Anyone seen these seats???
- Thread starter Mark Ferrari
- Start date
Ross Nicol
GT40s Supporter
Steve
Here's my "Please Explain" for you. IMO anyone who receives 2 large parcels would unwrap them immediately to see what they were. It's more likely they knew what they were and they Knew they didn't rightfully own them, but said nothing.Suddenly up pops Mark declaring on this very public forum that he's lost 2 very identifiable seats and the mysterious unknown person fabricates the story to a no blame conclusion. Anyway Mark got his seats back and that's all that matters really.
Ross
Here's my "Please Explain" for you. IMO anyone who receives 2 large parcels would unwrap them immediately to see what they were. It's more likely they knew what they were and they Knew they didn't rightfully own them, but said nothing.Suddenly up pops Mark declaring on this very public forum that he's lost 2 very identifiable seats and the mysterious unknown person fabricates the story to a no blame conclusion. Anyway Mark got his seats back and that's all that matters really.
Ross
Kool, I thought you were implying that Mark was full of it and there was more to the story. No worries I re read it, It makes sense now.
Steve
Steve
I've just returned from vacation to read the good news.
Congratulations Mark. Perhaps living in NY has made me cynical. I would have bet against there return.
Final word as it relates to our mysterious lawyer located somewhere in the world. You really should read the facts and law and not make assumptions before giving wrong or irrelevant legal advice. Your first post of 7/16/07 mistakenly talks about stolen property. Mark NEVER stated the seats were stolen, but in fact admitted that he dropped them off at the upholsterer, a MERCHANT. Based upon the UCC, Mr. Ferrari has ENTRUSTED his seats to a MERCHANT. Your advice about stolen property, or "chattel" really is irrelevant. My advice concerning the UCC is likewise irrelevant IF Australia does not have a similar provision. I stated the UCC as a reference for Mark as another possible avenue to pursue.
You now assert that "With regard to Section 2-403 subsection 2, the entrusting clause does not cause good title to pass because the upholsterer does not deal in those goods - why? Because an upholsterer upholsters, he/she isn't retailing/selling seats for sale as a matter of course."
Really?? I guess you know alot more about McBride than the rest of us. It really is never a good course for an attorney to assume things. Tends to cause problems for their clients. My two cents is that McBride would be held accountable as a merchant dealing in those goods.
You claim that the term "deals in", is a precise term, yet you fail to provide a definition of same. I searched the definition section of the UCC, section 2-103 and was unable to find a definition of "deals in". I would think that if "deals in" was such a precise legal term, that it would appear in section 2-103. Perhaps you can share with me offline.
"No ill will intended Mr. Gregg, simply pointing out that a) you're mistaken on this point, and b) legal training isn't just a matter of simply downloading text off the web. "
As far as legal training is concerned, please do not mistake intelligence with graduating from law school. There are plenty of incompetent attorneys, just like there are incompetent people in all fields.
The above are the facts as stated by Mr. Ferrari and the law here in the US.
Spotting the real issue of any matter is what helps one excel in their chosen field.
I have no ill will towards you or anyone else on this forum. My life is very full and rewarding, whether I participate on the forum or not. I am however, not a fan of what I would consider wrong advice.
Mark, congrats again on the return of your seats.
Congratulations Mark. Perhaps living in NY has made me cynical. I would have bet against there return.
Final word as it relates to our mysterious lawyer located somewhere in the world. You really should read the facts and law and not make assumptions before giving wrong or irrelevant legal advice. Your first post of 7/16/07 mistakenly talks about stolen property. Mark NEVER stated the seats were stolen, but in fact admitted that he dropped them off at the upholsterer, a MERCHANT. Based upon the UCC, Mr. Ferrari has ENTRUSTED his seats to a MERCHANT. Your advice about stolen property, or "chattel" really is irrelevant. My advice concerning the UCC is likewise irrelevant IF Australia does not have a similar provision. I stated the UCC as a reference for Mark as another possible avenue to pursue.
You now assert that "With regard to Section 2-403 subsection 2, the entrusting clause does not cause good title to pass because the upholsterer does not deal in those goods - why? Because an upholsterer upholsters, he/she isn't retailing/selling seats for sale as a matter of course."
Really?? I guess you know alot more about McBride than the rest of us. It really is never a good course for an attorney to assume things. Tends to cause problems for their clients. My two cents is that McBride would be held accountable as a merchant dealing in those goods.
You claim that the term "deals in", is a precise term, yet you fail to provide a definition of same. I searched the definition section of the UCC, section 2-103 and was unable to find a definition of "deals in". I would think that if "deals in" was such a precise legal term, that it would appear in section 2-103. Perhaps you can share with me offline.
"No ill will intended Mr. Gregg, simply pointing out that a) you're mistaken on this point, and b) legal training isn't just a matter of simply downloading text off the web. "
As far as legal training is concerned, please do not mistake intelligence with graduating from law school. There are plenty of incompetent attorneys, just like there are incompetent people in all fields.
The above are the facts as stated by Mr. Ferrari and the law here in the US.
Spotting the real issue of any matter is what helps one excel in their chosen field.
I have no ill will towards you or anyone else on this forum. My life is very full and rewarding, whether I participate on the forum or not. I am however, not a fan of what I would consider wrong advice.
Mark, congrats again on the return of your seats.
I agree with Ross. The whole story has a distinct tang of BS. Never minding the legal niceties of who rightfully owns what, the upholsterer was responsibe for the safe keeping of the seats. He couldn't just shrug his shoulders. He would have had to replace them.
In the UK, if goods aren't claimed or left longer than 6 months (sometimes common in car repairs) the contractor can legally dispose of them provided he has advertised for at least 4 weeks in a suitable publication, that he intends to do so.
That's my understanding, but as we seem to be awash with "lawyers" on here, both of the Barrack Room and Bar variety, I of course stand to be strenuously and enthusiastically corrected....
In the UK, if goods aren't claimed or left longer than 6 months (sometimes common in car repairs) the contractor can legally dispose of them provided he has advertised for at least 4 weeks in a suitable publication, that he intends to do so.
That's my understanding, but as we seem to be awash with "lawyers" on here, both of the Barrack Room and Bar variety, I of course stand to be strenuously and enthusiastically corrected....
Very good result for you Mark. Can't help thinking the story is BS though.
Whoever it was would have unwrapped the seats long ago. Good thing is you made them unsaleable to any possible purchaser by declaring your loss on here.The power of GT40s.com no doubt.
Ross
Hi Ross,
may not be BS as I have ordered bits for my car and when they arrive, I just leave them on the shelf un wrapped to protect them until needed. Case in point would be an ali radiator. A friend holed his rad so I gave him my spare which in due course he replaced with a new replacement. I think, however, I better go check the box contains one GTD ali radiator though!!!!!
Dave Wood
Lifetime Supporter
Hi Ross,
may not be BS as I have ordered bits for my car and when they arrive, I just leave them on the shelf un wrapped to protect them until needed. Case in point would be an ali radiator. A friend holed his rad so I gave him my spare which in due course he replaced with a new replacement. I think, however, I better go check the box contains one GTD ali radiator though!!!!!
I would agree, I do the same thing. Because I don't want the parts dirtied or damaged prior to useage, they often set for a month or so. I have taken to looking in them fairly soon after arrival, because of a wrong part shipment that wasn't caught before I needed it.
