Should I pay her?

porto_bello

Hi bundly. To clarify, I'm guessing that if this woman is going to the trouble of trying to belatedly obtain the magazines, after scamming you out of £300+, she's probably taken the details of your eBay ID and looked through your feedback. On the basis of this, she can probably see that you sold the magazines for £100. It sounds like she's probably after the £100 - not the magazines!

That's why I suggest that rather than reply with a simple refusal, as others recommend, which could potentially support a claim of theft, you reply that the magazines were unwanted when you tried to return them - and later sold them. That way, it's your word against hers - just like the £330 issue.

She sounds like she's rather bitter and twisted, so I wouldn't put it past her to go to the police with an email/reply, refusing to return her magazines, claiming they were stolen! As someone else mentioned before, the deal over the computer is a civil case (which the police won't deal with), but theft is a criminal matter. I'd avoid unnecessarily falling into a potential trap here.

techspec

terryw wrote: »

As you sold these seven years ago, and the affair of the computer pre-dates that, why do you think this matter has resurrected itself after such a long period?

If its more than 6 years, then she cannot claim the money back and neither can you for the help.

I would not say anything about selling them. If you do reply - they may have gone out with the re-cycling as she left it too long to pick them up.

BitterAndTwisted

Do not acknowledge her communication via that Yahoo group. If she wants to formally requested the return of these blessed magazines let her do it through more conventional routes. If there's no documentary evidence of that loan anywhere my response would be "What magazines? I never borrowed anything from you, ever."

halibut2209

techspec wrote: »

If its more than 6 years, then she cannot claim the money back and neither can you for the help.

You are correct in that the OP cannot pursue the alleged debt of £330 (well spotted!), but the OP still needs to be careful as there is no such limit with regards to criminal charges.

bundly

porto_bello wrote: »

Hi bundly. To clarify, I'm guessing that if this woman is going to the trouble of trying to belatedly obtain the magazines, after scamming you out of £300+, she's probably taken the details of your eBay ID and looked through your feedback. On the basis of this, she can probably see that you sold the magazines for £100. It sounds like she's probably after the £100 - not the magazines!

That's why I suggest that rather than reply with a simple refusal, as others recommend, which could potentially support a claim of theft, you reply that the magazines were unwanted when you tried to return them - and later sold them. That way, it's your word against hers - just like the £330 issue.

She sounds like she's rather bitter and twisted, so I wouldn't put it past her to go to the police with an email/reply, refusing to return her magazines, claiming they were stolen! As someone else mentioned before, the deal over the computer is a civil case (which the police won't deal with), but theft is a criminal matter. I'd avoid unnecessarily falling into a potential trap here.

Dear Porto

Thanks for your reply and for caring about my question.

To clarify also, even if she knew my ebay ID there is no way that anyone can see the feedback for something sold 7 years ago.

I think the best thing is for me to ignore her message. If she turns up on my doorstep or phones me then I will simply insist that I gave them back to her about 7 years ago.

bundly

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Do not acknowledge her communication via that Yahoo group. If she wants to formally requested the return of these blessed magazines let her do it through more conventional routes. If there's no documentary evidence of that loan anywhere my response would be "What magazines? I never borrowed anything from you, ever."

I won't reply to her - it was wrong of her to post the message publicly.

I rather like your last idea.

What can she do in the face of my being totally adamant? Nothing!

On balance, I prefer saying I gave them back.

macfly

There's no crime here. Anything left for this length of time is an assumed posession.

bundly

macfly wrote: »

There's no crime here. Anything left for this length of time is an assumed posession.

After what length of time, and where can I find this law written please?

halibut2209

Do you have a cite for that? Pretty sure if I stole the Mona Lisa that it wouldn't be mine after seven years.

bundly

halibut2209 wrote: »

Do you have a cite for that? Pretty sure if I stole the Mona Lisa that it wouldn't be mine after seven years.

S/he wasn't talking about stuff that is stolen! I did NOT steal the magazines, I didn't even ask her for them!

We are talking about something lent to someone and not claimed back for 8 years.