Stolen cue!!! Barry Stewart has my cue.

[SloMoHolic]

FWIW:

From the Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 31.01. DEFINITIONS.
(2) "Deprive" means:
(A) to withhold property from the owner permanently or for so extended a period of time that a major portion of the value or enjoyment of the property is lost to the owner;
(B) to restore property only upon payment of reward or other compensation; or
(C) to dispose of property in a manner that makes recovery of the property by the owner unlikely.

(4) "Appropriate" means:
(A) to bring about a transfer or purported transfer of title to or other nonpossessory interest in property, whether to the actor or another; or
(B) to acquire or otherwise exercise control over property other than real property.

Sec. 31.03. THEFT.
(a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.

 

[Shapechaser]

It does happen..

JB, you may remember this... a few years ago I bought a black and yellow vinyl case from you that you had posted on AZ. It was a trial case you were selling, I sent paypal and a couple weeks later I received a sweet a$$ leather tooled case. I believe it was supposed to have gone to singapore but instead it came to me. I notified you and said I could forward it along or if you wanted I would be willing to purchase the case. You gave me a fair price and I bought it for my wife, who had fallen in love with it.
Whats right is right, we should not need laws to govern every inch of our lives.
Side note: I did receive the black and yellow case, I believe it was a precursor to your rugged series. I still have it and use it. Great case.
Side note2: I sold the leather case I got for my wife shortly after because she yearned for a walk in closet more And now she laments not having that case:sorry:
Steve Eberly

 

[cyork2]

what now?

I haven't ready all this thread but my wife is an attorney and here is what we would do..

step 1) Document all efforts to date to contact the recipient

step 2) send him a letter via certified mail so you can prove receipt - in the letter make it very professional. I apologize for any inconvenience however I expect the return of my property. I will be happy to compensate you for shipping and the inconvenience. Please contact me at xxx-xxx-xxxx to arrange to return the cue. Please note that failure to respond to this letter within 5 days of receipt will result in further action.

step 3) if he doesn't respond file a police report - doesn't matter if it technically against the law or not - call and see if they will let you file a report anyway. If they will take a report it becomes another piece of information to use against the recipient.

step 4) get a copy of the police report - send the recipient a copy and notify him that failure to respond will result in further action.

step 5) if he still does not respond get an attorney to write a letter on your behalf stating your case against him, your evidence, your demand for action and your intent to file suit if action is not taken. Find someone in the same city where the recipient lives to write the letter - this person could represent you in court without you having to attend and in the letter the lawyer could state that they intend to represent you in the matter. Also make sure the lawyer clearly states that you intend to sue for the cue as well as your costs in the matter.

step 6) file suit

In my experience if the police report doesn't convince a person you are serious then having a lawyer write a letter will. Each step shows you are taking the situation seriously and by escalating with each step you are demonstrating that you will follow through on what you say you will. Having multiple escalation steps gives the person on the receiving end an opportunity to stop the process prior to it actually going to court. You never know what the recipient will do but if you do take him to court you would claim the cue as well as your costs.

 

[TX Poolnut]

"Don't take the law into your own hands. You take them to Court." -Doug Llewelyn on The People's Court

 

[Fatboy]

"Don't take the law into your own hands. You take them to Court." -Doug Llewelyn on The People's Court

Doug used to kick ASS!!!! I used to watch that show with my Grand Pa, infact its one of the few memories I have of spending time with him. Rusty the bailiff was cool too!!!

 

[Fatboy]

After reading it over again, since they first say you have no legal obligation to notify the sender, the following suggestion to notify the sender if its an honest mistake is just a CYA tactic. There doesn't appear to be any legal requirement for you find out if it was sent in error.

So basically this is how it goes:

You receive unsolicited merchandise.....

You can A) just keep it and say nothing

or

B) the FTC advises you(not legally required) notify the company you received the merchandise unsolicited, have the right to keep the merchandise, and if it was sent in error they have X number (recommended 30 days) to arrange shipment back at their cost.

