3 ms·

> If you have a receipt showing you just withdrew it from a bank account, even if they’re stupid enough to seize it, the court is going to give it right back to

> If you have a receipt showing you just withdrew it from a bank account, even if they’re stupid enough to seize it, the court is going to give it right back to you - along with a civil settlement. This isn't true. You'll probably get the money back, but it will take a couple months and cost a couple thousand in attorney's fees (which the courts will not reimburse)

paranoidrobot 2y ago
> You'll probably get the money back Unless you get a lot of press, and/or have someone like the Institute for Justice fighting on your behalf, that's not a given. There's a playbook that local/state and federal agencies have. If a local/state agency seizes your cash, then they can just kick it up to the feds. Then any suit you file will have to be against the federal government. This increases your costs and difficulty. The local/state agency is fine with this, because they have an agreement (see "Equitable Sharing"[1]) to get 80% of the money back. [1] https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/ https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/
lazide 2y ago
Maybe, but they’d need a really high bar if you had the paperwork with you to not have to pay out. It’s true though that it would require some fighting. But that’s true of any cop misbehavior, unfortunately. Civil penalties for this behavior means if you prevail (and it’s an egregious case), you can more than make up for it. Many attorneys will take such cases on contingency, as the odds are pretty good. Here is the federal manual on asset seizure btw [https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-afmls/file/839521/dl https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-afmls/file/839521/...]
- adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
  > Many attorneys will take such cases on contingency, as the odds are pretty good. what this means is that the government steals your money and then the lawyer gets half of it if you win and get it back.
  - lazide 2y ago
    Damages are on top of return of the money.
    - adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
      and damages are basically never awarded for this (for real, see if you can find a case where they were)
      - lazide 2y ago
        That’s because the moment someone lawyers up and appears to have a case, they give the funds back to avoid creating bad precedent. So it doesn’t go to court. (See https://ij.org/press-release/federal-government-will-return-over-1-million-seized-from-armored-car-company-in-california/ https://ij.org/press-release/federal-government-will-return-...)
- paranoidrobot 2y ago
  You've got it backwards. Civil Asset Forfeiture in the US is so widespread, and so egregious because it's so difficult to fight. You can't recover your expenses in fighting it, so it's only services like IJ that will take this on without you paying for it yourself.

paranoidrobot 2y ago

> You'll probably get the money back Unless you get a lot of press, and/or have someone like the Institute for Justice fighting on your behalf, that's not a given. There's a playbook that local/state and federal agencies have. If a local/state agency seizes your cash, then they can just kick it up to the feds. Then any suit you file will have to be against the federal government. This increases your costs and difficulty. The local/state agency is fine with this, because they have an agreement (see "Equitable Sharing"[1]) to get 80% of the money back. [1] https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/ https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/

lazide 2y ago

Maybe, but they’d need a really high bar if you had the paperwork with you to not have to pay out. It’s true though that it would require some fighting. But that’s true of any cop misbehavior, unfortunately. Civil penalties for this behavior means if you prevail (and it’s an egregious case), you can more than make up for it. Many attorneys will take such cases on contingency, as the odds are pretty good. Here is the federal manual on asset seizure btw [https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-afmls/file/839521/dl https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-afmls/file/839521/...]

adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
> Many attorneys will take such cases on contingency, as the odds are pretty good. what this means is that the government steals your money and then the lawyer gets half of it if you win and get it back.
- lazide 2y ago
  Damages are on top of return of the money.
  - adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
    and damages are basically never awarded for this (for real, see if you can find a case where they were)
    - lazide 2y ago
      That’s because the moment someone lawyers up and appears to have a case, they give the funds back to avoid creating bad precedent. So it doesn’t go to court. (See https://ij.org/press-release/federal-government-will-return-over-1-million-seized-from-armored-car-company-in-california/ https://ij.org/press-release/federal-government-will-return-...)
paranoidrobot 2y ago
You've got it backwards. Civil Asset Forfeiture in the US is so widespread, and so egregious because it's so difficult to fight. You can't recover your expenses in fighting it, so it's only services like IJ that will take this on without you paying for it yourself.