Scams

[wasions]

My guess is that he had the parts to begin with, but as a modern 18 y/o (I know this doesn't apply to all, but the majority), he didn't want to take the time to actually learn how to ship the thing, and, having spent the money, figured 'What the hell?'

Sorry to see you get touched that way. After sorting through the inanities in the thread, there were a couple of pretty good ideas. I, for one, would be glad to check out people or parts in my area for any persons that might be in a similar predicament.

Yes I bought it HERE! go to member "nota5speed" OH by the way Landshark & someone else got taken before I did.
As for the rest--I dont see any humor in this!

OK, Don't sue him in Small Claims! If it was an internet transaction YOUR state may have actual jurisdiction in the matter. Obviously, check with your lawyer. But sue him in real court. Then you can get actual and punitive damages, and "payment for loss of use" this could put you in the WRX STi range. Collecting WILL be a pain. But when the sheriffs show up on his doorstep asking for the keys to his car (cause you've got a lien on it)... look at 2 years before that happens. In the word of Churchill "Never never never quit!"

Collins
See what 1 law class can do!

[Noir]

no offense, but i don't see how that would apply.

it is in small claims court because of the monetary value of the claim. i can't remember what the figure is but i think david paid about 1k on it.

also it is not a licensed business that is selling it. it is an individual. david is claiming that he sent money out to this kid in california that did not produce/surrender the product to david. no bill of sale was involved as it appears. all david has on this kid are a few phone bills with the kid's number on it, and postings on this website forum that says i have this thing here and that david wants it. The kid did not say "yeah, let's do it." unless david has some emails, (though that may not help). none of this is contractual and even so, this kid is like 16-17 so it doesn't really matter. well let's get this out of the way.. what is your definition of 'real' court?

ok you are going to sue him for actual and punitive damages along with "payment for loss of use". so if i tell put an ad in the paper that says 'i have this pretty pen that says "hello kitty".' you send me 500 bucks and a letter that says you must have that pen because you love "hello kitty" items and ask for the pen. you got nothing in the mail. where is the damage? i guess there was a loss of use although i don't see the loss in use because you never owned the item. but how will this stand up in court? pretend you're the judge.

the sheriff shows up at his doorstep cause you've got a lien on it. i'm assuming you know the definition of lien. how is the sheriff going to come and take his car? a lien can be filed if some services were rendered along with materials with a contract, or from a penalty from gov't or a home owner's association that govern's your subdivision or neighborhood as stated with a contract and the owner of the house must be notified via registered mail that if no action is taken a lien will be filed. what services did david render to the kid? he basically gave the kid money. (by the way, liens i believe drop off every 2 or 4 years(i forgot) and you have to re-apply and pay a fee in the county where the property belongs). also liens filed only show that you have interests in the property that the service/penalty was rendered for. that doesn't give you the right to come and take his car, his car is not in the equation. the owner/kid would have a problem selling the car, if the kid never sold it you can't touch him, all you can do is keep renewing the lien everytime the lien expires which is like flushing away money on a lost cause. (by the way, how many kids that are 16-17 actually have a title to a car? would do them no good, insurance will not insure a 16-17 year old without tacking them to their parent's insurance so what car can the sheriff take?)

if i were you, i'd get my money back from that law class. all this info is free online.

[Noir]

i got an idea to help guard members from potential scams.

http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/show...5&pagenumber=2

i think it would help filter out low level scammers, but obviously the master scammers still maybe able to penetrate our community. it'll all depend on the willingness to participate by our good honest members and our people skills to determine if we are dealing with scum or a decent person.

[Beav]

I'm no legal anything, but couldn't/wouldn't this fall under mail fraud or the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission?

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by wasions
My guess is that he had the parts to begin with, but as a modern 18 y/o (I know this doesn't apply to all, but the majority), he didn't want to take the time to actually learn how to ship the thing, and, having spent the money, figured 'What the hell?'

Steve, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

David, I'm truly sorry to hear that you were ripped off. That's a real shame, and is the first time I've heard of any member here doing such a thing. While I know that it won't help you in this case, I recommend that in the future you pay the seller with a postal money order. That way, if you get ripped off in any way and don't find the seller to be cooperative, the USPS will investigate it as mail fraud.