Notice they stated you are not legally required to notify them BEFORE they advised you to notify them and give them a reasonable amount of time.

The FTC dont give a rats ass about a cue, believe me i know about the FTC. They cost me millions and they still lost,

 

[Bishop]

I haven't ready all this thread but my wife is an attorney and here is what we would do..

step 1) Document all efforts to date to contact the recipient

step 2) send him a letter via certified mail so you can prove receipt - in the letter make it very professional. I apologize for any inconvenience however I expect the return of my property. I will be happy to compensate you for shipping and the inconvenience. Please contact me at xxx-xxx-xxxx to arrange to return the cue. Please note that failure to respond to this letter within 5 days of receipt will result in further action.

step 3) if he doesn't respond file a police report - doesn't matter if it technically against the law or not - call and see if they will let you file a report anyway. If they will take a report it becomes another piece of information to use against the recipient.

step 4) get a copy of the police report - send the recipient a copy and notify him that failure to respond will result in further action.

step 5) if he still does not respond get an attorney to write a letter on your behalf stating your case against him, your evidence, your demand for action and your intent to file suit if action is not taken. Find someone in the same city where the recipient lives to write the letter - this person could represent you in court without you having to attend and in the letter the lawyer could state that they intend to represent you in the matter. Also make sure the lawyer clearly states that you intend to sue for the cue as well as your costs in the matter.

step 6) file suit

In my experience if the police report doesn't convince a person you are serious then having a lawyer write a letter will. Each step shows you are taking the situation seriously and by escalating with each step you are demonstrating that you will follow through on what you say you will. Having multiple escalation steps gives the person on the receiving end an opportunity to stop the process prior to it actually going to court. You never know what the recipient will do but if you do take him to court you would claim the cue as well as your costs.

I was thinking along these lines as well. Create a paper trail. However I was thinking he could do all that and file in small claims court avoiding the expense of hiring an attorney.

With the value of the cue being where it is (assuming <5k) small claims makes the most sense.

Most likely win a judgement on a failure to appear. In most states small claims doesn't require a police report only a certified letter that goes without response.

 

[cyork2]

small claims

The problem with jumping ahead and not filing a report and not hiring an attorney is that you have to file in small claims court that has jurisdiction over the RECIPIENT of the cue. Since the seller doesn't live in that same jurisdiction the objective is to demonstrate willingness to go all the way while hoping that the recipient clues in and avoids the hassle by just returning the cue.

I had a guy at a car lot sell my classic car on consignment. Getting the money turned into a huge problem (oh I have another $100 for you this week). I threatened to take him to court then promptly had my wife (lucky to be married to a lawyer) draft a legal notice as to our recourse and next steps. After 6 weeks of him nickle and diming me the balance was paid in days and he even back dated a check that he sent a copy of to my wife to prove he was complying. No one ever thinks you will go that extra step and hire a lawyer. When you do they realize that just to fight back will cost em and if they are in the wrong it compounds their expected loss.

In college a friend had a similar experience with a landlord who withheld a deposit with justification. He threatened to get a lawyer - they blew him off - he went to the universities legal assistance office, got a letter drafted and the landlord paid. She told him "I didn't think you would go through with it".

Craig

 

[holland]

The problem with jumping ahead and not filing a report and not hiring an attorney is that you have to file in small claims court that has jurisdiction over the RECIPIENT of the cue. Since the seller doesn't live in that same jurisdiction the objective is to demonstrate willingness to go all the way while hoping that the recipient clues in and avoids the hassle by just returning the cue.

I had a guy at a car lot sell my classic car on consignment. Getting the money turned into a huge problem (oh I have another $100 for you this week). I threatened to take him to court then promptly had my wife (lucky to be married to a lawyer) draft a legal notice as to our recourse and next steps. After 6 weeks of him nickle and diming me the balance was paid in days and he even back dated a check that he sent a copy of to my wife to prove he was complying. No one ever thinks you will go that extra step and hire a lawyer. When you do they realize that just to fight back will cost em and if they are in the wrong it compounds their expected loss.

