Skip to main content

View Diary: Ohio bank steals woman's possessions by 'mistake,' then refuses to pay up (518 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  A lien wouldn't apply in this case: see Replevin (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      She owns the property which was taken so in the Civil law she has a case for replevin

      Replevin is one of the oldest Forms of Action known to Common Law, first appearing about the beginning of the thirteenth century.

      It was a legal procedure for claiming the right to have personal property returned from the possession of one who had less right to hold it than the plaintiff.

      Originally the action may have been available only for the recovery of goods that were illegally held past the time the defendant had the right to their possession, but soon the right was extended to cover every situation, whether the defendant wrongfully took or just withheld another's property.

      As time passed, if the goods themselves could not be recovered, the courts sometimes gave judgment for an amount of money representing the value of the goods.

      Generally, however, replevin aimed at restoring the property itself to the person entitled to possess it.

      The defendant could not claim as an excuse that the property belonged to someone not involved in the lawsuit because the only issue before the court was rightful possession, not title.

      For example, an executor of an estate could seek replevy of racehorses boarded by the decedent if the owner of the stable refused to release them. It would be no defense that the executor was not the owner of the horses.

      Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

      by rktect on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:37:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But, once you have a judgment.. (0+ / 0-)

        So, aren't there various ways to recover judgments when it is not a bank?  Although I guess those are mostly used against people, and usually you can't get a lien on real property for a judgment on personal property I guess.  Too bad it is a bank.  I believe a proper judgment can result in just taking the money from some one's bank account. But, the bank is not going to let you just take money from themselves.  And, I expect the Federal Reserve would not honor a judgment against a bank's reserve account.

        •  Certainly once you have a judgement you can lien (0+ / 0-)

          I wouldn't be too worried about her getting her money from the bank. She can perfect her lien with a writ of attachment on the banks property. That isn't something they will want, but the entity, in this case a bank, that is being liened against can bond against the lien.

          In this case if the facts are as stated the owner has a prima facie case, the bank would not be particularly sympathetic to a jury, there would be a lot of pressure from higher up to settle immediately before there was any bad publicity, which as you can see from this thread is already there.

          Lawyers will be fighting over the opportunity to compete to see who can get the biggest settlement from the bank and the property owner is in the drivers seat all the way.

          Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

          by rktect on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:52:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Couple got a bank to pay by (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            getting a court order and deputies to enforce it.


            •  That bank got off wicked easy (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I'd have brought the Brink's truck and the locksmith to open the vault, taken their atm and computers, security codes desks, carpet, lamps, phones and the suits out of their office closet.

              I'm sure I'd like to see the auction where they sell off the rights to film the property auction where they sell off all the dirty torn money and securities as distressed property at pennies on the dollar.

              Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

              by rktect on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:13:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's what I thought. (0+ / 0-)

                I'm not sure of the text in the order though. Unless the order specifically allowed the bank to pay up instead of having their stuff taken, I would've taken it all even after they offered to pay! But, I'm kinda greedy and also unforgiving. Lots of chances to pay and you wait till I went through all this effort? NO!

              •  Probably should stay away from the vault... (0+ / 0-)

                Might be a legal grey area there, since the contents of the vault might not technically belong to the bank.

    •  in addition to Replevin; Trover, and Trespass (0+ / 0-)

      Trover Detinue and Trespass apply

      One of the old common-law Forms of Action; a legal remedy for conversion, or the wrongful appropriation of the plaintiff's Personal Property.

      Early in its history, the English Common Law recognized the rights of a person whose property was wrongfully held (or detained). Such a person could bring an action of Detinue to recover the goods or, later, could bring an action on the case to recover the value of the goods. In the course of the sixteenth century, the action of trover developed as a specialized form of action on the case.

      The action of trover originally served the plaintiff who had lost property and was trying to recover it from a defendant who had found it.

      Soon the lost and found portions of the plaintiff's claim came to be considered a legal fiction. The plaintiff still included them in the complaint, but they did not have to be proved, and the defendant had no right to disprove them.

      This brought the dispute immediately to the issue of whether the plaintiff had a right to property that the defendant would not give over to him or her. For some cases, it still was necessary for the plaintiff to demand a return of the property and be refused before he or she could sue in trover.

      It was reasonable to expect an owner to ask for his or her watch, for example, before the repair person holding it could be sued for damages. The measure of damages in trover was the full value of the property at the time the conversion took place, and this was the amount of money the plaintiff recovered if he or she won the lawsuit.

      Trover proved to be more convenient for many plaintiffs than the older action of detinue because a defendant could defeat a plaintiff in detinue by Wager of Law.

      This meant that the defendant could win the case by testifying under oath in court and having eleven neighbors swear that they believed him or her.

      In addition, the plaintiff in trover was not obligated to settle for a return of the property, regardless of its current condition, and did not have to prove that he or she had made a demand for the property if the defendant had stolen it. Since it was the plaintiff who selected the form of the action, he or she was more likely to choose trover over detinue.

      Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

      by rktect on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:45:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site