talk about a gamble that didn’t pay off!

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

we are not surpossed to swear here on PS
but the owners were f...... idiots IMHO

 

[kenny]

I bet Brinks' competitor Malca-Amit is loving this.

 

[LilAlex]

I'm not an expert but it sure sounds like an inside job to me:

"...One of the drivers of a Brink’s tractor-trailer was asleep inside the big rig, parked near a remote Southern California rest stop earlier this summer, when thieves broke a lock and stole millions of dollars worth of jewelry and gemstones, according to a lawsuit filed by the security company..."

And if you are going to try to inflate the value post hoc, why not say it was worth a billion? A gajillion?

 

[OcnGypZ]

Wholesale versus retail value - perhaps?

 

[yssie]

You declare for 8mil then you get paid 8mil. End of story. If you willingly underdeclare and that results in you being “emotionally and financially destroyed”, well, that’s what consequences for your own poor choices looks like. I’m struggling to find sympathy for those jewellers here.

 

[kenny]

You declare for 8mil then you get paid 8mil. End of story. If you willingly underdeclare and that results in you being “emotionally and financially destroyed”, well, that’s what consequences for your own poor choices looks like. I’m struggling to find sympathy for those jewellers here.

But but but ... their children are crying, and their little Susie was born with one short leg.

So surely they deserve $100 million.

 

[dk168]

If I were to under-declare the value of a package I sent out and it went AWOL, then I only have myself to blame for not being replace the content like for like, end of story!

That happened a while back with a package I sent to the bench I use in China.

I was only able to claim back the shipping of 12.00 GBP as it was not delivered in the time frame as promised.

Although I would be able to replace the items like for like financially, however, it contained CSs that I really liked cut by Jeff W and Gary.

Luckily, the package was eventually returned to me after about 5+ months from the date I sent it, phew!!!

Something/one up there was looking after me!

DK

 

[Karl_K]

I bet Brinks' competitor Malca-Amit is loving this.

Loving it but at the same time fearing it.
The bad publicity for Brinks is good for them.
They also should fear how the suit turns out.
All of the shippers even if they play in the high value/high risk game or not are cheering Brinks on in this lawsuit because it would set an awful precedent if they lost that would hurt them all.