In college a friend had a similar experience with a landlord who withheld a deposit with justification. He threatened to get a lawyer - they blew him off - he went to the universities legal assistance office, got a letter drafted and the landlord paid. She told him "I didn't think you would go through with it".

Craig

Yep, you need to show the willingness to do it and many times people back down ASAP with a letter. I hear of this all the time.

At the same time, if it goes all the way, a judgement against can mean very little without the ability to collect. That needs to be made known to the OP. Winning the judgement and collecting are 2 very different things, if you're up against someone who does not want to do it under any circumstances it's a drawn out uphill battle.

SC has a $7500 limit on small claims, just FYI, since you can tack on your costs, it pretty much gives you about $6600 (cue claimed to be $850) before you cap out....but again, collection. You will need a lawyer and the sheriff or a collection agency. You can get a lien against the home, wage garnishment, etc. Also, prepare for a lawsuit to come at you as well, if he has the means, even if it's petty.

Anyway, still hoping for the best, that a few visits from the police and/or the mailman with a certified letter from an attorney will knock some sense in.

Also, OP. Keep your cool.

 

[SterlingArcher]

I wasn't going to post in this thread, but here we go...

During my divorce (before it was final), my medical insurance company sent about $3000 in reimbursements to my soon-to-be-ex-wife's bank account by mistake. These were from medical expenses incurred after we had filed for divorced, lived in separate homes, and had legally-established separate finances.

I called her (because things were still somewhat civil at that point) to ask her to transfer the cash to my account or write me a check. It was just a clerical error, after all.

She tried to shake me down, and wouldn't cooperate, so I ended that phone call and called my lawyer. We notified her lawyer that we would be filing theft charges.

Three hours later, the money was in my account. Basically, her lawyer straightened her right out. A clerical error does not imply transfer of ownership, regardless of who committed the error.

I know the circumstances were different. Mail vs wire, business vs divorce. I'm not a lawyer, and don't pretend to be.

Just sharing my experience with an oddly similar situation.

I will say that I know it's a terrible feeling when another party has possession of your valuable property and won't cooperate.

I hope everybody gets this worked out.

PS, my lawyer got all that money anyway (and much more).

Again, totally different situation. Money errors always have to go back. For example if your employer mails you a check by accident, you can't keep it. Merchandise is a separate issue.

Had someone accidentally sent her say....a set of golf clubs you ordered to her house....her attorney would have likely advised her if she wanted to be a pain, she could just keep it.

Merchandise is a totally different story.

 

[SterlingArcher]

If I were you, I'd consider other representation should you ever need a lawyer. On one of the more recent posts, a lawyer says that the matter becomes a civil one and that a lawsuit may be needed if they do not return the product - replevin - or for the value of the product.

Technically, it was somebody else's product to begin with, while the shipper was only performing an action. The cue still belongs to its original buyer, but the shipper is on the hook for responsibility of the item. He has received somebody else's product, honestly misshipped(and told as much) and it must be returned or compensated for.

I repeat, if that was not the case, there wouldn't be many businesses willing to ship anything worth more than a few bucks.

Civil law is totally different from criminal law. In civil court he would likely get the cue back or be compensated. I've stated in almost every post his action would be civil. On a different level, but similar situation, OJ was acquitted of any criminal wrong doing, but was held civilly liable. Criminal and civil are two totally different worlds.

You claim that no business would ship things has no base. There are countless claims online where a company has sent more than one piece of merchandise by accident. The recipients have sought legal advice and were told legally they had no responsibility, but it wasn't the right to to do in keeping it. What you're saying is totally different anyway, sending something in error/or without solicitation is totally different than sending something correctly and the customer claiming they did not receive the item.

There is no law which states he must return it or face criminal charges.

Basically, the police can't knock on door and arrest him, and a magistrate wouldn't be able to write an arrest warrant.

