Other Criminal Charges & Offenses Can I be charged with anything for selling goods that I have been paying for under another’s name.

[Joeyjoey]

Jurisdiction

Florida

I have been paying on engagement rings that my ex girlfriend and I bought on credit under her name. I recently sold the rings and have informed her that I will no longer be paying for them and that I have sold them. Since I have been paying for them and have had them on my possession for over a year, can I still be implicated in the sale of stolen goods? Does the saying possession is 9/10 of the law apply? And since I've been paying for them are they considered hers still?
Thank you for any timely responses

 

[Joeyjoey]

in addition there is still money owed

I have been paying on engagement rings that my ex girlfriend and I bought on credit under her name. I recently sold the rings and have informed her that I will no longer be paying for them and that I have sold them. Since I have been paying for them and have had them on my possession for over a year, can I still be implicated in the sale of stolen goods? Does the saying possession is 9/10 of the law apply? And since I've been paying for them are they considered hers still?
Thank you for any timely responses

 

[Zigner]

I don't believe that these will be viewed as "stolen", so it's not a criminal matter. However, you kept the rings, so you should pay the balance due on the rings.

 

[Joeyjoey]

I don't believe that these will be viewed as "stolen", so it's not a criminal matter. However, you kept the rings, so you should pay the balance due on the rings.

what would they be viewed as

 

[zddoodah]

I have been paying on engagement rings that my ex girlfriend and I bought on credit under her name.

I interpret this to mean that the credit account is in her name (and not yours). Correct?

Why are you paying and not her (at least up until the time you sold them)?

there is still money owed

How much?

How much have you paid to date for the rings?

I recently sold the rings

For how much? On the assumption that you sold them for an amount that was less than the amount of the original purchase, why did you accept less than what you had paid?

and have informed her that I will no longer be paying for them

Why? What was her response when you told her this?

Since I have been paying for them and have had them on my possession for over a year, can I still be implicated in the sale of stolen goods?

Nothing in your posts indicates that any goods were stolen.

Does the saying possession is 9/10 of the law apply?

"Possession is 9/10 of the law" is both a colloquialism and a gross overstatement of the law. Let's say there is a widget that both Sam and Dave claim to own, but Sam has possession of the widget. The presumption at the outset of any legal proceeding (including if Dave calls the cops) will be that Sam owns the widget because it's in his possession. However, that presumption is rebuttable. For example, Dave may have a certificate of title for the widget that has his name on it as the owner. Presumption rebutted. Alternatively, Dave might be able to authenticate a post that Sam made on an internet message board in which Sam wrote, "Dave and I bought the widget on credit under his name." That quote should look familiar to you.

With that said, if you're thinking that the fact that you possessed the rings before you sold them will get you off the hook for any legal claim your ex might advance, you should think again. Imagine being in a courtroom and your ex testifying that you and she bought the rings together and financed them under her name. She explains that she did that because she loved you even though you had crappy credit. She then testifies that you broke up because [reasons] and that she was devastated for the better part of a year. She gave no thought to the rings or even the fact that they were financed under her name only because you were paying the bills. She then found out that you sold them and intended to keep the money and stop paying the bills. The judge then turns to you and asks if it's true that you bought the rings together. Are you going to tell the truth or are you going to perjure yourself?

And since I've been paying for them are they considered hers still?

That you paid her credit bill doesn't have anything to do with ownership of the rings.

Absent more information, one could reasonably assume that one of the rings belonged to you and one belonged to her or that both belonged jointly to the two of you. One issue is whether, in the time you had both rings in your possession, your ex could be said to have abandoned her interest in the ring(s) (although I doubt you followed the notice requirement of your state's abandoned property law). One might also wonder why you think it's ok for you to sell the rings, keep all the proceeds, but stop making payments on the credit account.

 

[Zigner]

what would they be viewed as

I believe that this is a civil matter.

 

[army judge]

Since I have been paying for them and have had them on my possession for over a year, can I still be implicated in the sale of stolen goods?

The specific charge MIGHT be "conversion".

The "victim" could sue you in civil court in Florida, as this FL licensed attorney explains:

The tort of conversion is defined as the wrongful deprivation of someone else's property. It is an act of dominion wrongfully asserted over someone else's property inconsistent with his ownership interest. The essence of a conversion claim is not the attainment of the property by the wrongdoer but rather the wrongful denial of that property by another.

The tort of conversion generally occurs where a person wrongfully refuses to relinquish property to which someone else has the right of possession and it can be established despite evidence that the defendant took or retained property based upon his mistaken belief that he had a right to possession, since malice is not a critical element of the action. To state a claim for conversion, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to show ownership of the property together with facts that the other party wrongfully asserted dominion over that property. The correct measure of damages in a conversion action is the fair market value of the property at the time of the conversion occurred plus legal interest up through the date of judgment. The damages for conversion are not based on replacement value.

Conversion has been found in instances where:

The wrongful use funds earmarked for a specific purpose with an express instruction that the funds be used for no other purpose.
A beneficiary to a savings account refusal to return funds to a joint tenant from a separate account upon the request of said joint tenant was an exercise of dominion over the funds inconsistent with the joint tenant's right to possess them.
Business partnership funds that were converted for personal use by the defendant.
Statute of Limitations
The statute of limitations on a claim for conversion is four years. The period begins to run when the last element constituting the claim occurs. A defense based on the statute of limitations is typically an affirmative defense which should be plead in an answer. This defense can also be set forth in a motion to dismiss if it appears on the "face of a prior pleading."

Does the saying possession is 9/10 of the law apply?

No.

since I've been paying for them are they considered hers still?

The items were bought using HER credit.

You pawned (as in sold) her property, absent her WRITTEN permission.

If you enjoy your freedom, I suggest you pay off the pawn shop, retrieve the items, and return them to her immediately.

If you do return the items to her, make sure you get a receipt.

If you do nothing, and she is angry, prepare to reap what you have foolishly sown.