Ignore all the lawyers?
December 9, 2009 11:15 AM Subscribe
What are the repercussions of ignoring a civil demand letter? Has anyone ever had their credit ruined?
Long story short, got caught shoplifting at a Safeway in SF. I will probably getting a civil demand letter in the mail soon. I am willing to settle with them for $50, which is roughly equal to twice the value of what I attempted to steal. But I am wondering, has anyone ever been taken to court and/or had their credit ruined by not responding to a civil demand?
Long story short, got caught shoplifting at a Safeway in SF. I will probably getting a civil demand letter in the mail soon. I am willing to settle with them for $50, which is roughly equal to twice the value of what I attempted to steal. But I am wondering, has anyone ever been taken to court and/or had their credit ruined by not responding to a civil demand?
Participating in this process will not necessarily eliminate criminal guilt. You need to discuss this with a criminal defense lawyer.
posted by grouse at 11:29 AM on December 9, 2009
posted by grouse at 11:29 AM on December 9, 2009
Texas attorney here:
Were you subject to criminal prosecution? If not, and you do receive a demand letter, I'd pay ASAP, as that's a small price to pay if it dissuades Safeway from criminal prosecution (you won't be able to get an assurance that they won't refer it to prosecution, as that would likely be illegal, but payment of the fine would certainly reduce the chances).
If (and only if) the criminal prosecution issue is off the table:
Many many people have been taken to court after not responding to a demand letter. That's typically the point of the demand letter -- an attempt to resolve an issue without having to file suit. Also, eventually, your credit could be hurt if you have a judgment against you.
I think it is odd for Safeway to try and sue on a sub $100 loss. I have no idea how likely it is that they'll file a suit - the amount of money at issue sounds low, but there may be a policy at play. I'm not a California lawyer, and IANYL, but I'd guess the claim, if it were made, would be some sort of conversion tort. If you don't respond, they may file a lawsuit against you and get a judgment for damages.
Your credit is less of a worry here than it would be if you had defaulted on a debt (in that case, the creditor would simply report to the credit agencies that you'd stop payment), but if there's a judgment against you, that'll hurt your credit.
posted by seventyfour at 11:33 AM on December 9, 2009
Were you subject to criminal prosecution? If not, and you do receive a demand letter, I'd pay ASAP, as that's a small price to pay if it dissuades Safeway from criminal prosecution (you won't be able to get an assurance that they won't refer it to prosecution, as that would likely be illegal, but payment of the fine would certainly reduce the chances).
If (and only if) the criminal prosecution issue is off the table:
Many many people have been taken to court after not responding to a demand letter. That's typically the point of the demand letter -- an attempt to resolve an issue without having to file suit. Also, eventually, your credit could be hurt if you have a judgment against you.
I think it is odd for Safeway to try and sue on a sub $100 loss. I have no idea how likely it is that they'll file a suit - the amount of money at issue sounds low, but there may be a policy at play. I'm not a California lawyer, and IANYL, but I'd guess the claim, if it were made, would be some sort of conversion tort. If you don't respond, they may file a lawsuit against you and get a judgment for damages.
Your credit is less of a worry here than it would be if you had defaulted on a debt (in that case, the creditor would simply report to the credit agencies that you'd stop payment), but if there's a judgment against you, that'll hurt your credit.
posted by seventyfour at 11:33 AM on December 9, 2009
I think the idea is that they say they won't call the cops if you agree to a civil enforcement.
posted by josher71 at 11:34 AM on December 9, 2009
posted by josher71 at 11:34 AM on December 9, 2009
You might want to check out this page.
Also google offers a shit pot of results
posted by travis08 at 11:35 AM on December 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Also google offers a shit pot of results
posted by travis08 at 11:35 AM on December 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
BTW, the first link I posted for you to avvo.com is actually three pages, so make sure you read the whole thing.
posted by travis08 at 11:40 AM on December 9, 2009
posted by travis08 at 11:40 AM on December 9, 2009
This was discussed on MeFi at length earlier this year, but the Search box is being a dick. I think the item in question that time was shampoo.