Like I said, feel free to find a statute which states otherwise. You're basing your argument on personal opinion and have not provided a single fact to back it up. The entire paragraph about original buyer, and who's responsible is totally made up and fabricated from your personal opinion unless you can find a statute which says otherwise. (and one that is valid in SC, so either a federal or SC state statute)

 

[SterlingArcher]

FWIW:

From the Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 31.01. DEFINITIONS.
(2) "Deprive" means:
(A) to withhold property from the owner permanently or for so extended a period of time that a major portion of the value or enjoyment of the property is lost to the owner;
(B) to restore property only upon payment of reward or other compensation; or
(C) to dispose of property in a manner that makes recovery of the property by the owner unlikely.

(4) "Appropriate" means:
(A) to bring about a transfer or purported transfer of title to or other nonpossessory interest in property, whether to the actor or another; or
(B) to acquire or otherwise exercise control over property other than real property.

Sec. 31.03. THEFT.
(a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.

One, that is Texas law, not SC. Two, he still can claim the property was sent to him without solicitation, therefore at the moment, it is his property as he has no legal obligation to return it. Likely wouldn't get a criminal charge. I'd be curious as to how Texas defines "acquire" legally.

 

[9Ballr]

Man this is horrible...do you think it's possible to maybe offer him some incentive, send him another cue or something to get him to do the right thing.

This must be a joke.
Reward the guy for steeling a cue with the hopes that he'll then do the right thing?

 

[SterlingArcher]

This must be a joke.
Reward the guy for steeling a cue with the hopes that he'll then do the right thing?

Its pretty ass backwards, but its a viable strategy if it costs less than litigation. This happens many times if someone is honest if a company ships them something extra. They notify the company and they are either told to keep it, or the company will send them a gift card, give them credit, etc.

They do this because the customer could have in fact kept the merchandise, so this rewards them for being honest.(and at the same time retains customers)

I'm not sure if this situation calls for it, since the receiving party didn't seem to be so honest and up front about it though.

 

[SloMoHolic]

One, that is Texas law, not SC. Two, he still can claim the property was sent to him without solicitation. Likely wouldn't get a criminal charge. I'd be curious as to how Texas defines "acquire" legally.

That's why I started the post with "FWIW". I meant to imply that perhaps there is a section in the SC law (or whatever states are involved) covering a similar situation that may be worth researching. You asked us to find statutes related to the situation, so I paused the hockey game and did just that. The OP is free to ignore my post, as is anyone else.

"Without solicitation?" So, if someone accidentally leaves their cue at the pool hall (or leaves it at my house), the fact that there was no solicitation makes it mine? Surely, there is more to it than that.

I'm not sure if Texas law has a definition for every word in the Penal Code, but I'd guess that to acquire something means to come into possession of it.

I'll step out now, and let the legal eagles handle this thread. I was just trying to help, but it's clear that others have more knowledge and experience than I.

No hard feelings.

Best of luck to the OP.

 

[SloMoHolic]

Again, totally different situation. Money errors always have to go back. For example if your employer mails you a check by accident, you can't keep it. Merchandise is a separate issue.

Had someone accidentally sent her say....a set of golf clubs you ordered to her house....her attorney would have likely advised her if she wanted to be a pain, she could just keep it.

Merchandise is a totally different story.

Point taken. Sorry to distract.

And she would have kept the golf clubs.

 

[SterlingArcher]

That's why I started the post with "FWIW". I meant to imply that perhaps there is a section in the SC law (or whatever states are involved) covering a similar situation that may be worth researching. You asked us to find statutes related to the situation, so I paused the hockey game and did just that. The OP is free to ignore my post, as is anyone else.

"Without solicitation?" So, if someone accidentally leaves their cue at the pool hall (or leaves it at my house), the fact that there was no solicitation makes it mine? Surely, there is more to it than that.

I'm not sure if Texas law has a definition for every word in the Penal Code, but I'd guess that to acquire something means to come into possession of it.

I'll step out now, and let the legal eagles handle this thread. I was just trying to help, but it's clear that others have more knowledge and experience than I.

No hard feelings.

Best of luck to the OP.

No hard feelings at all. Its an interesting topic.

