DONT YOU DARE NEGOTIATE WITH THIS FOOL. Every second that goes by is a second that could be spent in court. My life has been filled with morons like this that think they can get away with anything. Drag thier a*s to court, and then drag it out for years. Force them to pay thousands in legal fees to defend themselves. This family your dealing with is obviously just a bunch of losers. SUE SUE, then SUE some more. Believe me, that's the only way to get thier attention and that's the only real solution to a problem like this.

Then, if you should reach a legal dead-end (and unable to reach justice in the courts), wait til they go out of town and take revenge out on their house/lawn.

 

As much as I hate dealing with court and lawyers, I think his family did not leave you much of a choice. Personally I think going to court is a waste of your time and his money. People should be punished for their faults and ignorance, but you don't have to be the one to do it. Have your dad's lawyer call the other family and make them understand they are in a no win situation and pay up the damage. There is no need to go to court, it's troublesome especially for you.



CPV35 G35C Maliblue

 

ckwik,

but i think perhaps you have missed a majority of the discussion on this topic. raznips has been EXTREMELY patient and understanding. it is the parent of the perp who appears to show an inability to "own up" to the damages. offering a couple hundred dollars since it is the ongoing daily rental rate for a boxter is laughable. if anything, i think raznips has handled the whole affair more maturely than the parent of the "perp".

and as far as pressing charges, it will help raznips in court (civil or otherwise) if there is an actual police report. furthermore, if the "perp" is found guilty of the auto theft, it will be a walk in the park in civil court. however, if he has yet to be found guilty, you will then have to prove that in the civil case. why make your case more difficult. if there is already a conviction or no contest plea (which basically equates to an admission of guilt), it will only be a question of how much are the damages.

furthermore, i sincerely believe that either way, charges should be filed. i'm sick of hearing about these "punk" kids not respecting the law or anyone around them. let him sit in jail for a while to straighten him out. if the parents can't teach him to be a law abiding citizen, then let his cell-mate teach him about the hardships of life: )

 

Quote:
"I disagree. Criminal charges are for punishment. Civil cases are for recovering damages and should not be a form of punishement but rather a form of indemnity. Basically, just getting what you are owed. It is easy for most people to confuse and tie the two together."
______________________________
It is indeed easy to confuse the two together. You're forgetting that the court (in a criminal proceeding) may order restitution for the damages.

 

This is great.....lets talk about the validity of organized religion in modern day Uzbekistan next.....lol.

Serioiusly though, the kid has to learn sometime to be accountable for his actions. You had reffered to him as "kid at school" I thought, does that mean that you are a minor as well? If so, have you consulted with your parents on possibly having them confront his parents instead of you trying to do so (like you did)?? I dont think anybody disagrees that he should pay for the damages to your car, and personally I think that using the threat of legal action as a blackmail tactic is in this case justified. If his parents had a better attitude on the whole thing then I probably wouldnt feel that way. His Dad seems to be pretty unreasonable though, so, make him listen to reason. By the way....Im not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night...


Better to burn out than fade away. '04 G35c, 5at, Prem, Sport, Punk Tunes "TEMPTID"

 

I'm just wondering if my Mom would have been so quick to sue someone that took my 71 Dodge Dart and dented a $10 hub cap.

Kids should have different problems. THAT'S the problem.

 

Are you even listening to what I am saying. My argument has nothing to do with the interaction between Raznip and the kid's parent's. Whether or not Raznip has been patient, or the kid's parents have been unreasonable is irrelevant. Regardless of what has transpired, how does that justify an immorral or unethical approach? Recovering damages is what the civil court system is for.

Here's the definition of blackmail according to dictionary.com:

"Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information."

While I understand Raznip is trying to recover money that he is owed, the cause does not justify the means.

Police Reports are nothing more than a report. It is hearsay court and hold little weight by itself. Secondly, Criminal charges are not going to necessarily mean a Civil case will be easily won. And this is true for several reasons. In order for there to be a cause of action in a civil case, there must be a tort, causation and damages. If any of the three do not exist, technically there can be no judgement awarded against the defendant. If the kid steals the car and it is returned to the owner with no damage, then there is no casue of action because there is no damage to award. If the kid steals the car and there are damages, but the damages are not caused by him, or the action of stealing the car then a judgement can not be awarded based on stealing the car. Therefore the Criminal charges alone would not prove the case. And in actuallity about the only cause of action you might be able to try and put on him is the additonal mileage. Wear and tear would be hard to prove withouth being able to show the actual damages to the court. Getting a court to agree to pay damages based on speculation alone might prove difficult. And just so you know the California Vehicle code agrees with me on this as there are laws that state when a person is cited for speeding or DWI, a guilty verdict can not be used as evidence in a civil matter. The model for a civil case is that it must be proven on it's own merits.

