Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Man Jailed by car dealer over price error.

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by FortAnthem
 



You have to remember; every time this guy applies for a job, he's gonna have to check off "yes" in the box asking if he's ever been arrested.


There's no box for "arrested", only "convicted"

It won't even show up on a background check. He'll be fine as far as that goes.


Wanna Bet, try crossing international borders, they always ask if you have been arrested....not if you have a criminal record or been convicted of anything.




posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem


$2.2 MILLION? For 4 hours in jail? There's no defamation here folks, just a plain old mistake and a bit of that mistake being mishandled. Why can't people just shake hands, brush it off, and be done with it? Heck, "Have the car for free Johnny." should have worked.

No...instead, $2.2 MILLION is asked for and will take a couple dozen people back and forth in court for month, paperwork for a year at all of those people's salaries, and a final pay-out somewhere around $1 MILLION to someone who was buy a $5,600 SUV who will more than likely forget to pay their taxes on $1 MILLION and spend a few years in prison, or at the very minimum lose everything they've "gained."

Enough is a enough with these frivolous law suits.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by neo96
 

Shouldnt he be suing the police as well?

I realize that most police are high school flunkies or GED graduates but how difficult would it be to understand that the man bought a car and was given another one in exchange?

edit on 5-10-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)


The police are the ones who sorted it out for the guy. The police should charge the idiots for filing a false police report.


Not sure if it is much different in Virginia, but in Florida it's quite routine:

Once the police are called, their job is to investigate all involved and to determine if they have a crime. The caller, usually the victim, gives their account, and provides a sworn statement. The police then must locate and meet with the 'suspect', detain and interview him for a reasonable amount of time, the purpose is to establish 'probable cause', that based on evidence and witness statements, the 'suspect' had intent to permanently deprive the owner of their property without making any attempt to pay for it. In this case, they found the elements necessary to establish Grand Theft did not exist. Because the 'suspect' occupied the vehicle with permission, with the keys, signed contract, and departed with the vehicle with approval until the dealer noticed their mistake.

Once this was established, the suspect was not longer detained, because now Law Enforcement determines no criminal offense took place, and that the incident is a Civil Dispute.

1) The 'suspect' can civilly sue the dealership for the wrongful accusation.
2) The 'victim' who called police to report the alleged 'crime' can be arrested for False Statement if he completed a sworn statement.
3) No Arrest of the suspect = no criminal record, but if an incident report is completed by police afterward, he will show up as a principle in a civil investigation. (information only)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem
reply to post by phroziac
 

You have to remember; every time this guy applies for a job, he's gonna have to check off "yes" in the box asking if he's ever been arrested. A lot of employers won't bother to look any further than that on a job application, especially when the arrest was for Grand theft auto.


well... was that 4 hours he was held for, was he charged in court for grand theft auto?
i mean people get arrested all the time, but its not on your record unless a court says you are a criminal in one way or the other.
edit on 6-10-2012 by Bisman because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
The main crime here is the fact that they reported the car stolen. They obviously did that because they felt there was nothing else they could do. The truth seems that they screwed up, and they wanted this guy to make it right for them, when he was under no obligation to do so. I hope he wins his lawsuit, because these people are obviously crooks, if they would get someone arrested for something they did not even do.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I lost count how many times I heard of someone getting screwed by a dealership. I been down that road a couple of times, getting into a vehicle that was a lemon and had to redo another contract to get out of the first. Or traded in a vehicle that was last registered in my name. The dealership was such a cheapskate they never paid to have the vehicle title and registration changed over. Next thing I know I am getting tickets and pink slips and bench warrants for my arrest on a car I no longer owned. So yeah dealerships can be scumbags. Be vigilant visiting a dealership. Things you need to ask yourself. Is the car worth what they are asking? Is it a lemon and has no oil leaks etc? Has it been involved in a wreck? Write down the VIN number and look it up on the net, you might be surprised what you find! Take the car for a test drive with someone you know who has some mechanical knowledge. Buying a brand new car? Well most cars are already thousand of dollars overpriced. You're better off to buy a repo or private party same car only 1 year older or so. Dealers don't like to reveal the conditions of the cars, or their history. That As is sign means just that and before you slap down the cash shop around a bit.
edit on 6-10-2012 by sean because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by phroziac
First of all, wtf? i already had plenty of reasons of never buying a car from a dealer again, but i never figured id get arrested for getting a hell of a deal. Lol one time i came home with a nice car, told my then gf...hey i just stole a car! Lets go for a ride! lol....

