View Single Post
Old 10-06-2010, 11:47 AM   #62
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,938
Thanks: 533
Thanked 568 Times in 334 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoBozo View Post
I believe there is a legal term called "Unjust Enrichment". NB

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unjust_enrichment
How was the pawn shop "enriched"? They bought a kayak (let's say for $100), and had it repossessed by the police, they're out $100. No enrichment that I can see.

Or, the other scenario is that they pay $100 for the kayak and sell it for $200 to someone. It's reported stolen, somehow traced to the pawn shop, which has records of who they sold it to (maybe?), and it gets repossessed from that person. The pawn shop would have made $100 (not $200) on the sale, perhaps the law should require them to refund their profit. But to who?

What happens if the original owner ultimately gets his kayak back? Is he then liable to refund the pawnshop back their money?
__________________
[insert witty phrase here]
brk-lnt is offline   Reply With Quote