Q: In a 10 day demand letter to get my vehicle back, do I have to list the option for defendant to pay full market value
Loaned my truck (reg/insured) to a friend in Oct 2017. She moved in Nov. Dec 26 2017 asked vehicle be returned within 4 days. Has ignored phone calls/ texts demanding my Truck back. This morning I called sheriffs dept. Deputy dispatched to me. I gave exact location of my truck (A bar). Only suggestion, a "10 day demand letter". Surprised by, option to "pay full market value of vehicle" as an alternative. Several strange interactions that make me believe she is trying to exploit what she believes to be a loophole to ultimately purchase the vehicle. Supporting theory, her "boyfriend" contacted me several times asking "are you sure you don't want to sell me the truck?". Several subtle hints about her "good friends" in law enforcement and her extensive knowledge of laws. Then the deputy listed possible consequences if I attempt to get my truck from the bar. "Her friends could beat you up and "we" couldn't do anything about it" or have guns pointed at me then to jail bc I stole it.
A:
It sounds like law enforcement's position is that since, back in October, your friend had your EFFECTIVE CONSENT to possess the property (truck) then it doesn't become theft when you later withdraw your consent. By mentioning the demand letter, it seems like they are saying that this is a matter of civil law rather than criminal law.
One indication that the officers don't want to be involved is that they didn't arrest her for Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle. Who could blame them if they don't want to get in the middle of determining the rightful owner. That is the role of the civil court system, not law enforcement. That said, they absolutely could/should/would get involved in a breach of the peace involving a fight with her friends. The state might not be able to effectively PROSECUTION the friends, but they would get involved if there was a fight, especially in a public place like the parking lot of a bar.
The prosecution problem comes from the fact that the use of force to protect property (truck) can be legally justified to prevent theft, and deadly force can be used to prevent theft at night. If her friends did not know that you were the rightful owner of the truck, they would reasonably believe that YOU were a thief and could be legally justified to use force to prevent you taking it.
Bottom line is that you should use the civil court system to repossess the property because taking matters into your own hands is dangerous and potentially illegal.
1 user found this answer helpful
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
