Originally Posted by biffer
i don't see how i could be accountable for one of my brothers for instance, it's not fair and it ain't right, the beef was with the uncle, what's it got to do with the other party
Nothing, that's the point. The problem seems to be though that to recover the funds disputed from the uncle (which was only left unpaid due to dispute over the work/charge) this guy thought he would use the leverage of the nephew and the work they carried out with him to force the uncle' hand. I'm guessing he did that as the uncle had already moved his own boat. Sly.
It's not right by any means but I guess the fact he got his money would suggest he thinks it worth it. I think different.
If the nephew had not had any work done or put any money through the yard then he could not have done it as it would then have been theft but as he claimed the service he had done for the nephew was still outstanding payment (ie by saying he does not recall selling the motors to cover the balance) it was lawful based on the info he supplied to the solictor but unlawful in the fact he knew he had in fact been paid. That's clear by "remembering" only after the uncle had settled the debt.
Clear as mud. Resolved now by all accounts.
Peter @ Boatsandoutboards4sale ~ firstname.lastname@example.org
~ 07930 421007