The "without solicitation" only works in regards to items shipped to you, not physically handed to you. Totally different world.

This is why being an attorney is a profession. There are endless amounts of different things involving legal matters. The average person really has no idea how to interpret law. They mainly just give their own opinion or what they've been told by other people.

FWIW, my experience is a pre-law undergrad, several years with a city fraud dept., 5 years as the operations manager for a private investigation firm, and currently in federal law enforcement.(though the area my agency deals with is totally different than something like this situation)

And I still have to take hours to look over things, or consult with several attorneys. Its a huge pain in the ass. Sometimes you can think there's no way to make something work, and then you stumble onto some case law from 50 years ago.

 

[JB Cases]

JB, you may remember this... a few years ago I bought a black and yellow vinyl case from you that you had posted on AZ. It was a trial case you were selling, I sent paypal and a couple weeks later I received a sweet a$$ leather tooled case. I believe it was supposed to have gone to singapore but instead it came to me. I notified you and said I could forward it along or if you wanted I would be willing to purchase the case. You gave me a fair price and I bought it for my wife, who had fallen in love with it.
Whats right is right, we should not need laws to govern every inch of our lives.
Side note: I did receive the black and yellow case, I believe it was a precursor to your rugged series. I still have it and use it. Great case.
Side note2: I sold the leather case I got for my wife shortly after because she yearned for a walk in closet more And now she laments not having that case:sorry:
Steve Eberly

Thanks. I do remember that and it's one of the reasons I say that I have been fortunate in the few instances that this has happened.

The phrase "possession is 9/10ths of the law" is actually relevant here because it literally means that the one who has possession is in the stronger position in a dispute. So without good-hearted and honest customers like yourself folks like me would be practically unable to recover property or compensation for the cases we mistakenly ship to the wrong place.

This is the meaning of the phrase:

"The saying “possession is nine points of the law” is an old common law precept that means one who has physical control or possession over the property is clearly at an advantage or is in a better possession than a person who has no possession over the property. Even if a person is the rightful owner of the property but has no possession over it, the person who is in possession will be in a better position should the property ever be subject to challenge. This is especially true with adverse possession. However mere possession alone does not grant the possessor rights in the property superior to those of the actual owner. This adage “possession is nine tenths of the law” is not a law but a logical rule of force that has been recognized across ages.

In re Garza, 984 S.W.2d 344, 347 (Tex. App. 1998), Texas court has held that “Despite the old saying that "possession is 9/10ths of the law," mere possession and whatever right to the property that comes with mere possession does not grant the possessor rights in the property superior to those of the actual owner. J. CRIBBET, PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF PROPERTY 12-13 (1962); R. BOYER, SURVEY OF THE LAW OF PROPERTY 679-80 (1981). In other words, there is a hierarchy of ownership, as reflected both in the common law and § 1.07(35)(a) of the Penal Code. One in possession of chattel has a greater right to it than one who lacks both possession and title. Yet, one who has title maintains a greater right over the chattel than 1) one who simply has possession and 2) one who has neither possession nor claim of ownership. Id. Indeed, it can be said that the title owner has the greatest rights to the property. With that greatest right comes the power to negate the authority of those with lesser right. Similarly, those who stand in the lesser position lack the power to override or negate the rights of the title owner.”

So maybe cues should be titled somehow? No matter what I simply cannot accept that it's this easy to essentially steal a cue (no reflection on the current participants). I mean what if you sell a $20,000 cue and mistype the address by one digit and it gets delivered to the house next door? I just can't imagine that this simple mistake allows the receiver to simply keep the cue.

 

[blah blah]

I disagree.

I'm guessing:

Theft.
Trespass to chattel.
Conversion.

Mistake is not a defense.

But I'm not a lawyer. Is Sterling?

 

[akane]

surely there is enough info on the OP's part to prove offer and acceptance with the correct party.
all the sending, receiving and bits in between are semantics.
you have enough documentation/correspondence for a lawyer to straighten this out quick smart.
possession may be 9/10ths of the law, but ownership is absolutely 10/10ths.