Whether charges should be filed criminally is Raznip's decision. He has shown a big hert in not pressing charges so far and I would not hold bad judgement against him or anyone for pressing charges against a person who steals your vehicle. But I don't think it's right to use that to try and recover the money. Essentially the kid has done wrong. If he is to be punished then the courts should decide that aspect of his punishement. The is parents were certainly put on the spot here and if they fail to reasonably resolve the matter, then it should be put on them and not the kid. Punishing the kid for the father's lack of cooperation is just plain mean.

For all we know this kid could be a good kid. Who knows the people posting in support of Raznip may have painted a picture far worse than is reality. Remember, there is always two sides to a story. And even good kids can make bad decisions. We can all relate to this.

I'm not ranting to try and bring you, Raznip or anyone down. I feel its wrong and I will say something. Ultimately, Raznip can ignore me and my rants. But I'd prefer him to see this for what I think it is. Not everyone can see everything for what it is, especially when it's personal. Emotions can cloud even the best person's judgement.

 

Actually I didn't forget about restitution. I wasn't going to bring it up since that wasn't the purpose of filing criminal charges. And in many cases restitution is something that is followed up on by the criminal courts just to ensure the civil matter was resolved. I see this a lot when I handle drunk driving accidents. The courts ask us(insurance adjusters) to provide documentation to show the "victims" (if you will) were made whole for their damages. But if the drunk driver was not the at fault party in the accident you can be sure his insurance company would dispute any restitution. The civil case still needs to be able to stand on it's own.

 

Being reasonable is subjective. What one person thinks is the value of a case is not what another might be. Sit on a jury in a civil trial. You'll be surprised how far apart most people start at. After discussions they get much closer as people start to develop an understanding of each person's opinions and how they got to them. The best negotiators aren't the people who make demands, but the people who listen, try to understand the other person's point of view and try to help the other person understand their point of view.

I deal with total loss vehicles fairly regularly. Many times people initially think I am unreasonable as son as I tell them what their car is worth. I explain my goal is to try and determine wha the value of the vehicle was before the car was totalled(what it would have sold for). Then I explain how I got to the figures(using comparables cars that are for sale or were recently for sale). Then I open it up to let them find us to be wrong and show me documentation that perhaps the facts we gathered were wrong. In this situation I might do something similar. Let him know that you feel the wheel needs replacement. You obtained quotes. Then give him the specs of the wheels and see if he can find a better deal. This can help allow the kids father to feel like he is not so much on the defensive and at your mercy. Secondly, if that is indeed the best price you can get, then after he is unable to find a better deal he will feel better about paying it. Or if he finds a better deal for the same thing, then you get what you want and he still feels better about paying it. Short of pure resistance on the kid's father to pay anything, I think this wil open up the discussions and make everyone feel better about the situation. But that's just me.

 

no matter where you stand on this issue, no one disputes that the brand new coupe was stolen, taken for a joyride, and damaged. a crime was committed. if raznips has estimates of the damages (courts usually want two, i believe), then he is owed that amount.

i would just love to see how everyone else reacts if they were also in the same situation. bottomline, i think raznips was too NICE. if it were me, i would have made a police report and pressed charges right off the bat. i would have NO sympathy for the "perp".

 

Im with you Z2G, a crime was most definately commited. Its nice that CKwik writes novelesque rebutals to my posts, but the facts still stand that restitution needs to be paid. Whether that occurs by a friendly handshake deal, or turns into a court battle is irrelavant. I would consider myself a moral and ethical man that would have handled the situation a little differently from the start. But, we are talking about two kids here whose legal accountability rests with their parents. The father of the kid who damaged the car sounds like he doesnt care what his son does as long as it doesnt cost him anything. My advice Raznips, print out this entir thread and present it to the accused at school. Have him take it home to show his father, but do not make any threats. He will see reason after that, and try to meet him half way there.
(by the way...I wasnt doggin on you CKwik, but jeez man..lol)


Better to burn out than fade away. '04 G35c, 5at, Prem, Sport, Punk Tunes "TEMPTID"

 

"if raznips has estimates of the damages (courts usually want two, i believe), then he is owed that amount."

