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

161–170 of 704 posts

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

#161

Post by throwaway85825 »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #123
throwaway85825 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Child abuse is not an official sanctioned thing in Mormonism. And they have officially ended the practice of polygamy (yes there was some coercion on the part of the US govt) The other three were pretty much traits of every major traditional religion at its founding.

The founder of mormonism married a child and given that mormon doctrine is just whatever he said definitionaly it's an official sanctioned thing.

Some coercion? It was entirely external pressure. Some of the mormons haven't even stopped polygamy today.

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

#162

Post by [deleted] »

usehand wrote: post #151
Aurornis wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

In this thread you have admitted to not knowing basic facts about this case. Yet here you are pontificating on the merits. Are you affiliated with B&M? Maybe an employee or franchisee? Why do you feel so strongly you need to defend them?

[deleted]

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

#163

Post by ogig »

hacker_homie wrote: post #68

Could he take them to small claims court one Lego set at a time, get a judgment against the business then go in with the sheriff and start taking stuff to cover the judgement?

This is one of the stunts tried on the video. The original owner sold the sets to the crew members, and they presented 10 small claims. They won all of them because BAM did not went to court, the next day they closed the store permanently. This story is crazy.

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

#164

Post by A_D_E_P_T »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #104
frmersdog wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legal system is captured by legal professionals. The average American is bound by a system that they can't engage directly with. The middlemen who most people must hire to navigate through it generally will not help unless there's a substantial payday in it for them. And in civil matters, defendants have no right to representation. (Also, the judge is colleagues with counsel, opposing or otherwise; none of them t…

You correctly identify the problem as an over-complicated legal bureaucracy in your first paragraph, and propose more government as the solution in your third? The solution here should be to simplify the legal system so legal adjudication is more accessible to non-lawyers, not add more layers of government bureaucracy on top of the existing ones.

If you ask me, the solution to this matter in particular should be: (1) That all sides to civil litigation use court-appointed attorneys who are assigned at random and are sworn to not waste the court's time with delaying tactics, (2) That all persons should be granted the right to representation in civil court, an (3) That default judgments should not exist in the absence of the above; all matters should be adjudicated fairly.

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

#165

Post by Aurornis »

jasonlotito wrote: post #138
Aurornis wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The company should have done the right thing, but instead, they are evil, criminals, and crooks who should be treated as such. > he should have paid a process server He was quoted a LOT more money to try. > He also didn't leave after the police were called, He was legally allowed to be there trying to serve the individual. Why are you defending a clearly evil criminal company?

[flagged]

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

#167

Post by DrammBA »

shadefinale wrote: post #41
artnanika wrote: post #4

The best part about this is that the CEO insists that the agreement with the previous store owner is null (thus relieving him of the burden of paying 200k), and yet he also insists on keeping the Lego collection set and selling it. It's comical.

From what I understand ownership of the Lego sets never left the Mansells. The consignment agreement states as much. Even if we take what corporate says at face value (there was no agreement, or the agreement is null, or it's an agreement that the previous owners agreed to) that still just means that the store possesses property that they do not legally own. Whether or not they legally came to possess the sets seems…

I believe that's the one thing BAM refuses to acknowledge, they have no legal possesion of the lego sets, that's the beginning and end of it. They are trying their damnest to hide that fact behind a consignment/contract/franchise/corporate/arrests/heroin/lawsuit curtain of smoke.

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

#168

Post by cogogo »

bena wrote: post #82
em-bee wrote: post #44

putting aside that this deal went sour, which is very frustrating, i am curious how much they actually spent to buy all that lego, and how much they gained, if anything, over just directly saving the money.

Cloud City 10123 is 698 pieces. That would've retailed for around $70-$90 new. It is worth roughly $10,000 sealed in box. I have some of the original Lego Star Wars sets. All opened and built and etc. Including this one which I purchased for like $5 or $10 https://www.ebay.com/itm/198386156944 I also have the only Deadpool figure Lego ever put in a set that goes for $75 or $100 by itself. It was in a $20 set. So the…

Wow. I do not want to knock collectors but I will never understand them. That particular set worth 10k looks kind of crappy to me. I understand the star wars crossover appeal but still. And I have three kids and have bought countless sets. Every bday and xmas times 3.

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

#169

Post by jimnotgym »

throwaway85825 wrote: post #136
munk-a wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have absolutely no doubts a court would consider it impossible to transfer goods under consignment to a different entity free of the burden of the consignment contract. So the corporation trying to reach into the franchise to grab these goods without honoring the contract is absolute BS and they should be dragged through the mud over it. The unfortunate loophole here is that, potentially, by shutting down that fran…

In bankrupty a court appointed liquidator can seize assets and sell them to repay creditors. Of course none of this happened here.

They can't sieze consignment stock though?!?

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

#170

Post by solomonb »

anthomtb wrote: post #141
solomonb wrote: post #71

Can anyone explain WHY a 400M company would do this? This is just bonkers. They are destroying their reputation for $200k of legos???

A $200k loss isn't much in the context of the whole company but it may be a very large amount for an individual franchise, and they want to set an example. Think of it like a restaurant chain pursuing legal action against an internal theft ring at a single location. (I am not taking the BAM side here, just providing a rationale for their actions).

This isn't an individual franchise. The franchise was already taken over by corporate!
Post reply on HN