Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

mybricklog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 704 posts

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#661

Post by thevinter »

Burj wrote: post #298
solomonb wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not doubting the claims at all. I simply don't understand why a massive company would shoot themselves in the foot over something relatively small.

My guess is that their books are cooked to hell and back In truth, the alleged $200k lego collection is meaningless. The real smoke is that the previous owners were strong armed out at random. It honestly would just be franchise infighting if it werent for the fact that the ceo is explicitly running interference at every step It seems like there is deep, deep fraud. The knee jerk reaction to run legal defense seems t…

If that were to bethe case, a public scandal would be the last thing they need, and I would expect them to do everything in their power to keep it under wraps instead (eg privately settling)

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#662

Post by gosub100 »

thrance wrote: post #653
gosub100 wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you just falsify data to waste people's time? I think you are just guessing. Or protecting your own distate for people who have a different lifestyle than you.

[flagged]

you can't just say "mormons have a higher incidence of abuse because patriarchy" - thats a fundamentally lazy statement. There is abuse in/out of religious households. Go look at the demographics if you don't understand it (hint: the #1 abuser of children is women). Time taken away from dishonest and lazy arguments (and bigotry) is not wasted.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#663

Post by Ovah »

getnormality wrote: post #656
Ovah wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen the youtube videos? They paint a pretty clear picture.

Clear enough that my questions can be answered in writing? Someone should do that.

You're saying that people shouldn't take a stance "without this basic evidence about the substance of the matter". The basic evidence is there. Take the time to watch Ben's videos, it's an hour of your time well spent.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#665

Post by stefantalpalaru »

throwaway85825 wrote: post #48
busterarm wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to the Mormon Mafia.

Mormonism is the original cult that survived the first generation. It has all the hallmarks of a cult, singular charismatic leader, polygamy, child abuse, apocalyptic prophecy etc.

[dead]

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#666

Post by krisoft »

usehand wrote: post #621
paulddraper wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That user won't say. [1] One discrepancy is that B&M says consignment was against their operating instructions, yet the former franchisee shared the franchise contract, which explicitly allowed it. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48318473

And that's the reason I won't. You can see yourself how insanely easy it is to find this info (you replied with one you probably found pretty quickly yourself), and yet these people who are full of quickly-formed opinions are constantly trying to offload the work onto others.

> people who are full of quickly-formed opinions

My quickly formed opinion is that you are emotionaly disregulated and unpleasant to chat with. That is the only opinion i hold about the whole topic.

> constantly trying to offload the work onto others.

You claimed something. I’m not a a mind reader to figure out what you meant.

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#667

Post by nerdsniper »

nullfield wrote: post #584
superxpro12 wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah you cant just unilaterally cancel the contract in which you agreed to hold the goods for sale, and then take possession without any reimbursement. You either need to pay the sales price of the consigned items, or just give them back. If you do neither, its the same exact thing as theft. Which is what they did. They took possession of the 200k lego set with no reimbursement. Just plain ol' theft.

When this is so clearly theft, how can the police just claim “it’s a civil matter”? They seem to like that excuse, I know… but gahhh!

It’s not theft, it’s “conversion”, which is the civil equivalent of theft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_(law)

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#668

Post by nerdsniper »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #18
gkoberger wrote: post #11

I'm really confused by this blog. There seems to be a large portion of the story missing. I can't figure out the correlation between the owner losing their franchise and the rest of the story. Why did they want to steal the sets? If they're really a $400M company (whatever that means), why would they do this over (at most) $200k? I couldn't figure out what is being claimed here. I'm not saying it's not true, I just c…

It's not that hard to understand. A man gave a store merchandise on consignment, signed a contract with the store manager. The manager lost control of the store to corporate. The goods were still there, still on display and being sold. Corporate says, "this is mine now" and refuses to honor the contract. "It wasn't our name on it, says right here that the previous store manager signed this, and she's no longer with u…

Civil “Conversion” (as opposed to criminal theft): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_(law)

Re: Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

#669

Post by nerdsniper »

mcv wrote: post #468
prophesi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporate is also claiming that they don't allow stores to take on consignment deals, contrary to their franchise agreement explicitly allowing franchise owners to take on consignment deals.

Corporate is lying a lot, and is pretty clearly guilty of theft at the very least. The bigger problems I see here are: 1. You can't really sure large corporations like Bricks & Minifigs. They've got deeper pockets and can drag it out until you go bankrupt. There's no good legal recourse for this, meaning larger corporations can basically do whatever they want and ignore the law, as long as they only hurt people small…

Re: #2: It’s civil “conversion”, not criminal “theft”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_(law)

It’d be nice if it was theft, but it isn’t.

Post reply on HN