Making payments on appliances I can't recover.

[jhansen82]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Idaho

I recently broke up with my girlfriend who I lived with for 6 months. I purchased a washer and dryer right before we broke up and when I moved out she claimed she has made payments on it and therefore has partial ownership. This is untrue I have all payments on my credit card and bank account corresponding to all payments to Sears. What are my options to recover my personal property as the police say I need to go to small claims court?? I do not want to keep making payments for something I don't have possession of!What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Proserpina]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Idaho

I recently broke up with my girlfriend who I lived with for 6 months. I purchased a washer and dryer right before we broke up and when I moved out she claimed she has made payments on it and therefore has partial ownership. This is untrue I have all payments on my credit card and bank account corresponding to all payments to Sears. What are my options to recover my personal property as the police say I need to go to small claims court?? I do not want to keep making payments for something I don't have possession of!What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

Looks like you answered your own question

 

[xylene]

The police are correct however I think you have a losing case.

Just because you financed does not mean your parting gift was not a gift.

 

[mistoffolees]

The police are correct however I think you have a losing case.

Just because you financed does not mean your parting gift was not a gift.

Why is that? He can show that he purchased the items so they're his.

She'll claim it was a gift, he'll say it wasn't - and the judge will have to look at who actually paid for them.

 

[nextwife]

The police are correct however I think you have a losing case.

Just because you financed does not mean your parting gift was not a gift.

If it was a table saw would we presume it a gift to her just because it still sits at the property in which he resided? Being a domestic appliance sure doesn't scream gift to me.

 

[Proserpina]

Installed appliances + small claims court = verdict in favor of the defendant, very often.

 

[nextwife]

Installed appliances + small claims court = verdict in favor of the defendant, very often.

Washer and dryer are not "installed" appliances. They are freestanding appliances. A Wall oven is an installed appliance. A cooktop is an installed appliance.

I deal with real estate daily, and the washer and dryer are normally NOT considered part of the real estate.

 

[mistoffolees]

Washer and dryer are not "installed" appliances. They are freestanding appliances. A Wall oven is an installed appliance. A cooktop is an installed appliance.

I deal with real estate daily, and the washer and dryer are normally NOT considered part of the real estate.

You are correct.

There really is no legal term 'installed appliance'. Either something is an appurtenance or it isn't. An appurtenance is something that is made a permanent part of the dwelling. While there's no simple rule, the way I look at it is that if it requires tools to remove, it's an appurtenance. If you can just unplug it and carry it away, it's not. That works most times, although a gas dryer is one of the few exceptions. It does take removal of the gas supply hose - but that's not enough to make it an appurtenance.

When you buy a house, if the washer and dryer go with the home, they have to be listed separately. If they're not listed, then they don't go with the home.

 

[xylene]

Why is that? He can show that he purchased the items so they're his.

She'll claim it was a gift, he'll say it wasn't - and the judge will have to look at who actually paid for them.

I have receipts for lots of things I bought on credit that I gave away to lady-friends I broke up with.

People try to win people back with a gift. It happens all the time.

Her possible defense contentions that these where shared purchases for the household or gift are not weak ones given the domestic circumstances.

 

[Bali Hai]

I have receipts for lots of things I bought on credit that I gave away to lady-friends I broke up with.

People try to win people back with a gift. It happens all the time.

Her possible defense contentions that these where shared purchases for the household or gift are not weak ones given the domestic circumstances.

Would you accept an expensive gift from someone who you knew very well you would never become involved with? If so, there is something wrong with you.

If this case came before Judge Judy, OP would win.

 

[xylene]

Would you accept an expensive gift from someone who you knew very well you would never become involved with? If so, there is something wrong with you.

If this case came before Judge Judy, OP would win.

The OP left.

Not the other way around Bali Hai.

 

[Bali Hai]

The OP left.

Not the other way around Bali Hai.

So what? This is really very simple.

It comes down to the ownership of the items. If OP owns them, OP takes possession of them.

If the girlfriend takes ownership, she makes the payments.

Forget the gift defense.

 

[mistoffolees]

So what? This is really very simple.

It comes down to the ownership of the items. If OP owns them, OP takes possession of them.

If the girlfriend takes ownership, she makes the payments.

Forget the gift defense.

While I agree that the likely outcome is that OP could keep them, it's not that simple and you can't simply ignore the gift argument.

The most likely scenario is that they will go to small claims court. The judge will hear their stories. If OP says it was not a gift and ex says it was a gift, then the judge will have to make a decision based on credibility of the two claims. Now, if ex says that she has been paying for them, but OP shows that he is the one who has been paying, then her credibility is shot to pieces and OP would probably win.

Either way, though, they would have the ability to present their case in front of the judge and use whatever argument they think is legitimate.

 

[Zigner]

If this case came before Judge Judy, OP would win.

NOW we know where Bali gets his ideas from!

 

[Bali Hai]

While I agree that the likely outcome is that OP could keep them, it's not that simple and you can't simply ignore the gift argument.

The most likely scenario is that they will go to small claims court. The judge will hear their stories. If OP says it was not a gift and ex says it was a gift, then the judge will have to make a decision based on credibility of the two claims. Now, if ex says that she has been paying for them, but OP shows that he is the one who has been paying, then her credibility is shot to pieces and OP would probably win.

Either way, though, they would have the ability to present their case in front of the judge and use whatever argument they think is legitimate.

Nowhere does OP say that the ex-girlfriend is claiming the items as a gift. If OP is paying for the items, they are legally his. If she wants them, she's on the hook to pay for them.

This isn't a family court case where judges think up stupid reasons like "gift" to screw husbands and favor wives.