5 ms·

Depends if the car was bought with stolen money or traded for stolen goods. If so, then I'd say yes.

lotsofpulp 9y ago
Should everyone expect every transaction to be subject to clawback? Employees have no guarantee their pay is final, vendors have no guarantee their pay for products delivered will be paid for, etc?
- Spooky23 9y ago
  The law generally renders those contracts null and void. You never technically hold title to stolen goods or things purchased with stolen goods.
  - lotsofpulp 9y ago
    Is this for any contract? If someone steals $20 and buys some food, does the food merchant now have to return the $20 and suffer the loss? I've never heard of any situation like this. Usually, this type of liability is in events such as vehicle, house, land, or business purchases for which there is title insurance. But if the buyer does the due diligence, and they're not aware of any illegitimate funds being used, how much should they suffer? How much should the person who it was stolen from be liable?
    - Spooky23 9y ago
      Yes. The title to the property never transfers away from the original victim. If I steal a pen and sell it to you for $1, the owner can compel you to return it, and you need to go after me for your dollar. Obviously in reality the hassle is often not worth it. This is one of the reasons that banks and companies are so obnoxious and seemingly overreactive to risk.
      - lotsofpulp 9y ago
        I wonder how it would work in an employer/employee relationship. I can't imagine the government recouping an employee's pay from an employer who has been stealing, assuming the employee is not aware of the theft. Could evading taxes and paying employees be considered stealing from taxpayers, which the employees have to pay back? I see the hazard in letting people keep stolen goods, as it might be hard to prove they were or weren't knowledgeable of that fact allowing thieves to get away with it, but at the same time how far does a government get to go in determining which of your assets belongs to you.
        Spooky23 9y ago
        IANAL, but I think the theft of property is a tort that isn’t tied to employment. If someone stole from an employer and the employer gets a judgement or restitution order, garnishment of wages may be part of collection. Labor law in my state has a strict liability policy for employers and payroll taxes. Restaurants that get seized by state tax authorities are usually for failure to make timely payroll or sales tax payments.
        sulam 9y ago
        I think you have misread the parent. He is asking if the government would go after employee salaries in a case where the employer owes the government money. There are cases where this could definitely happen. For instance imagine an LLC where the partners are making millions from government contracts due to the company breaking bribery laws. The government would (has) sue the partners in such cases. I think the parent is more asking whether the government would sue the office admin, though. Just as in the Madoff cases I believe this revolves around their presumed degree of complicity in the illegal behavior. And probably at least some on what the prosecution thinks will get their name in the news in a more positive light.
      - njarboe 9y ago
        I believe in the US cash is an exception to the give back rule. My google fu does not find a good reference at the moment. Also, public auctions of goods is a process where the chain of ownership is reset for property (source, had a second hand dealers license). Thus auctions for captured police stuff, lost luggage, etc.
- yardie 9y ago
  Credit card, debit card, and ACH transactions (i.e. checks) can be reversed up to a certain amount of time. Chargebacks are part of the hidden costs of running a business. Nobody likes them but it’s part and parcel of almost every merchant agreement. If you’ve been overpaid and have direct deposit your employer can reverse the entire or partial payment. It’s been that way for years.
  - lotsofpulp 9y ago
    Those are erroneous transactions, different from what was being discussed. I'm referring to party A transacting with party B, and B doesn't know A is using illegitimately obtained funds, why should B be penalized? Obviously this is different in the case of things such as vehicles and houses, which have titles and legal checks that can be done to make sure they are legitimate, but even then as long as the buyer has done due diligence, they shouldn't be penalized otherwise trust in the market will erode.
    - alex_hitchins 9y ago
      IANAL, the law I was looking for I can't find - can just locate this which isn't directly related[0]. Perhaps I need to look more at the proceeds of crime. Interesting point you raise. I know the police can confiscate the proceeds of crime, and if I buy a car that is stolen it's not legally mine, however as to whether if the money used to purchase the item was stolen, well. Would it be fraud then? If so, I'd still think obtaining goods by deception would cover the car being reclaimed if possible. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/crossheading/offences-relating-to-goods-stolen-etc https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/crossheading/of...

