First off, let me say right off the bat I appreciate any and all helpful responses to my questions.
OK, here is the situation. In the summer of 2004, myself and 6 other men all contributed $175 a piece to purchase a large 8-man tent for a historical reenacting group we were all a part of at the time. We all agreed, in principle, that we were all equal 14% or so owners of the tent, which was valued at about $1000 total.
A verbal agreement was put in place that in case anyone left the group, there was a mechanism in place to address this, based on an over/under of 3 instances of use.
If someone left the group prior to using the tent at 3 events, it was up to them to contact the remaing members to have them "buy them out" of their share, or, barring that, selling their "share" to another unit member who would take their place. The figure of 3 events was derived from the calculation that it was equated that a night stay in a typical local hotel near a reenactment site was valued at approximately $60 a night. A night spent staying in the tent, due to its spaciousness, and being a more practical alternative, (and over the long-haul, a more fiscally prudent move), was considered the equal of a typical night's hotel room stay, and that if one spent 3 nights in the tent, you had received $180 or so worth of comprable lodging, thus getting your money's value back. This concept was agreed to, in principle, by all parties prior to the purchase of the tent.
If one left AFTER the use of the tent on 3 or more seperate occasions/events, it was also agreed upon by all that your balance was cleared and nothing was owed you, since you had gotten your "value" out of it. We specifically talked about and hashed out this arrangement to avoid situations arising like the one I currently find myself in.
Ok, that being the ground rules we established and that ALL 7 of us agreed to, the tent was purchased, and has been used at about 10 different venues since.
In the early part of Spring 2005, one of the members who was in on this group tent purchase, we'll call him "John", decided he wanted to leave the unit. He made no mention of wanting any compensation for his tent share, even though he had only slept in it at 2 seperate events, and was under the "3 event" threshold for it being a wash. John re-joined the unit a few months later, after re-considering his stance, and was welcomed back in.
In October 2005, one of the other members of the unit and a fellow tent purchaser, we'll call him "Dick", had a bad falling out with many members of the unit, and was asked to take an administrative leave from the unit to allow things to cool off, and let him get his affairs in order. Dick decided that he was leaving the group, and went off to form his own group, and has held a very mean spirited grudge since.
In January of this year, John informed the group that he was again leaving, and joining up with Dick's newly formed group. He parted on good terms, and went on his way. Again, no mention of the tent or compensation was discussed.
Sometime during 2004, I had lent Dick a wood turning lathe for a project he wanted to work on. To date, he still has this lathe, valued at roughly $200. Through a 3rd party yesterday, Dick was asked to return my lathe to me. He replied with the following e-mail:
"As for Rolo9's lathe and the half track seat that is here, and it will be returned after John's $175.00 and my $175.00 is given to us from the first unit tent purchase."
So, clearly, he is in possession still of my lathe, and acknowledge's that fact, as well as acknowledging that it is mine. John, as mentioned before, had 2 occurance's of sleeping in the tent, and therefore, to be consistent with our arrangement, it is deemed that he is due $60 compensation for the value of his tent ownership, split 5 ways by the remaining tent owners. Dick slept in the tent on 4 seperate occassions, and therefore, has surpassed the 3-event threshold, and is deemed to not be owed any money.
OK, phew!
Here is my question: Dick and John both live in PA. I live in NJ, as does one other of the purchasers. 2 others also live in PA. The last party lives in MD. What are my options here?
Dick has my lathe. I would like to have it returned. He is holding it "hostage" so to speak for compensation that I, and the other 4 still in the group, do not feel he is entitled to due to the verbal arrangement we set up prior to making this group purchase.
What recourse do I have?
Can I take him to small claims court to try and get my lathe back?
Where would I file the suit, in PA where Dick lives and the lathe is currently residing, or in NJ where I live?
Can I reasonably expect to win?
Is this worth my time?
Who would bear the court costs?
How much does something like this cost to do?
Are verbal contracts binding is a situation such as this?
With an e-mail from Dick stating he has possession of the lathe, and that he knows its mine, is this a permissible form of "evidence" that can be entered into the case, or do e-mails not meet the criteria of being reliable enough to be admitted in?
At this point, it is more the principle of the matter then anything else. I would like to pursue this if there is a reasonable chance of satisfactory resolution, and would appreciate any and all assistance from those versed in these matters.
