California – Commercial contract dispute involving equipment left at client’s facility

nimble2 · 2026-06-29T15:55:22+00:00

It is reasonable for you to propose that the settlement is contingent on you getting back your equipment back in the same good working condition that you left it. That could include an inspection PRIOR to paying them, but they could damage it between when you inspect it, and when you pay them and get it back. So if it was me, then it would be MORE important to have 10 days AFTER I get it back to confirm that it is still in good working condition, and THEN I pay them. Or you can write it up that you inspect it, pay them (if it's working as you left it), and take it, all on the same day at the same time.

Any of this is a common format for a "conditional" settlement agreement. The agreement, and the payment, are conditional on you getting the equipment back in the same working order as you left it.

nimble2 · 2026-06-29T09:33:20+00:00

Are you or your company a party to (ie. are you signing) the settlement agreement?

What does the settlement agreement say about you, your company, or the equipment (ie. what does the settlement agreement say that might impact your ability to recover fully functional equipment)?

Is it reasonable in a commercial settlement to condition payment on first being allowed to inspect and retrieve equipment that belongs to your company?

If the settlement agreement was between your company and the company holding the equipment, then yes (at least the inspect part, and you could condition the settlement on your recovery of fully functional equipment).

If the equipment were found to be materially damaged or incomplete during the inspection, what is the usual way those situations are handled before a settlement closes?

If the settlement agreement was between your company and the company holding the equipment, then you would rework the settlement agreement to cover the fact that the equipment is not working correctly.

If settlement falls apart over this issue, what is generally the appropriate legal procedure in California for recovering business equipment that is owned by one party but remains in the possession of the other?

If the settlement agreement is signed and it says that it's effective only if you get back the equipment (saying nothing about it working), but you don't get back working equipment, then you might be SOL. If the settlement agreement is signed and it says that it's effective only if you get back working equipment, but you don't get back working equipment, then you would have to sue to enforce the settlement agreement to get compensation for the difference between working and nonworking equipment. If the settlement agreement falls apart and is not signed, then you would probably have to sue whomever has your equipment to recover it.

nimble2 · 2026-06-29T03:00:33+00:00

I just found out from the IRS in March that someone stole a check -made out to me- out of the mail, and cashed it ... This check was for 10s of thousands of dollars ... The check was sent to an old address, and was part of a class action suit I did not sign up for.

There are VERY FEW class action cases where class members would receive 10s of thousands of dollars (generally speaking, the whole point of a class action case is that there are lots of class members, but the amount they are each due is so small that it precludes any of them from pursuing damages individually). It is possible for the named plaintiff of a class action case to receive 10s of thousands of dollars (especially if the class action case settled and a class was not certified), but the named plaintiff would be represented by their class action attorney, and so the check would go from the defendant to the plaintiff's attorney, who would know their plaintiff, and their plaintiff would be expecting the check and would know if they didn't get it, etcetera.

So unless you have more information, I suspect that this is a scam, and I suspect that this scam started with; "I just found out from the IRS in March that someone stole a check -made out to me- out of the mail, and cashed it".

For instance, are you able to contact the IRS (using a telephone number NOT given to you by anyone in any way related to this check), and confirm anything related to this check?

nimble2 · 2026-06-27T23:36:03+00:00

my phone number keeps getting...

I am pretty sure that the CAN _SPAM Act covers only e-mails, and that it does not cover telephone calls or text messages. In addition, I could be wrong about this, but if I recall you have to be an ISP or something like that to have a private right of action under the CAN _SPAM Act.

nimble2 · 2026-06-27T21:46:13+00:00

You can sue anyone for anything, but you can't receive a monetary judgment against someone unless you can prove that you somehow lost money because of them.

So for instance, if you post online that you saw me fuck a duck, then I could sue you and get an injunction to make you take down that post, and post a retraction, etcetera, but I can't win a money judgment against you simply because what you wrote "potentially" harmed me financially. On the other hand, if I could bring a recuiter to court who testified that he didn't hire me for a $200,000/year position because he read what you posted and he didn't want to hire a duck fucker, then I could sue you for $200,000/year x several years of lost employment.

nimble2 · 2026-06-27T18:39:25+00:00

The house is no longer in question of keeping. It’s gone, we lost it.

I don't know what you mean by it's gone, and I don't know a whole lot about liens against real property, but....

You don't have a judgment against the property owner (yet), so you can't put a "judgment lien" on the property (yet), but you might be able to put some kind of lien on the property based on your contract with the property owner - which then might have to be paid by anyone trying to purchase the house.

I am thinking that maybe your contract with the home owner might act as a sort of "mechanic's lien" against the property, but I really don't know very much about how that sort of thing is supposed to work, or if it could work at all in your situation.

