Boat Held Hostage By Marine Transport Company

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by Bluewaters2812

The discussed circumstances support a crime of theft rather than a civil matter.

Yes if the "hypothetical "circumstances are true than theft is the order of the day ..I just havent seen any proof of that...once again where in this thread does it say the op said his boat was stolen by this man?..

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

What specific "fact of theft" are you refering to..At times like this I wish I were a lawer(not really) and some of you that think it was stolen were my clients,as it is awful easy to pray on people that are ignorant of the law! Hell id be rich! lol...he didnt steal the boat it was given to him...

Remember, this guy (tropicalescape) earlier posted that he makes his clients sign an agreement that they will pay him $50K if they ever sue him. Is it any wonder he has advocated on behalf of the shyster trucker throughout this thread?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

Yes if the "hypothetical "circumstances are true than theft is the order of the day ..I just havent seen any proof of that...once again where in this thread does it say the op said his boat was stolen by this man?..

The OP's thread title has no bearing on the legal niceties involved here. Maybe it's theft, maybe it's extortion but whatever it is, it sure as hell ain't legal, despite your arguments to the contrary.

[Bluewaters2812]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

Yes if the "hypothetical "circumstances are true than theft is the order of the day ..I just havent seen any proof of that...once again where in this thread does it say the op said his boat was stolen by this man?..

The OP doesn't have to "say" it ... the facts need to support it.

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by Bluewaters2812

Given???? You surely mean entrusted with it to deliver it as requested?

Edit: Sorry, "as instructed", not requested.

From what I see that too is up for debate...This "contract" is very vague at best...although the implied intent not withstanding there still is no proof...this is he said she said and I suspect the OP has figured that out and either lawered up or payed up...If what this guy says is true he has lost this fight and had better pay the evil piper or spend more fighting a costly battle with even more sinnester pipers (lawers)..lol...

[Bluewaters2812]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Remember, this guy (tropicalescape) earlier posted that he makes his clients sign an agreement that they will pay him $50K if they ever sue him. Is it any wonder he has advocated on behalf of the shyster trucker throughout this thread?

Thanks for the reminder of that ... I guess not many sensible people will be using his business or advice (transport or legal).

[Bluewaters2812]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

From what I see that too is up for debate...This "contract" is very vague at best...although the implied intent not withstanding there still is no proof...this is he said she said and I suspect the OP has figured that out and either lawered up or payed up...If what this guy says is true he has lost this fight and had better pay the evil piper or spend more fighting a costly battle with even more sinnester pipers (lawers)..lol...

Well, how you could say the boat was "given" to him goes beyond any rational thinking.

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

From what I see that too is up for debate...This "contract" is very vague at best...although the implied intent not withstanding there still is no proof...this is he said she said and I suspect the OP has figured that out and either lawered up or payed up...If what this guy says is true he has lost this fight and had better pay the evil piper or spend more fighting a costly battle with even more sinnester pipers (lawers)..lol...

Tropical,, so you are saying that you would advise the OP to give the trucker who has his boat more money, and hope that he delivers it? Are you crazy? If this is not what you would do, what would you suggest to him, to get his boat back? Just curious.

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Remember, this guy (tropicalescape) earlier posted that he makes his clients sign an agreement that they will pay him $50K if they ever sue him. Is it any wonder he has advocated on behalf of the shyster trucker throughout this thread?

The clause in my contract keeps litigues scum from suing me,An example:I hire some low rent bottom feeder to clean the bottom of my boat and he tries to say he bumped his head on the boat and wants to sue me,fine he has that right,but first he has got to give me 50,000 before he sues me..Nips all the problems in the butt in this situation,now if only the OP would of thought of that he would be sailing right now..."If" you can read you will see where I said several times I wasnt for the truck driver in this matter,and yes I do support small business and the protection of the right to conduct it in a law abiding way,

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

Yes if the "hypothetical "circumstances are true than theft is the order of the day ..I just havent seen any proof of that...once again where in this thread does it say the op said his boat was stolen by this man?..