[Noir]

thx beav, for exposing me to more good info. i've been reading the ftc site and the mail fraud stuff. it would be mail fraud if it was done on a larger scale. i hardly think that 2-3 instances is good enough to nail that kid. the usps also says that it would investigate and prosecute mail fraud, but it's aim is to cease schemes, not refund you for you items, money, or services.

from the ftc.gov site, i'm trying to find where it houses the exact definition that they use for 'merchant'. because if you can prove this 16-17 year old kid is not a 'merchant' then he's clear blue.

they have regulations regarding auctions because of the abuse, but it's easy to solve those problems by making the auction sites follow their regulations. when you create a account at a auction site, you are asked to abide by the rules or else. that's what is held against the seller and buyer. in david's case, it more than likely won't apply.

just like you have rules regarding used auto sales for dealerships but not private sales, on the ftc sites it states that they can't solve individual problems, but they can try to stop fraudulent schemes and practices. but the problem is that it is an individual/individual issue not a business/individual issue. it would all be based on is david considered a 'consumer' and is the kid considered a 'merchant'.

i believe his only chance is with small claims court. unfortunately it will have to be in california because that is where the source is (you have to take it to the business's county). the only problem is the expenses that you will need to actually go out there to prosecute the kid. that lies another issue. if the kid is 16-17 it may get thrown out, but you maybe able to seek out his parents because they are responsible for their child's actions.

david may be able to win the case, but he will spend more than he will get back. so i guess it's a lost cause because small claims typically only reward the amount that was involved. he would have to sue the kid again for expenses for sueing him in the first place all over again.

looks like david will lose alot more than 1k for that tranny if he tries to sue him. i'd like to know what other options appear for you david just to further my limited understanding.

Other than ambulance chasers "Contract Law" is the largest segment of the legal profession. The class I took was a graduate class in Contract Law to fulfill MBA requirements. Now to address your issues. My definition of REAL court is “not small claims court” I understand very well that small claims court is real so you can drop that now.
There was a contract. Verbal, written, implied… It does not matter. A contract was entered into by both parties. The fact the MO was cashed makes this very easy to prove. I’m not sure what “Hello Kitty” is, or why you’d need it, but if I agree to supply you with needed “Hello Kitty” products and by NOT supplying you with these products you suffer incidental loss (because I did not fulfill my contractual obligation to you) You can claim “Loss of use” and will usually be awarded these additional funds.

I know what a lien is. From your odd discourse it does not look like you do. A lien can be filed against someone for non-payment in nearly ANY situation in where a judgment has been granted. Liens do not “drop off” Have you ever heard of a 60 month loan? The dealership does not “Renew the Lien” every 2 years. And lastly if person X has a lien against property owned by person Y that property can be seized immediately to satisfy the judgment. I guess you’ve never heard of a sheriffs auction either.

If your depending on free law classes off the internet you are certainly getting what you’re paying for.

I stand by my position
Collins
92 Pearlie

[wasions]

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets


Steve, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Uhhh. You don't get out much, do you.

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by wasions


Uhhh. You don't get out much, do you.

A lot more than you do, apparently. Defining the typical 'modern 18-year-old' as a scheming, yet lazy, criminal is nothing short of insane - and it coupld only come from somebody who has never actually met another person in his life. That's an absurd generalization.

You just said that most 18-year-olds wouldn't think twice about defrauding somebody out of a pretty decent chunk of change. I'd love to see your supporting evidence for that.

Everybody else get comfy and grab some popcorn. This ought to be good.

And, no, I didn't forget the smiley. This is ridiculous and I won't stand for it.

Two seperate Flame type threads on the same... er... thread.

Collins
92 pearlie

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by ww111
Two seperate Flame type threads on the same... er... thread.

Collins
92 pearlie

I don't see any flaming here. Steve said something crazy and I'm calling him on it.

If I was flaming Steve, I would have called him dirty names and questioned more than his samity.

[wasions]

When I said 'You don't get out much', I didn't mean it as though you haven't seen the lazy bunch of 18 y/o's. (That statement was tongue-in-cheek, by the way, but the only available smiley is tongue-out-of-cheek. ) I thought you knew me well enough to know that I wouldn't condemn, en masse, any group like that.

What I meant was, if that really was the most ridiculous thing you ever heard, then you must not get out much, because most of us hear more ridiculous things than that every several seconds (Especially if we happen to be among a bunch of 18 y/o's. ).

Did I just throw gasoline at the flames? (Dons fire suit.)

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by wasions
When I said 'You don't get out much', I didn't mean it as though you haven't seen the lazy bunch of 18 y/o's. (That statement was tongue-in-cheek, by the way, but the only available smiley is tongue-out-of-cheek. ) I thought you knew me well enough to know that I wouldn't condemn, en masse, any group like that.

I do, and that's why I didn't understand why you did.

Originally posted by wasions
What I meant was, if that really was the most ridiculous thing you ever heard, then you must not get out much, because most of us hear more ridiculous things than that every several seconds (Especially if we happen to be among a bunch of 18 y/o's. ).

Did I just throw gasoline at the flames? (Dons fire suit.)

I have a remarkably low upper-limit for ridiculousness, so almost everything I hear or read is 'the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.'

Okay, so you were joking. That's fine.