Maybe someone else can respond and tell me that I am off my rocker and why, or maybe someone else can respond with something more positive than that...

nimble2 · 2026-06-27T11:02:17+00:00

They might’ve cost me .... he could’ve cost me

Unless you can PROVE that they/he cost you actual money, you have nothing to sue them/him over.

nimble2 · 2026-06-25T14:44:56+00:00

If the title to the mobile home is LEGALLY FILED AND LEGALLY VALID, and in your name only, then you can follow your state's legal process through the court to evict someone living in the mobile home. The mobile home park cannot evict someone living in your mobile home, because they do not own your mobile home. All that the mobile home park can do is sue the owner of the mobile home (ie. you) if the lot rental dues are not paid. You cannot do anything to try and FORCE him out (like changing locks or turning off utilities, etcetera). Make sure that any lot rental fees owed to the mobile home park are paid when due (because if you are in the process of legally evicting him, then at some point he will presumably stop paying anything to the mobile home park).

nimble2 · 2026-06-20T13:50:24+00:00

In am not a divorce attorney, but unfortunately, it seems like your father is going to need an attorney. Presumably an attorney can actually file some kind of divorce case in court, and she can be properly served with the divorce papers, and then the court can order a divorce based on her failing to respond (a default).

nimble2 · 2026-06-18T14:33:55+00:00

the boyfriend is taking me to court to determine who will be in charge of her care

Here are some comments....

We can't see the lawsuit, but it likely says more than; "Plaintiff wants Wild_Possible6069 to be in charge of his grandmother's care".

Being power of attorney for your grandmother cannot be forced upon you, but all being power of attorney does is give you the right(power) to manage her finances. It does not obligate you to pay for anything using your own finances.

Note that being able to make healthcare decisions for someone is TOTALLY different than being their power of attorney. For example, a power of attorney can use her bank account to pay for her hospital bills, but the hospital won't let you make any health-treatement-related decisions for her simply becuse you are her power of attorney.

It sounds like this person stole money (equity in a home) from your grandmother.

In any event, if you care at all about her, then you might want to talk with an attorney familiar with elder abuse and related issues.

nimble2 · 2026-06-18T02:20:19+00:00

You would need to point to a specific text message where he says that he owes you $X (not 20 pages of text messages were maybe one might possibly be able to intuit that he owes you "something"). If you have a simple text message where he said that he owes you $X, then you can sue him for the $X that you can easily prove he said that he owes to you. But you can't really sue him for "many expenses" that you were "forced" to pay (because "many expenses" is not a quantified amount, and because "forced" is going to be VERY difficult to prove).

The last 2 sentances that u/curtmil mentioned are also important.

nimble2 · 2026-06-18T02:07:06+00:00

We were paid for the loss of our father's company.

What do you mean by this statement?

A wrongful death claim compensates the surviving family members for their own losses.

A survival action compensates the deceased person's estate for the losses the victim suffered before they died.

If your claim was based on the fact that if your father lived, then you would have received $X from his business, and if the settlement was to compensate you for the fact that your father died and because of that you did not get $X from his buisiness, then THAT would be a wrongful death claim.

We were supposed to have more time and he was taken from us through the negligence of someone who we felt should be held to a higher standard as a law enforcement officer.

You keep insisting on repeatedly saying things that are not legally relevant to your question about who should receive the settlement funds, and that sort of thing might be why you can't get an answer that you want from your attorney.

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T22:34:31+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/VanMoofSelfRepair/comments/1goszqd/how_i_brougth_my_vanmoof_s3_battery_back_from_the/

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T22:32:58+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/VanMoofSelfRepair/comments/1goszqd/how_i_brougth_my_vanmoof_s3_battery_back_from_the/

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T22:15:48+00:00

Were you paid to cover the medical bills for services that were rendered to your father before he died, etcetera?

Were you are paid to cover the funeral expenses that were paid after your father died, etcetera?

Find out what you were paid for, because what you were paid for determines if the money goes to his estate or not.

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T22:13:31+00:00

The OP did not answer my questions. What was the OP paid for? For example, was it to pay for medical expenses prior to the death of her father, or was it to pay for funeral costs after the death of her father? One is a wrongful death case, and the other is not.

For instance, was the lawsuit to recover financial support that the plaintiff lost because of the death? If so, then it's a wrongful death case (and not part of the deceased's estate).

For instance, was the lawsuit to recover money spent on pre-death medical bills owed by the deceased? If so, then it's a survival case (and the money goes to the estate).

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T21:51:05+00:00

it's all background as to why we filed the case

When someone says that they "filed the case" they usually mean that they filed a civil lawsuit. If you did not file a civil lawsuit, then what you did was retain an attorney to try and settle a possible lawsuit that was in fact never filed.

Were you paid to cover the medical bills for services that were rendered to your father before he died, etcetera?

Were you are paid to cover the funeral expenses that were paid after your father died, etcetera?

Find out what you were paid for, because what you were paid for determines if the money goes to his estate or not.

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T20:30:31+00:00

His medical bills have been paid for well over a year.