Should everyone expect every transaction to be subject to clawback? Employees have no guarantee their pay is final, vendors have no guarantee their pay for products delivered will be paid for, etc?

Spooky23 9y ago
The law generally renders those contracts null and void. You never technically hold title to stolen goods or things purchased with stolen goods.
- lotsofpulp 9y ago
  Is this for any contract? If someone steals $20 and buys some food, does the food merchant now have to return the $20 and suffer the loss? I've never heard of any situation like this. Usually, this type of liability is in events such as vehicle, house, land, or business purchases for which there is title insurance. But if the buyer does the due diligence, and they're not aware of any illegitimate funds being used, how much should they suffer? How much should the person who it was stolen from be liable?
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    Yes. The title to the property never transfers away from the original victim. If I steal a pen and sell it to you for $1, the owner can compel you to return it, and you need to go after me for your dollar. Obviously in reality the hassle is often not worth it. This is one of the reasons that banks and companies are so obnoxious and seemingly overreactive to risk.
    - lotsofpulp 9y ago
      I wonder how it would work in an employer/employee relationship. I can't imagine the government recouping an employee's pay from an employer who has been stealing, assuming the employee is not aware of the theft. Could evading taxes and paying employees be considered stealing from taxpayers, which the employees have to pay back? I see the hazard in letting people keep stolen goods, as it might be hard to prove they were or weren't knowledgeable of that fact allowing thieves to get away with it, but at the same time how far does a government get to go in determining which of your assets belongs to you.
      - Spooky23 9y ago
        IANAL, but I think the theft of property is a tort that isn’t tied to employment. If someone stole from an employer and the employer gets a judgement or restitution order, garnishment of wages may be part of collection. Labor law in my state has a strict liability policy for employers and payroll taxes. Restaurants that get seized by state tax authorities are usually for failure to make timely payroll or sales tax payments.
        sulam 9y ago
        I think you have misread the parent. He is asking if the government would go after employee salaries in a case where the employer owes the government money. There are cases where this could definitely happen. For instance imagine an LLC where the partners are making millions from government contracts due to the company breaking bribery laws. The government would (has) sue the partners in such cases. I think the parent is more asking whether the government would sue the office admin, though. Just as in the Madoff cases I believe this revolves around their presumed degree of complicity in the illegal behavior. And probably at least some on what the prosecution thinks will get their name in the news in a more positive light.
    - njarboe 9y ago
      I believe in the US cash is an exception to the give back rule. My google fu does not find a good reference at the moment. Also, public auctions of goods is a process where the chain of ownership is reset for property (source, had a second hand dealers license). Thus auctions for captured police stuff, lost luggage, etc.
yardie 9y ago
Credit card, debit card, and ACH transactions (i.e. checks) can be reversed up to a certain amount of time. Chargebacks are part of the hidden costs of running a business. Nobody likes them but it’s part and parcel of almost every merchant agreement. If you’ve been overpaid and have direct deposit your employer can reverse the entire or partial payment. It’s been that way for years.
- lotsofpulp 9y ago
  Those are erroneous transactions, different from what was being discussed. I'm referring to party A transacting with party B, and B doesn't know A is using illegitimately obtained funds, why should B be penalized? Obviously this is different in the case of things such as vehicles and houses, which have titles and legal checks that can be done to make sure they are legitimate, but even then as long as the buyer has done due diligence, they shouldn't be penalized otherwise trust in the market will erode.
  - alex_hitchins 9y ago
    IANAL, the law I was looking for I can't find - can just locate this which isn't directly related[0]. Perhaps I need to look more at the proceeds of crime. Interesting point you raise. I know the police can confiscate the proceeds of crime, and if I buy a car that is stolen it's not legally mine, however as to whether if the money used to purchase the item was stolen, well. Would it be fraud then? If so, I'd still think obtaining goods by deception would cover the car being reclaimed if possible. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/crossheading/offences-relating-to-goods-stolen-etc https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/crossheading/of...