And if I remember right, the conclusion was that nothing about these demand letters reduces any chance of criminal action.
posted by rokusan at 12:01 PM on December 9, 2009
And if I remember right, the conclusion was that nothing about these demand letters reduces any chance of criminal action.
posted by rokusan at 12:01 PM on December 9, 2009
I am willing to settle with them for $50, which is roughly equal to twice the value of what I attempted to steal. But I am wondering, has anyone ever been taken to court and/or had their credit ruined by not responding to a civil demand?
Where I live (not California), there is a specific statute allowing petty theft offenders to pay restitution to the merchant in return for a theft charge being dismissed. My clients (particularly those charged with stealing at Macy's) sometimes get letters from the merchant offering to accept restitution. I always advise my clients to accept these proposals, because it is an easy way to get a theft charge dismissed. In my locality, if I could show that my client had paid restitution to a merchant, in a case for which restitution is appropriate, it would greatly facilitate me getting the case dismissed.
However, without an attorney helping you with your Safeway matter, you don't really know what will be the effect of paying restitution. I would hire an attorney, then let the attorney advise you on whether to pay the restitution.
posted by jayder at 12:09 PM on December 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Where I live (not California), there is a specific statute allowing petty theft offenders to pay restitution to the merchant in return for a theft charge being dismissed. My clients (particularly those charged with stealing at Macy's) sometimes get letters from the merchant offering to accept restitution. I always advise my clients to accept these proposals, because it is an easy way to get a theft charge dismissed. In my locality, if I could show that my client had paid restitution to a merchant, in a case for which restitution is appropriate, it would greatly facilitate me getting the case dismissed.
However, without an attorney helping you with your Safeway matter, you don't really know what will be the effect of paying restitution. I would hire an attorney, then let the attorney advise you on whether to pay the restitution.
posted by jayder at 12:09 PM on December 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
I looked into this a day or two ago after a question on Avvo. Turns out, there's a California statute, Cal Penal Code 490.5, that talks about what store owners can do to shoplifters. Long story short, they will get "not less than $50, nor more than $500, plus the value of the item stolen if not returned in merchantable condition." If you ignore the demand letters and they sue you, they'll probably win, and you'll also pay their costs, which might run to several hundred or even a few thousand dollars.
Once they do that, it'll show up on your credit as a civil judgment, and they can do other unpleasant things to you.
Don't ignore the letter. See an attorney if you wish, but don't assume you'll get away by paying what the item was worth, or the value plus $50, or something like that. You're not in the driver's seat.
IAAL, but IANYL. TINLA.
posted by spacewrench at 5:03 PM on December 9, 2009
Once they do that, it'll show up on your credit as a civil judgment, and they can do other unpleasant things to you.
Don't ignore the letter. See an attorney if you wish, but don't assume you'll get away by paying what the item was worth, or the value plus $50, or something like that. You're not in the driver's seat.
IAAL, but IANYL. TINLA.
posted by spacewrench at 5:03 PM on December 9, 2009
One more thing about restitution programs --- they are really win-win programs for merchants and for defendants. One thing I have noticed as a criminal defendant is how onerous it is for merchants to come to court and testify at a trial or hearing in a petty theft case. They can count on sitting in court for four hours minimum, usually more like seven hours, and of course the merchant has to pay the manager or loss prevention employee to sit there and wait for the trial or hearing. So, to convict someone who may be charged with stealing merchandise worth $15, the merchant has to pay an employee $10 or more an hour to sit in court --- when a criminal conviction will actually bring no gain to the merchant at all. It doesn't make sense.
The merchants' restitution programs recognize this problem, and give merchants a way to actually benefit from catching a shoplifter. Smart merchants --- like Macy's --- are eager to accept the restitution.
posted by jayder at 5:13 PM on December 9, 2009
The merchants' restitution programs recognize this problem, and give merchants a way to actually benefit from catching a shoplifter. Smart merchants --- like Macy's --- are eager to accept the restitution.
posted by jayder at 5:13 PM on December 9, 2009
One thing I have noticed as a criminal defendant
I meant "criminal defense attorney"
posted by jayder at 5:13 PM on December 9, 2009
I meant "criminal defense attorney"
posted by jayder at 5:13 PM on December 9, 2009
« Older As a productivity coach how can I best serve... | My job has broken me; please help me leave. Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
I've never heard of a civil demand letter though, it might be something real, and of course, I'm not a lawyer.
posted by cschneid at 11:25 AM on December 9, 2009