OK, here is the situation. In the summer of 2004, myself and 6 other men all contributed $175 a piece to purchase a large 8-man tent for a historical reenacting group we were all a part of at the time. We all agreed, in principle, that we were all equal 14% or so owners of the tent, which was valued at about $1000 total.
A verbal agreement was put in place that in case anyone left the group, there was a mechanism in place to address this, based on an over/under of 3 instances of use.
If someone left the group prior to using the tent at 3 events, it was up to them to contact the remaing members to have them "buy them out" of their share, or, barring that, selling their "share" to another unit member who would take their place. The figure of 3 events was derived from the calculation that it was equated that a night stay in a typical local hotel near a reenactment site was valued at approximately $60 a night. A night spent staying in the tent, due to its spaciousness, and being a more practical alternative, (and over the long-haul, a more fiscally prudent move), was considered the equal of a typical night's hotel room stay, and that if one spent 3 nights in the tent, you had received $180 or so worth of comprable lodging, thus getting your money's value back. This concept was agreed to, in principle, by all parties prior to the purchase of the tent.
If one left AFTER the use of the tent on 3 or more seperate occasions/events, it was also agreed upon by all that your balance was cleared and nothing was owed you, since you had gotten your "value" out of it. We specifically talked about and hashed out this arrangement to avoid situations arising like the one I currently find myself in.
Ok, that being the ground rules we established and that ALL 7 of us agreed to, the tent was purchased, and has been used at about 10 different venues since.
In the early part of Spring 2005, one of the members who was in on this group tent purchase, we'll call him "John", decided he wanted to leave the unit. He made no mention of wanting any compensation for his tent share, even though he had only slept in it at 2 seperate events, and was under the "3 event" threshold for it being a wash. John re-joined the unit a few months later, after re-considering his stance, and was welcomed back in.
In October 2005, one of the other members of the unit and a fellow tent purchaser, we'll call him "Dick", had a bad falling out with many members of the unit, and was asked to take an administrative leave from the unit to allow things to cool off, and let him get his affairs in order. Dick decided that he was leaving the group, and went off to form his own group, and has held a very mean spirited grudge since.
In January of this year, John informed the group that he was again leaving, and joining up with Dick's newly formed group. He parted on good terms, and went on his way. Again, no mention of the tent or compensation was discussed.
Sometime during 2004, I had lent Dick a wood turning lathe for a project he wanted to work on. To date, he still has this lathe, valued at roughly $200. Through a 3rd party yesterday, Dick was asked to return my lathe to me. He replied with the following e-mail:
"As for Rolo9's lathe and the half track seat that is here, and it will be returned after John's $175.00 and my $175.00 is given to us from the first unit tent purchase."
So, clearly, he is in possession still of my lathe, and acknowledge's that fact, as well as acknowledging that it is mine. John, as mentioned before, had 2 occurance's of sleeping in the tent, and therefore, to be consistent with our arrangement, it is deemed that he is due $60 compensation for the value of his tent ownership, split 5 ways by the remaining tent owners. Dick slept in the tent on 4 seperate occassions, and therefore, has surpassed the 3-event threshold, and is deemed to not be owed any money.
OK, phew!
Here is my question: Dick and John both live in PA. I live in NJ, as does one other of the purchasers. 2 others also live in PA. The last party lives in MD. What are my options here?
Dick has my lathe. I would like to have it returned. He is holding it "hostage" so to speak for compensation that I, and the other 4 still in the group, do not feel he is entitled to due to the verbal arrangement we set up prior to making this group purchase.
What recourse do I have?
Can I take him to small claims court to try and get my lathe back?
Where would I file the suit, in PA where Dick lives and the lathe is currently residing, or in NJ where I live?
Can I reasonably expect to win?
Is this worth my time?
Who would bear the court costs?
How much does something like this cost to do?
Are verbal contracts binding is a situation such as this?
With an e-mail from Dick stating he has possession of the lathe, and that he knows its mine, is this a permissible form of "evidence" that can be entered into the case, or do e-mails not meet the criteria of being reliable enough to be admitted in?
At this point, it is more the principle of the matter then anything else. I would like to pursue this if there is a reasonable chance of satisfactory resolution, and would appreciate any and all assistance from those versed in these matters.
