Adam wrote:
> >That's not theft. You would be hiding it from the repo guys, not GM. > > A distinction without a difference. Repossessions are done by agents > of the principal, and hiding from the agent is exactly the same as > hiding from the principal. No it's not. What the repo guys do is technically illegal, UNTIL they take possession of the vehicle. > >You could tell the court you are keeping the vehicle "in storage" in > >a "safe place" pending the outcome of the litigation. As long as you > >tell the court you are willing to release the vehicle if you > >eventually lose, it's not theft. > > The key is intent to deprive someone else of ownership. No. The "intent" is to purchase, or compensate GM for the property. > If you actually know that the other party's claim of ownership is > legitimate, then you can't hide it and not be a thief. No. At the most you are in breach of a business contract, and the matter is in litigation. There is no criminal intent involved. > In any case, this discussion seems to have run its course and is > veering well off-topic, so I'll take any further comments off-list, > please. Well, I WAS already done. :) Vince
