Sold laptop on Craigslist - 3+ years later, buyer wants refund

[quincy]

I'm not talking about FTC violations. In California, this type of situation could give rise to a claim of Abuse of Process. If the other party knows that the claim is time-barred, yet sues anyway, that is abuse of process. In fact, even if the other party doesn't know, it can be an abuse of process because they should have known. Once the suit is found in the defendant's favor (based on the SOL), that would give rise to a claim by the defendant against the plaintiff for abuse of process.

A small claims action might not give rise to a claim of abuse of process simply because the litigants are not lawyers.

The main thing heyitsr needs to be concerned with is the purchaser filing a lawsuit against him, even if the lawsuit has no merit. heyitsr will need to respond to any legal action so a default judgment is not entered.

 

[adjusterjack]

If one is on notice that the statute of limitations has passed, yet one proceeds with a suit and loses (based on the SOL), couldn't one be at risk of being found to have committed abuse of process in a later proceeding?

I'm pretty sure that could happen.

 

[quincy]

Here is a link to the elements necessary to support an abuse of process suit in California:

https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1500/1520/

I don’t see the elements being met.

 

[Zigner]

A small claims action might not give rise to a claim of abuse of process simply because the litigants are not lawyers.

That really doesn't change anything. I did allow for that by mentioning the other party being put on notice, but even if not put on notice, the litigant is expected to know, just as if s/he were an attorney.

 

[Zigner]

Here is a link to the elements necessary to support an abuse of process suit in California:

https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1500/1520/

I don’t see the elements being met.

I see all of the elements being met:


1. That [name of defendant][insert legal procedure, e.g., “took the
deposition of [name of deponent]”]; (Filed suit)
2. That [name of defendant] intentionally used this legal procedure to
[insert alleged improper purpose that procedure was not designed to
achieve];(Attempt to collect money beyond the applicable statute of limitations)
3. That [name of plaintiff] was harmed; and (Cost of defending suit)
4. That [name of defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor in
causing [name of plaintiff]’s harm.(No question on this one)

 

[quincy]

I see all of the elements being met:


1. That [name of defendant][insert legal procedure, e.g., “took the
deposition of [name of deponent]”]; (Filed suit)
2. That [name of defendant] intentionally used this legal procedure to
[insert alleged improper purpose that procedure was not designed to
achieve];(Attempt to collect money beyond the applicable statute of limitations)
3. That [name of plaintiff] was harmed; and (Cost of defending suit)
4. That [name of defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor in
causing [name of plaintiff]’s harm.(No question on this one)

The statute of limitations is a defense to the lawsuit. A plaintiff could show that the statute of limitations is not a viable defense (e.g., statute of limitations was tolled).

Filing a lawsuit is not an abuse of process on its own, even when the defendant has a legitimate defense to the suit.

 

[Zigner]

Filing a lawsuit is not an abuse of process on its own, even when the defendant has a legitimate defense to the suit.

I agree. Filing a lawsuit with no merit, when one knows it is meritless, can be.

 

[heyitsr]

Have you been reading the responses?!

You do not morally owe a full refund. He's used it for over 3 years. And for all we know, the problems he's having could be due to his misuse/abuse.
You do not legally owe a refund, unless there are details that you have not previously shared. You have not indicated that you had a written contract, therefore even if he claimed to have an oral contract, the statute of limitations have passed.

Tell the clod to "pound sand".

If the dork tries suing in small claims, respond with the legal equivalent on "pound sand". Do not use the phrase "pound sand" in your response, though. Look up "motion to dismiss" and "frivolous". You sound a little timid, so if it comes to pass that this goes to small claims, look into getting someone (a lawyer) to talk for you if you are afraid to speak up for yourself. Only lawyers are allowed to represent a party in court.

Noted, thanks for the feedback, to state, we did sign a transfer of ownership but nothing was promised.

 

[quincy]

Noted, thanks for the feedback, to state, we did sign a transfer of ownership but nothing was promised.

It appears that the four years statute of limitations applies.

 

[zddoodah]

the right thing to do would be to refund the money

That's a matter of subjective opinion, but I think most folks would disagree.

Should I expect this holding up in small claims court and having to refund the full amount?

No.

Most consumer to consumer sales of goods are made on an "as is" basis. Unless you gave this buyer a warranty that is massively better than any computer manufacturer's warranty, you have almost no chance of being sued successfully. There are other problems with your buyer's claim, including the fact that there is likely no way to determine if any defect existed at the time of sale or whether it happened sometime in the last 3+ years.

Would Statute of Limitations play any part in this scenario?

Depends on the nature of the buyer's claim. The SOL for breach of verbal contract is two years from the date of breach. The SOL for fraud is three years from the date of the alleged fraud. The SOL for breach of written contract is four years from the date of breach.

 

[adjusterjack]

the right thing to do would be to refund the money,

After 3 1/2 years, no.

 

[heyitsr]

Thanks everyone, very helpful, I'll ignore for now!

 

[Taxing Matters]

I'm pretty sure you meant 2 years for an oral contract.

Yes, I did and I've made the corrective edit. Thanks.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I'm not talking about FTC violations. In California, this type of situation could give rise to a claim of Abuse of Process.

In at least most states it is not abuse of process to file a lawsuit that turns out to be time barred. In general there is nothing wrong with filing the lawsuit if it is otherwise a potentially viable claim (aside from the statute of limitations issue). California does not hold otherwise. "In order to succeed in an action for abuse of process, the plaintiff must show that the defendant contemplated an ulterior motive in using the process, and committed a willful act in the use of the process not proper in the regular conduct of the proceedings." Galdjie v. Moses, No. B187754, 2006 WL 2773886, at *4 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 28, 2006). The Court went on to note that the mere filing or maintenance of a lawsuit is not itself an abuse of process. Id.

Under federal law, however, a number of courts have held that the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is violated when a debt collector (which is defined as a third party collecting a consumer debt) files a lawsuit when he or she knows the action to be time barred. California has its own version of the FDCPA that extends not just to third party debt collectors but also to the original creditor collecting a consumer debt. It may be that the California courts hold that the California statute is also likewise violated when a debt collector or creditor files a lawsuit it knows to be time barred.

 

[quincy]

Thanks everyone, very helpful, I'll ignore for now!

I think ignoring any calls or texts or emails or letters can be the best thing to do right now. The guy is probably in desperate need of money, noticed the laptop, and thought “why not.”

Again and importantly, though, do NOT ignore a summons and complaint. Many a nefarious lawsuit-filer are looking for their defendant to not appear in court to make for an easy default judgment.

Good luck.