The OP never used the term stolen as far as I can tell. My interpretation is that if the trucker had a legal right to keep the boat and had it locked up in a safe place then he should have no issue telling the OP where it is located. If it is truely secure then the OP should not be able to gain direct access to it without the trucker's knowlege. His failure to share the location with the owner tells me something is amiss. The facts as we last heard them from the OP is that the trucker is demanding money over and above the original agreement and if he does not pay he will not divulge the location of the boat or deliver it as agreed. Since there is no end date given we must assume that the trucker will never divulge the whereabouts or deliver the boat. This is the definition of theft by conversion. There is no legal minimum amount of time the trucker must hold the boat to commit the crime of conversion. If we have all of the facts which since we are hearing only one side of the story may be in doubt, then I submit that as soon as he refused to divulge the location of the boat and told him it would not be delivered unless the demanded amount was paid that the crime of conversion has already occured.

I suspect that we've not heard from the OP lately because he has got legal help from a lawyer or law enforcement or both and they have advised him to go quiet, at least in public while they handle the matter. I hope we hear from him when the matter is resolved.

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

Tropical,, so you are saying that you would advise the OP to give the trucker who has his boat more money, and hope that he delivers it? Are you crazy? If this is not what you would do, what would you suggest to him, to get his boat back? Just curious.

Only a dumbass would give him more money and trust him,I would give him more(not much more)If it meant not going to court and hiring lawers and all the expense that entails...You like going to court,spending money or do you think there is some soft hearted lawer out there ready to take your case for free? What would you suggest a hitman? maybe a crystal ball?..

[Bluewaters2812]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

Only a dumbass would give him more money and trust him,I would give him more(not much more)If it meant not going to court and hiring lawers and all the expense that entails...You like going to court,spending money or do you think there is some soft hearted lawer out there ready to take your case for free? What would you suggest a hitman? maybe a crystal ball?..

"Only a dumbass would give him more money and trust him" but you "would give him more money"...??? The logic is just not there.

Nothing he has done thus far engenders any trust in him and on what grounds would the "not much more" money be likely to get him to deliver? Sorry, but I can't help thinking you are enjoying some hefty amounts from the vine right now?

[Capt Phil]

One thing to remember before leaping to conclusions, tropical, was that this occurred in a time when many deals were still done on a hand shake and I suspect my BC buddy did it that way with cash up front, expenses and some balance to be paid on delivery of the boat to Steveston, BC.
It was a simpler time when a mans word was his bond and only a true scumbag would go back on a deal unless there were really extenuating circumstances and then he would talk it over with guy he was doing business with. Sure miss those days! Phil

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

Only a dumbass would give him more money and trust him,I would give him more(not much more)If it meant not going to court and hiring lawers and all the expense that entails...You like going to court,spending money or do you think there is some soft hearted lawer out there ready to take your case for free? What would you suggest a hitman? maybe a crystal ball?..

In what world would you give him anything more? I would like to know what circumstances would have to hapen before any reasonable person to give him more money?

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by Captain Bill

The OP never used the term stolen as far as I can tell. My interpretation is that if the trucker had a legal right to keep the boat and had it locked up in a safe place then he should have no issue telling the OP where it is located. If it is truely secure then the OP should not be able to gain direct access to it without the trucker's knowlege. His failure to share the location with the owner tells me something is amiss. The facts as we last heard them from the OP is that the trucker is demanding money over and above the original agreement and if he does not pay he will not divulge the location of the boat or deliver it as agreed. Since there is no end date given we must assume that the trucker will never divulge the whereabouts or deliver the boat. This is the definition of theft by conversion. There is no legal minimum amount of time the trucker must hold the boat to commit the crime of conversion. If we have all of the facts which since we are hearing only one side of the story may be in doubt, then I submit that as soon as he refused to divulge the location of the boat and told him it would not be delivered unless the demanded amount was paid that the crime of conversion has already occured.

I suspect that we've not heard from the OP lately because he has got legal help from a lawyer or law enforcement or both and they have advised him to go quiet, at least in public while they handle the matter. I hope we hear from him when the matter is resolved.

He never said stolen because it aint stolen and all this other mess people write is a "what if ", well what if pigs could fly? Why dont some of you folks call the local magistrate and lay out the story and ask them when they are going to arrest this guy that the OP "gave" the boat to to haul for him, you dont belive me maybe you will belive them..Conversion has not been commited according to this thread...To all of you that said something to the affect of me supporting this guy why dont you go to a country that dosent have such laws if you think they are wrong,better yet just give your money to a hitman like some of the smart people here would, Ill just give mine to the SOB holding my boat hostage and forgo all of the drama of a RICO statute violation..