September 22, 2011 | Dan Farrell
A centuries old Rembrandt drawing is snatched from an art exhibition at the Ritz Carlton Marina del Rey Hotel in Los Angeles. For reasons unknown, the thieves abandon the drawing at a church across town, and law enforcement officials recover it. Great outcome and end of story, right?
In fact, what comes next is much more interesting.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department is attempting to return the Rembrandt drawing called
“The Judgment” to an organization called the Linearis Institute. Officials at the institute claim they own the drawing which they value at $250,000. But there is one major sticking point. Institute officials refuse to reveal the purchasing history of the drawing. They’ve also stated that they have no provenance or official documents to authenticate that The Judgment truly is a Rembrandt. As a result, the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department is holding onto the alleged Rembrandt until the Linearis Institute can demonstrate proof or ownership.
There’s quite a bit more to read about this case in a recent Associated Press article, but what interests me most about this particular incident is that it reveals the crucial importance of provenance for individuals, institutions like the Linearis Institute and insurance carriers when it comes to fine works of art and collectibles. Documenting ownership and provenance should be a given for anyone or any organization fortunate enough to own unique and valuable works of art, but cases like The Judgment controversy arise more frequently than you’d expect. Insurance carriers can also get caught up in these time consuming disputes, wasting valuable time and resources. Carriers who invest in specialty contents claims solutions and experts with broad and deep domain expertise across a wide array of fine art and collectible categories minimize their exposure to costly scenarios like this.
When provenance is unknown, carriers can also benefit from specialty contents experts who have the knowledge and resources for swiftly authenticating a work of art and determining a credible valuation.
It will be interesting to see how this scenario plays out in the end. What do you think? Is the L.A.County Sheriff’s Department being too much of a stickler in this case? What about the Linearis Institute? Did the thieves who ended up leaving the drawing at the church determine themselves that the art work was in fact a fraud, which is why they gave it up? Please share your views in comments.