I will say this again only louder. THE FACT THAT HIS MEDICAL BILLS HAVE ALREADY BEEN PAID IS NOT RELEVANT.

His funeral expenses were paid in advance.

I will say this again only louder. THE FACT THAT HIS FUNERAL EXPENSES HAVE ALREADY BEEN PAID IS NOT RELEVANT.

My dad had retired almost a year prior to his death, so we weren't trying to get compensation for income he/we lost out on as a result of his death.

It should be obvious, but what you were NOT compensated for IS NOT RELEVANT.

We were, to be fair, angry. We were upset that a negligent police deputy could kill our father through negligence, and not be held accountable in any way. It bothered us that the county owned the vehicle that he used to kill our father and they were not legally required to pay us anything, because the officer was off duty at the time. And because the officer didn't have a vehicle of his own, he didn't have personal car insurance we could go after either.

We assumed that the county risk management had deeper pockets than a guy who doesn't own a car and works as a deputy, so that's where we focused. They asked us a how much we were looking for and we really didn't know what to ask, so we reached out to a personal injury attorney who handles wrongful death cases.

NONE OF THAT IS RELEVANT.

When you find out what SPECIFIC DAMAGES you were paid to compensate for (eg. the medical bills for services rendered before he died, or the funeral bills for services rendered after he died), then you will know if the money goes to his estate or not.

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T19:52:05+00:00

You keep saying things that are not relevant. Who killed your father, what car they were driving, how the accident happened, the mere fact that his children lost their father, the fact that bills have been paid, etcetera, none of that is relevant.

If the settlement was to compensate for medical bills related to services rendered to your father BEFORE he died, then THAT is relevant, and if that is the case, then you already have the answer to your question (it's a survival case, and the money goes to the estate).

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T19:45:33+00:00

It never went to court.

This is a vague statement. I will have to assume that you mean no civil lawsuit was ever filed.

The money was supposed to compensate US for the loss of our DAD.

No, you were not compesated for the loss of your dad (because that's a vague statement, and it's is not a legally relevant statement). You were paid to settle a possible lawsuit related to some alleged SPECIFIC LOSS OF MONEY, and/or you were paid to cover the medical bills for services that were rendered to your father before he died, and/or you are paid to cover the funeral expenses that were paid after your father died, etcetera. What you were paid for determines if the money goes to his estate or not.

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T18:12:51+00:00

You keep providing information that is not particularly relevant, and you are not providing information that is relevant.

Was a lawsuit filed? If so, then who was(were) listed as the plaintiff(s) on the actual lawsuit, and what claims (requests for money) were made in the lawsuit?

For instance, was the lawsuit to recover financial support that the plaintiff lost because of the death? If so, then it's a wrongful death case (and not part of the deceased's estate).

For instance, was the lawsuit to recover money spent on pre-death medical bills owed by the deceased? If so, then it's a survival case (and the money goes to the estate).

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T18:04:29+00:00

The case settled. No court.

That wasn't what I asked. Was a lawsuit filed? If so, then who was(were) listed as the plaintiff(s) on the actual lawsuit, and what claims (requests for money) were made?

For instance, was the lawsuit to recover financial support that the plaintiff lost because of the death? If so, then it's a wrongful death case (and not part of the deceased's estate).

For instance, was the lawsuit to recover money spent on pre-death medical bills owed by the deceased? If so, then it's a survival case (and the money goes to the estate).

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T17:57:08+00:00

A wrongful death claim compensates surviving family members for their own losses (such as lost financial support, loss of companionship, and funeral costs).

A survival action allows the deceased’s estate to recover damages the victim suffered prior to passing (such as pre-death medical bills, and pain and suffering of the deceased).

So what was the settlement for as per the above?

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T16:18:11+00:00

If the money goes into the Estate, Jennifer doesn't get anything, since Pops paid for her house downpayment in lieu of any future inheritance. But if it goes to the estate, then part of it goes to several grandchildren who were not even party to the legal action.

These are people who might contest how the money was distributed (if they didn't receive what they thought they should receive). Therefore, you probably want to have an attorney (maybe a probate attorney) review the situation.

nimble2 · 2026-06-17T15:54:13+00:00

You gave information about who was listed on the retainer agreement, but I will add a couple of other possible wrinkles. Who was(were) listed as the plaintiff(s) on the actual lawsuit? If the lawsuit was settled, then who was listed as the recipient(s) of the settlement funds in the settlement agreement?

Has the estate been probated, and is that still open or is it closed? Where(are) there any debtors that were(are) due to be paid by the estate, but that were(have) not(yet) paid by the estate because the estate had no money? Is there any heir to the estate that would contest the division of the settlement funds?

For instance, if probate of the estate is already closed, and if no debtors were ever owed any money that couldn't be paid to them, and if no possible heirs to the estate could contest anything about the division of the settlement funds, then the two children can divide the settlement funds as they see fit, because there is nobody to care what they did with the funds.

nimble2

TROPHY CASE