This guy has a fine reason for suing. But not for 2 million. Thats just as stupid as what the dealer did to him. Car should be free, thats it, no cash. Was he tazed? Then he should get enough noney to buy a couple more cars.


Its not up to YOU to decide how much he can sue for. Thank God !
If the US Congress or State Legislatures won't take up TORT REFORM, then its really too bad.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Xterrain
 


A lot of folks seem to think that $2 mil is a lot of money for just 4 hours spent in jail. You also have to consider that this man also spent two whole months sweating over a felony charge before the DA's office finally dropped the charges.

As I've stated earlier, in this digital age, it is nearly impossible to expunge any records of arrest from your record. If you think nobody will learn of your arrest without a conviction, think again.

There is also the fact that this man, in addition to facing fines and possible prison time, also had to contemplate the loss of several rights that comes with a felony conviction while he had those charges hanging over his head.

1. The Right to Vote.
Most felons lose the right to vote while imprisoned and on parole and some states bar them from ever voting again.

2. The Right to Hold Public Office

There is no provision in the Constitution that prohibits convicted felons from seeking and holding national level public office. However, each house of Congress is allowed to take a vote to expel any member deemed unfit or unqualified to serve. This provision is often used to remove senators and representatives whose involvement in unsavory or illegal activities has been exposed, as well as those members who have actually been convicted of felonies. State laws vary, but many states bar convicted felons (and even some individuals convicted of misdemeanors) from seeking or holding elective office. Officials convicted of felonies while in office may be removed under the same laws.


3. The Right to Bear Arms.
Federal law dictates that no convicted felon is permitted to own firearms under a penalty of a ten year prison sentence. A convicted felon gives up their right to self defence.

4. The Right to Travel Abroad

Contrary to what many people believe, convicted felons are not barred from obtaining a passport in the United States. A passport is intended to be a document that establishes a person's identity and status as a citizen of the country which issued the passport. However, convicted felons often face severe restrictions in traveling abroad because many countries impose visa requirements on individuals with criminal records. Unlike a passport, a visa is seen as a privilege, and the issuing country has the right to refuse entry to any person seen as a threat or as unsuitable, including convicted felons.

E-How

5. Felon jury exclusion.

The lifetime exclusion of felons from jury service is the majority rule in the U.S., used in thirty one states and in federal courts. The result is that over 6% of the adult population is excluded, including about 30% of black men, creating a class of citizens defined and punished by the criminal justice system but unable to impact its function. Felon jury exclusion is less visible than felony disenfranchisement, and few socio-legal scholars have challenged the statutes that withhold a convicted felon’s opportunity to sit on a jury.

Wiki



Bringing any felony charge against someone is no joke and will have a huge impact on their lives. Do not think that the only inconvenience that he suffered was the 4 hours that he spent in jail before he had to make bail. He also incurred legal fees and had to deal with the stress of possibly losing his freedom for over two months as well as his rights to vote, hold office, bear arms, travel or serve on a jury.

$2 million is low in my opinion. I hope he takes that dealership for all its worth and then goes after the cops who didn't bother to investigate the facts of the case before arresting him and bringing felony charges against him.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
edit on 7-10-2012 by Lonewulph because: covered already



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


If the charges were thrown out there is no permenant record of an arrest. Yes the arrest happened but when something is thrown out of the court those records are expunged and there should be no record.

Lots of people get arrested. It takes a conviction for a permenant record to be entered.
If he wasnt convicted of grand theft auto then thats not on his record.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


A lot of places I've applied to do have that question. Some follow up by asking if you were convicted, others do not.

I guess it all depends on what company you are applying at.

Still, whenever cops run his criminal record, they will see that he has that arrest on his record. It may mean the difference between him getting off with a warning for a traffice violation and the officer issuing a citiation.

A criminal record, even without a conviction, can hurt a person in numerous ways.


I dont think they can ask about arrests. Only about convictions. Otherwise many people would never be able to get a job if they'd been arrested. Arrests dont count, only convictions count. I think you are remembering the question wrong but since I wasnt there I dont know.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by brice
 


Does going from USA into Canada or Mexico count. I've crossed both boarders and wasnt even asked to show ID. They only asked what I was going to do while in their country. How's that for security folks? I didnt even have to show ID to get back into the states. Amazing HUH?