There is no usual or a standard in court. The documentation need only be credible and reasonable. But if a defendant has reasonable proof that an estimate was inflated or a person was overcharged then the plaintiff may only be entitled to collect the proven reasonable damages.

 

ckwik,
i think that is the reason why judges/courts want more than one estimate--i.e. to lessen the chance that the reported damages have been fluffed up. but of course, the judge has to take into his/her account basic common sense and reasonable damages.

either way, i think most ppl here support raznips and agree that he was wronged and need to be compensated. you, on the other hand, appear to just want to pick apart ppl's statements like you're the expert. however, all you appear to do is ramble on and on: )~

 

Quote:
"Here's the definition of blackmail according to dictionary.com:

"Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information."

While I understand Raznip is trying to recover money that he is owed, the cause does not justify the means."

__________________________
While I agree with your definition of extortion, I don't think it's quite applicable in this case. My idea of extortion is when someone says "give me $5000 or I'll tell your wife about your mistress." The extortionist has not been damaged in any way and is solely looking for monetary gain.

In this situation, raz has suffered a real pecuniary loss. While the value of the wheel might be in question, he's wants to be in the same position he was before the incident happened. This to me is totally different than the situation above.

Quote:
"Police Reports are nothing more than a report. It is hearsay court and hold little weight by itself."

______________________________
Besides the argument that it is not hearsay, there are many exceptions to the hearsay rule that would allow the report in. The report may be introduced to 'refresh the memory' (in which case, anything can be used) of the police officer.

Abbreviated version:
Counsel: Officer Smith, what happened on the 4th of January 2004?
Officer: That was a few months ago but I think I investigated a report of grand theft auto.
Counsel: you think, huh? Is there anything that would refresh your memory?
Officer: I remember filling out a police report as I always do per standard procedure.
Counsel: is this the report?

ETC. ETC.

The report will be inspected by defense and after it is authenticated, it will become an exhibit.

Quote:
"In order for there to be a cause of action in a civil case, there must be a tort, causation and damages. If any of the three do not exist, technically there can be no judgement awarded against the defendant. If the kid steals the car and it is returned to the owner with no damage, then there is no casue of action because there is no damage to award. If the kid steals the car and there are damages, but the damages are not caused by him, or the action of stealing the car then a judgement can not be awarded based on stealing the car. Therefore the Criminal charges alone would not prove the case. And in actuallity about the only cause of action you might be able to try and put on him is the additonal mileage. Wear and tear would be hard to prove withouth being able to show the actual damages to the court. Getting a court to agree to pay damages based on speculation alone might prove difficult."
_______________________________________
Irrelevant. There was a duty and it was breached. It was foreseeable and but for the punk stealing the car, it would not have been damaged. All the stuff about no damage or mileage and speculation is irrelevant.

Quote:
"And just so you know the California Vehicle code agrees with me on this as there are laws that state when a person is cited for speeding or DWI, a guilty verdict can not be used as evidence in a civil matter. The model for a civil case is that it must be proven on it's own merits."
_______________________________________

That's fine that a guilty verdict can't be used but pretty much everything else can. The report can come in. Any testimony under oath can be used for credibility, etc.


Quote:
"Whether charges should be filed criminally is Raznip's decision. He has shown a big hert in not pressing charges so far and I would not hold bad judgement against him or anyone for pressing charges against a person who steals your vehicle. But I don't think it's right to use that to try and recover the money. Essentially the kid has done wrong. If he is to be punished then the courts should decide that aspect of his punishement. The is parents were certainly put on the spot here and if they fail to reasonably resolve the matter, then it should be put on them and not the kid. Punishing the kid for the father's lack of cooperation is just plain mean."

____________________________________
I'm a little confused with this one. Pressing charges against the kid because he stole a car and deserves punishment is OK but since the parents aren't cooperating, blame them and not punish the kid? Punishing the kid for the father's lack of cooperation is just mean? I don't get it.

Let's try to sum this up:
1. the kid did wrong
2. the parents aren't cooperating
3. raz wants to be made whole

Are you recommending that raz press criminal charges and then press civil charges? If not, what are you trying to say? It seems as though he has tried to settle this matter as easily for the parties as possible. You say that threatening criminal charges is wrong (If you don't agree with my definition of extortion, I suggest we agree to disagree.) but what else would you have him do? Going through the criminal process and then a civil one is going to hurt all of the parties involved whether it will be in terms or atty's fees, time, effort, mental anguish/fatigue/stress, etc.

We know your position on the threat but we (at least me) don't know what you would have him do instead. If your solution is better than the above, help raz out.