Stolen TV

[ajkroy]

What is the name of your state? New Hampshire

My father died in Florida nearly three months ago. My brothers and sisters and I divided up his property and I received his brand-new 52" plasma television. I was going to pack it up and have it shipped that same day, but my sister (co-executor) asked me not to until another sibling had moved out of the house. The other sib was leaving in a week and my sister agreed to pack it up as long as I paid for shipping.

Fast-forward over two months. The television is now the only thing left in the house besides some unwanted bedroom furniture and my sister hasn't had time to pack it up...but she promised she would get to it "soon". Sister has a garage sale and parades people through the house to look at furniture. Several people comment on big tv, but are told it isn't for sale because it belongs to me. A few days later, it is discovered that the television was stolen. Of course, we don't have insurance on the house because sister felt we didn't need it if we are selling the house. Now, my sister tells me "tough luck" and that she isn't liable because she didn't know it was going to be stolen. I say she is liable because if she had packed it and shipped it in a timely manner, theives wouldn't have had access. At the very least, I think she should have removed it from the house when the insurance expired.

Is she liable? I won't sue her over a television, but if she is wrong, I would like her to know it! Conversely, if I am wrong, I would like that perspective.

Honestly, I would be happy for 1/2 of the tv's value and an apology. Am I out of line?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

good thing you won't sue her over this. You'd lose.

 

[JETX]

Is she liable?

That depends largely on HOW the property was stolen!!
If she was responsible for the theft (either directly or through GROSS negligence), she might be liable. Absent that... she isn't.

 

[Dandy Don]

How could someone steal the TV when your sister had keys to the home? Did she provide exact details about when and how the TV was stolen? Of course she didn't because she or one of her cohorts took it out of spite against you. Is there paperwork on the serial number so that someone could check at local pawn shops to see if it is there? Did she file a police report about the theft?

 

[JETX]

Of course she didn't because she or one of her cohorts took it out of spite against you.

Aww, come on Northington!!!
You smokin' some of that weird Oklahoma tobacco again???

 

[BL]

Aww, come on Northington!!!
You smokin' some of that weird Oklahoma tobacco again???

Must be . L@@K at the big screen TV . I would love to watch it .

Prove the the theft .

 

[Dandy Don]

Instead of your useless insult, I prefer to get clarification about the facts of the so-called theft from the original poster. And I'm a non-smoker.

 

[Some Random Guy]

good thing you won't sue her over this. You'd lose.

Are you dsure he doesn't have a long shot of a case by not suing over the theft, but rather being cut out of the estate. The executrix was in control of the property and did not release it to the heir, therefore it could be argued that it was stolen from the estate and one must go back to the will/intestate rules for how the remaining estate proceeds should be distributed.

Of course, winning such a case would cost far more than the TV and the redistribution of already distributed possessions is unwieldy, but its a thought.

 

[BL]

Are you dsure he doesn't have a long shot of a case by not suing over the theft, but rather being cut out of the estate. The executrix was in control of the property and did not release it to the heir, therefore it could be argued that it was stolen from the estate and one must go back to the will/intestate rules for how the remaining estate proceeds should be distributed.

Of course, winning such a case would cost far more than the TV and the redistribution of already distributed possessions is unwieldy, but its a thought.

Blink and serve .l

 

[JETX]

Are you dsure he doesn't have a long shot of a case by not suing over the theft, but rather being cut out of the estate. The executrix was in control of the property and did not release it to the heir, therefore it could be argued that it was stolen from the estate and one must go back to the will/intestate rules for how the remaining estate proceeds should be distributed.

The problem with your 'advice' is.... the television wasn't bequeathed to him.... it was simply 'given' by the estate. And theoretically (even if the executor 'stole' it or not) the estate can change its mind.

 

[Dandy Don]

And the problem with YOUR advice is that nobody knows what the heck you are talking about. Exactly what has the "estate" "changed its mind" about?

 

[thepizzaguy]

The problem with your 'advice' is.... the television wasn't bequeathed to him.... it was simply 'given' by the estate. And theoretically (even if the executor 'stole' it or not) the estate can change its mind.

What do you mean by change its mind?

I am curious as to how this pans out. The OP doesn't want take legal action he just wants to know if he has the law on his side.

Hopefully the OP will answer the questions in the above replies so we can see where this COULD go.

 

[JETX]

And the problem with YOUR advice is that nobody knows what the heck you are talking about. Exactly what has the "estate" "changed its mind" about?

The problem with YOUR 'advice' was that it was (presumably) based on being a bequeathment (stipulated in a will). That is clearly NOT the case here ("My brothers and sisters and I divided up his property and I received his brand-new 52" plasma television."). The sister is the executrix of the estate. Until such time as that television (or any other asset) actually changes ownership, it is the property of the estate and subject to the 'whims' of the executrix. And yes, the estate (through the executrix) can simply 'change its mind' and decide to NOT willingly give the television to the poster.