11 ms·

> Then Bricks & Minifigs Corporate took control of the Salem location from the original franchise owner > They were found liable in court. They closed the stor

> Then Bricks & Minifigs Corporate took control of the Salem location from the original franchise owner > They were found liable in court. They closed the store rather than pay. This doesn't make any sense. If the corporation took control of the franchise, the corporation now owns it and its obligations. They can close the store if they want, but that doesn't do anything about their obligation to pay. What's missing from this story? Because as presented, it makes no sense.

abirch 5mo ago
I believe what is missing is a Brick and Minifig's attorney with a law degree. This is why you shouldn't buy a business for 1 dollar because you can inherit its debts.
hedora 5mo ago
If they were smart, they took the "inventory" as payment for some imaginary debt, bankrupting the store without taking ownership of it. Hopefully, the courts will see through that tactic, and add a contempt charge on top of all the civil penalties.
- jasonfarnon 5mo ago
  do we know the debt is "imaginary"? Was this inventory seized in satisfaction of some debt.
AntonyGarand 5mo ago
It is my understanding that they sued the franchise, which then closed, and not the parent corporate entity. While they won against the franchise due to the default judgement, they didn't win against corporate. The store that is now closed is the franchise they sued.
- smcl 5mo ago
  This entire story started because the corporation took control of the franchise though
  - fastball 5mo ago
    Fairly certain it was actually someone affiliated with corporate who took over the franchise, but it is still a franchisee.
ChrisRR 5mo ago
I don't think they won in court, B&M just didn't respond so it went to a default judgement
- KomoD 4mo ago
  > B&M just didn't respond so it went to a default judgement So they won.
  - ChrisRR 4mo ago
    They didn't win in court is what I said
    - KomoD 4mo ago
      The default judgment was a court decision, so yes, they did.

abirch 5mo ago

I believe what is missing is a Brick and Minifig's attorney with a law degree. This is why you shouldn't buy a business for 1 dollar because you can inherit its debts.

hedora 5mo ago

If they were smart, they took the "inventory" as payment for some imaginary debt, bankrupting the store without taking ownership of it. Hopefully, the courts will see through that tactic, and add a contempt charge on top of all the civil penalties.

jasonfarnon 5mo ago
do we know the debt is "imaginary"? Was this inventory seized in satisfaction of some debt.

AntonyGarand 5mo ago

It is my understanding that they sued the franchise, which then closed, and not the parent corporate entity. While they won against the franchise due to the default judgement, they didn't win against corporate. The store that is now closed is the franchise they sued.

smcl 5mo ago
This entire story started because the corporation took control of the franchise though
- fastball 5mo ago
  Fairly certain it was actually someone affiliated with corporate who took over the franchise, but it is still a franchisee.

ChrisRR 5mo ago

I don't think they won in court, B&M just didn't respond so it went to a default judgement

KomoD 4mo ago
> B&M just didn't respond so it went to a default judgement So they won.
- ChrisRR 4mo ago
  They didn't win in court is what I said
  - KomoD 4mo ago
    The default judgment was a court decision, so yes, they did.