No, it was negligence. There needs to be some penalty for this, such as a misdemeanor. If an employee is not certain, they can contact the bank and get expert advice on the location (such as contacting the city or the police department), which would only then be a reasonable defense against negligence.
5 Likes
Dude - Their stuff was taken, some of it stolen. Things were moved out of their ânaturalâ place. Perhaps it was scratched or damaged. If I was that family, I would want everything exactly the way it was, not a millimeter left or right. I should not have had to go through all that inconvenience. Even just buying me new stuff is not enough - I would need to be compensated for the inconvenience, the trauma, and for all the time wasted on re-configuring the house to make it the way it was.
You also must be sensitive to the fact that people have had their personal space INVADED. The bank and their goons were not invited. They came into that house, invaded a space, took things, stole things, personal items with emotional attachment and all that. This is not a simple situation at all, emotionally and mentally. The bank should pay for their mistake, and way, way more than just for the material goods.
6 Likes
No. I think itâs you that doesnât understand the law. Irony!
3 Likes
When I worked in the nuclear industry, the nuclear plants were responsible for EVERYTHING their contractors did. So it was the plantâs job (and my job) to get up in the shit of the contractor and make sure they were doing exactly what they were supposed to do. If a contractor screwed up, the plant was fined (for the infraction and for not properly supervising the contractors). Iâm not particularly sympathetic to anybody who tries to pass the buck onto a contractor. It reeks of lax oversight.
4 Likes
This shouldnât be merely a civil matter. This was pure theft by BLATANT negligence.
2 Likes
How do you propose you get what you want from the bank?
That was in response to the hypothetical situation.
Sure. Youâre a hitman. I get it. I am crying a small hitman tear for your poor hitman story.
Your line of work is corrupt and you shouldnât be doing it until it can be proven to be error-free.
5 Likes
So in terms of theft/burglary, is there anything built in to address this? If Iâm target shooting and accidentally kill someone, Iâm not going to get murder one, but Iâm very likely going to be charged with manslaughter, even though I my intent wasnât to kill anyone. Is there a âmanslaughterâ for burglary and theft?
I guess what Iâm trying to wrap my head around is the idea that stealing an entire householdâs worth of stuff is covered under some kind of criminal immunity because it was done mistakenly instead of maliciously.
Well, this fine institution and its minions are richly deserving of what is certainly coming their way âŚ
This has now entered my top five biggest fears. Gods above, just thinking about how I would feel to have my home invaded like this and my belongings taken - not to mention the horror and rage and disgust of dealing with an entity that obviously does not care about how they fucked up and destroyed a life. Yeah, we âshouldnâtâ be attached to our possessions and all that jazz, but damn. I remember how much just having my car broken into jolted my world - having my home entered like this would be a million times worse.
Negligent homicide is a better example. The law can separate negligence and malice, and provide penalties for both. A truck driver who improperly loads a truck and causes an accident that kills someone wouldnât be charged with murder. Similarly, an employee of a company that foreclosed on the wrong house wouldnât be charged with burglary. It was a negligent crime, not a malicious crime.
Youâre right, it becomes the liability of the erroneous and faulty oversight. I triple check everything my crew does, and triple check the work order and raise questions whenever I feel it is warranted.
Human error factors in this, just as it does in the drone crashes last week in north florida and the destruction of the wrong home in California last month. Somewhere, some one fucked up pure and simple. Scapegoating the âgoonsâ who went into the house demonstrates a clear lack of understanding of the issue.
You are not going to get any pity here from being âvilifiedâ in the press for destroying a completely innocent persons home. You are in no way obligated to take work from Banks that you have reason to believe are providing you with incorrect information that may lead to ruin someones home. If you truly believe that 90% of your work orders are incorrect it is your ethical obligation to stop working for the bank or verify the information as many times as it takes to make sure it is correct. As for the issue of intent I have read several stories of drunk individuals breaking into homes in a drunken stupor who thought they were at their correct home but they still get arrested for breaking and entering despite a lack of intent. I am also in the position where I have to hire contractors on a regular basis and I am very well aware that If I donât appropriately vet and supervise them that I will be held liable for their actions. Just because the system is screwed up doesnât mean everyone involved should not be held liable. If you see a screwed up system and choose to operate within it without putting corrective effort into the situation then you are just as liable as the guy passing you the bad info. On a related note It amazes me how some people are able to justify their actions I have trouble sleeping when I feel i was inadvertently rude to someone so the amount of mental gymnastic it would take to be ok with ransacking someones house and throwing away their things because of my own negligent attention to detail would be astonishing.
13 Likes
Iâm guessing your line of work is absolutely 100% error free and beyond reproach. Must be nice.
1 Like
All too easily, unfortunately.
3 Likes
Sometimes, I think we should just blow the whole goddamn corrupt system up. Even though I have no idea what to replace it with, except perhaps with more periodic culling.
1 Like
There should be a responsible party, a real person, who IS held accountable. The band CEO or president sounds about right to me. What has happened to the country I used to live in?
Itâs not error-free, but the errors would in no way lead to grave mistakes, crimes or death.
Iâm not even in this line of work and I can easily come up with a reasonable way to verify if itâs a legit entry before continuing with my work.
So, you enter a house that is very clearly inhabited. There are dirty dishes in the sink and fresh milk in the fridge. This is a foreclosure? A foreclosure of an inhabited residence should be preceded by an eviction by the Sherriff. The Sherriff should have a record of who was served and how the eviction went. Then, after that verification, and a 48 hour waiting period, continue with the consignment. And if those laws donât exist in the locality, you can still play by those rules anyways. Your business could float to the top in terms of legitimacy by contractually insisting on multiple levels of checks before any bank consignment, rather than doing it by feel and intuition.
Hereâs another one. As a condition of doing business with you, the bank is required to send you a picture of the house with the address clearly visible, and a copy of the foreclosure and they have to match AND a bank representative must be present to supervise the consignment.
I can keep coming up with these. The long and short of it is that banks and their henchmen are at fault for shoddy workmanship and deserve to get the pants sued off of them.
11 Likes
