Shadow
New member
This was posted in another part of the forum:
There's apparently a huge misunderstanding between what constitutes a criminal and civil act that needs to be rectified.
I'll break these down by situation:
In this matter, although quasi-criminal (if the investigator and SAO were were a tinkers dam, but that's another story), it remains in the civil realm for the following reason.
1) It's contractural in nature from the outset. There was an agreed price to be paid, an amount over time to be paid, and a finance agreement in force.
What the person did, is considered a breach of contract. It "may" in matters of civil litigation, be considered "civil theft" and as such, my be recoverable as treble damages. Unfortunately, if they POS that took off with the rig had the $$$, he'd probably pay the bill. Trying to get $$ out of a turnip is generally not profitable for anyone other than the attorneys.:nonod:
This is the same reasoning that allows defaulting on a home loan to result in a foreclosure and not jail time.
The poster could have:
1) Gone forward with a law suit, obtained a judgement and filed a lien. Then started looking at the defendant's assets to determine what he has that may be recoverable through writs of replevin, garnishments, etc.:yesnod:
2) Assuming that the initial paperwork (financing agreement) was done correctly, the poster could have done a reposession and recovered the rig that way.:thumbsup:
In the other situation:
Again it's contratural. The poster and the POS were "co-owners", "partners" if you will, in the business (if I'm reading the above information correctly?) and have/had an equal share and stake in the profits of the business, and the inventory.
It's not impossible to determine who did what, but it's generally not worth law enforcements time. The time allotment that would be required to sift through the partnership agreements and such is phenominal, and usually, outside the ability, capability and understanding of the average detective, even many of the white collar types.
It generally takes an attorney, not just any attorney, but someone skilled in the practice of business law, to seperate the wheat from the chaff in these cases.
Even then, most judges won't be able to make a ruling without taking the matter "under advisement" and having his/her JA or paralegals do some research.
Civil matters as this can be quite complex.
In the first matter, the one regarding the rig, the poster wouldn't need an attorney. This could be handled by anyone with all the necessary documentation, thier ducks in a row, and the willingness to file the necessary paperwork.
Cases like this are brought "pro-se" all the time:thumbsup::yesnod:
To conclude:
The biggest difference between criminal and civil, is intent.
Sloppy workmanship, poor business practices, and lousy costomer service, are not criminal.
While it "may" violate some BS administrative law that has criminal implications as an aside, it's generally going to be treated as civil in nature.
As I said before, unless put on the spot, all the state is going to be interested in, is the $$$$$.
(They may take criminal actions in the other case because too many people know about it and have made complaints, and it's an election year.)
However,
Intentionally charging for parts/work not supplied, converting (in this case) parts to one's own use, or conversion for ones own profit, the assets of another, is CRIMINAL.
Failure to meet time lines, refusing to pay for something agreed upon by contract, or a dispute over ownership, especially between 2 or more "partners" is CIVIL.
In the other section, you have BOTH:yesnod:
There's apparently a huge misunderstanding between what constitutes a criminal and civil act that needs to be rectified.
I'll break these down by situation:
In this matter, although quasi-criminal (if the investigator and SAO were were a tinkers dam, but that's another story), it remains in the civil realm for the following reason.
1) It's contractural in nature from the outset. There was an agreed price to be paid, an amount over time to be paid, and a finance agreement in force.
What the person did, is considered a breach of contract. It "may" in matters of civil litigation, be considered "civil theft" and as such, my be recoverable as treble damages. Unfortunately, if they POS that took off with the rig had the $$$, he'd probably pay the bill. Trying to get $$ out of a turnip is generally not profitable for anyone other than the attorneys.:nonod:
This is the same reasoning that allows defaulting on a home loan to result in a foreclosure and not jail time.
The poster could have:
1) Gone forward with a law suit, obtained a judgement and filed a lien. Then started looking at the defendant's assets to determine what he has that may be recoverable through writs of replevin, garnishments, etc.:yesnod:
2) Assuming that the initial paperwork (financing agreement) was done correctly, the poster could have done a reposession and recovered the rig that way.:thumbsup:
In the other situation:
Again it's contratural. The poster and the POS were "co-owners", "partners" if you will, in the business (if I'm reading the above information correctly?) and have/had an equal share and stake in the profits of the business, and the inventory.
It's not impossible to determine who did what, but it's generally not worth law enforcements time. The time allotment that would be required to sift through the partnership agreements and such is phenominal, and usually, outside the ability, capability and understanding of the average detective, even many of the white collar types.
It generally takes an attorney, not just any attorney, but someone skilled in the practice of business law, to seperate the wheat from the chaff in these cases.
Even then, most judges won't be able to make a ruling without taking the matter "under advisement" and having his/her JA or paralegals do some research.
Civil matters as this can be quite complex.
In the first matter, the one regarding the rig, the poster wouldn't need an attorney. This could be handled by anyone with all the necessary documentation, thier ducks in a row, and the willingness to file the necessary paperwork.
Cases like this are brought "pro-se" all the time:thumbsup::yesnod:
To conclude:
The biggest difference between criminal and civil, is intent.
Sloppy workmanship, poor business practices, and lousy costomer service, are not criminal.
While it "may" violate some BS administrative law that has criminal implications as an aside, it's generally going to be treated as civil in nature.
As I said before, unless put on the spot, all the state is going to be interested in, is the $$$$$.
(They may take criminal actions in the other case because too many people know about it and have made complaints, and it's an election year.)
However,
Intentionally charging for parts/work not supplied, converting (in this case) parts to one's own use, or conversion for ones own profit, the assets of another, is CRIMINAL.
Failure to meet time lines, refusing to pay for something agreed upon by contract, or a dispute over ownership, especially between 2 or more "partners" is CIVIL.
In the other section, you have BOTH:yesnod:
Last edited:
:thumbsup:
-ask OJ:lmao
, etc.