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Sorry, as much as you might want this to be the terrible thing you believe it is but no conviction no records to show up during any background check. I do this for a living. (Hire people who need to be background checked) Arrests do not show up. Only convictions show up.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Bringing felony charges against someone will not ruin their lives. A felony conviction will. Get it straight. Otherwise there would be a lot more people unable to get a job but thankfully what you believe is not true and so no worries.
Being accused of something is not the same as being convicted of something.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
The main crime here is the fact that they reported the car stolen. They obviously did that because they felt there was nothing else they could do. The truth seems that they screwed up, and they wanted this guy to make it right for them, when he was under no obligation to do so. I hope he wins his lawsuit, because these people are obviously crooks, if they would get someone arrested for something they did not even do.


I think there is legal precedent that shows that he is obligated to do so. I've heard of cases where the bank accidentally gave someone money; it doesn't make it their money.

As much as I think the "little guy" should benefit when a rich corporation screws up in their favor, the only ones who agree with me are the Parker Brothers.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by brice

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by FortAnthem
 



You have to remember; every time this guy applies for a job, he's gonna have to check off "yes" in the box asking if he's ever been arrested.


There's no box for "arrested", only "convicted"

It won't even show up on a background check. He'll be fine as far as that goes.


Wanna Bet, try crossing international borders, they always ask if you have been arrested....not if you have a criminal record or been convicted of anything.

I always tell them no and have even had the full anal probe search in canada.....all they could come up with was they didnt like my pocket knife. They cant find it



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayson

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
The main crime here is the fact that they reported the car stolen. They obviously did that because they felt there was nothing else they could do. The truth seems that they screwed up, and they wanted this guy to make it right for them, when he was under no obligation to do so. I hope he wins his lawsuit, because these people are obviously crooks, if they would get someone arrested for something they did not even do.


I think there is legal precedent that shows that he is obligated to do so. I've heard of cases where the bank accidentally gave someone money; it doesn't make it their money.

As much as I think the "little guy" should benefit when a rich corporation screws up in their favor, the only ones who agree with me are the Parker Brothers.

Banks dont sign a contract with you every time you make a transaction. A contract to buy a car plainly states a purchase price. Why should only the little guy be held to the contract?



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by brice
 


Does going from USA into Canada or Mexico count. I've crossed both boarders and wasnt even asked to show ID. They only asked what I was going to do while in their country. How's that for security folks? I didnt even have to show ID to get back into the states. Amazing HUH?


That changed in 2009. I know because I had to hurry up and get some passport cards for my wife and I when we went to vacation in Niagara Falls Canada this year.


Since June 2009, everyone from every country arriving in Canada by air, land and sea has needed a passport or equivalent travel document. (Some exceptions apply to children's passport requirements). Besides an up-to-date passport, visitors may instead have an equivalent travel document, such as a NEXUS Card.

Passport requirements have been a complicated and ever changing issue for U.S. travellers to Canada for the past few years due to the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), which was introduced in 2004 by the U.S. government to strengthen U.S. border security and standardize travel documentation.

Visitors from any country other than the U.S. have always needed a passport to enter Canada. On the other hand, because of a friendly border crossing agreement between Canada and the United States, Canada Border Services did not require U.S. citizens to present a passport to enter Canada. This friendly border crossing agreement used to be mutual; however, now the WHTI requires that U.S. citizens have a passport to return home. In this way, passport requirements for Canada and U.S. borders are different on paper, but, are in practice, the same. Canada will not allow a U.S. citizen into the country who does not have the proper documentation to return home.

About.com

I'm pretty sure they said they didn't really start enforcing it 'till this year but, if you want to travel outside the US from now on, you're gonna need a passport.

Ain't progress grand?



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Yeah, but they themselves dont care....theyre just making sure you dont get stuck in canada cause theu dont want you lol



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by FortAnthem
When he got home he found a stack of mail and a ton of missed phone calls from the dealership. They said the car he drove off with was worth $5600 more than the one he originally bought and they wanted him to come in and pay the difference. He told them to stuff it.



The buyer is in the wrong.
This is "wrong price tag" theft. If a shop accidentally puts a wrong price tag on an object, you do not have the right to have it at that price.

Same as if a bank puts 2 million dollars into your account by mistake.
It is not yours.

The Theft Act 1968 says...

Where a person gets property by another’s mistake... an intention not to make restoration shall be regarded accordingly as an intention to deprive that person of the property or proceeds.


Having said that, the way the dealership went about fixing their mistake is rather horrible.
edit on 5-10-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)


they had a written contract this was not an issue of placing a wrong tag or something like that they had written documents illustrating what each parties terms would be .....and both parties agreed to those terms and signed

so no the buyer is not in the wrong and this is not an instance of "wrong price tag" theft
edit on 7-10-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)





new topics




 
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join