Should I pay her?

techspec

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.

But thy were not initially stolen and the owner failed to collect for over 6 year's. Theres no police force or court in the land that would touch this - and in fact she could charge a storage fee.

I think no contact is best option though - just leave her to it.

porto_bello

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.

I agree, I think it's a lttle more complex: There have been recently reported cases of families retrieving their paintings and posessions, stolen during World War 2.

techspec

porto_bello wrote: »

I agree, I think it's a lttle more complex: There have been recently reported cases of families retrieving their paintings and posessions, stolen during World War 2.

That may be true - but the number of cases where they retreived items that were simply dumped at someone elses house and abandoned, currently stands at nil.:D

halibut2209

Apologies for the inaccurate analogy.

mikey72

techspec wrote: »

That may be true - but the number of cases where they retreived items that were simply dumped at someone elses house and abandoned, currently stands at nil.:D

Strange definition of "lent" that you and others appear to have.
Of course they were stolen. Even the op hasn't denied that. The question was whether they should keep the money or not.

The op had even entered into a verbal agreement to return them.
So we all agree the advice is to lie about it though and keep the money?

bundly wrote: »

I was so darned furious with her that I auctioned on Ebay about 50 vintage magazines that she had lent me to read. She didn't seem to think these mags all that precious, it was just, "oh give them back sometime, no rush" kind of thing. They went for £100 (less fees).

meg72

warehouse wrote: »

What magazines?

Deffintely, I would just not remember having borrowed any

bundly

Mikey, although I see your point, to be accurate "I didn't enter into a verbal agreement to return them." She just said, borrow them and read them, and I suppose I just said thanks or similar.

I agree though I suppose by selling them, you could call that "theft". But then she "stole" from me. She offered me money to work for her, I did the work, she didn't pay.

This is a MORAL dilemma, not a thread asking for legal advice, and was posted under Moral Dilemmas, until some mod decided to move it.

mikey72

I agree it is a moral dilemma, at very best you should admit you sold them in an act of anger, and give her the money is she wants it.
It doesn't excuse what she did, but you can't do anything about her morals, you can only stand by your own.

I have to admit I'm stunned by posters on here suggesting you blatently lie about it. You did it, right or wrong, put your hand up to it.

As an aside as it's an ebay board, maybe it explains why the same posters are the ones advocating sd and rd for everything, as they expect the buyers to be putting in INR claims eveyday, it's a reflection of the standards they have themselves.

What will they suggest next, go round when she's out and collect the rest?

bundly

meg72 wrote: »

Deffintely, I would just not remember having borrowed any

Yes that is certainly a strong option.

soapyjoe

Yes it is a moral dilema. It depends on whether you can live with yourself over it.

You were both wrong, the ex-friend in not paying you and you in selling her belongings. And as mentioned earlier, two wrongs dont make a right.

But I doubt the £100 you received for the mags would satisfy her anyway, especially so, if she's loaded. So if you admit to having sold them, you could stir up a hornets nest. She's probably just peeved now that she's remembered you have something that belongs to her (or so she thinks).

Probably best to keep your head down and not respond and if she pushes the point with you directly, then not be able to remember what happened to them.