Imagine losing your nearly $40,000 investment and still being forced to pay for it every month. That’s the nightmare Jose Ortega, a West Palm Beach resident, has been living for three years after his prized Sea-Doo watercraft vanished from a dealership’s service lot. But here’s where it gets controversial: despite the disappearance, Ortega is still making monthly payments on the missing vehicle, raising questions about consumer rights, business accountability, and the fine print of trust. And this is the part most people miss: the dealership’s lack of security measures and insurance coverage has left Ortega in a legal and financial limbo, sparking a lawsuit that could set a precedent for similar cases.
In 2022, Ortega purchased a 2022 Sea-Doo from Broward Motorsports, along with a 36-month maintenance plan for an additional $1,400. ‘They told me, just bring it back, and we’ll handle everything—oil changes, maintenance, the works,’ Ortega recalled. Trusting the dealership’s promise, he delivered his watercraft and trailer to their Okeechobee Boulevard location in August 2023 for routine service. By October, he was informed that his Sea-Doo had disappeared, presumed stolen. ‘It was gone. They searched, they promised to call, and three days later, they said it was stolen—the first time I’d brought it in for service,’ Ortega said, his frustration palpable.
Despite filing a police report with the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office, Ortega continues to make $441 monthly payments to protect his credit. ‘It’s not fair. It’s irresponsible,’ he stated. Attorney Robert Gonzalez, representing Ortega, filed a lawsuit against Broward Motorsports for negligent safeguarding, demanding over $38,000 in damages. The suit argues that the dealership ‘knew or should have known’ that valuable customer property was at risk of theft and failed to take reasonable precautions.
‘At the very least, businesses in a position of trust should ensure customer property doesn’t vanish without a trace,’ Gonzalez explained. ‘Here, we have a missing watercraft, no explanation, no access to security footage, and no disclosed insurance coverage.’ When contacted, Broward Motorsports’ Director of Operations, JJ Sciarrino, confirmed that their security cameras do not cover the area where the theft occurred and that the company lacks garage keepers liability insurance, a specialized policy that could have covered the loss.
This raises a critical question: Who bears the responsibility when a business fails to protect customer property? Without garage keepers insurance or personal insurance on the item—which Ortega did not have—customers are left at the mercy of businesses to either compensate them or face legal action. ‘This isn’t about attacking one business,’ Gonzalez clarified. ‘It’s a call for fairness and accountability.’
As the legal battle unfolds, both parties have filed motions: Broward Motorsports seeks to dismiss the case, while Ortega pushes for a default judgment. The judge’s ruling on these motions remains pending, leaving Ortega in a state of uncertainty. ‘It’s heartbreaking,’ he said. ‘Three years later, I’m still paying for a jet ski I’ll never see again.’
This case serves as a stark reminder for consumers: Always inquire about security measures and insurance coverage before leaving valuable property with a business. While Broward Motorsports declined to comment pending litigation, the outcome of this lawsuit could reshape how businesses handle customer property and how consumers protect themselves.
What do you think? Is the dealership entirely at fault, or should Ortega have taken additional precautions? Let us know in the comments—this is a conversation that needs your voice.
