breach of legal document resulting in theft/fraud - how far could the guilty party fight?

[loversandstrangers]

I'd really appreciate if someone could offer any insight here. I'll try to keep it simple. Let's say two people - Jack and Jill - have a very simple and clear signed agreement saying 'if we sell this asset, we must both agree on the sale price in advance and then split the proceeds.'

Jack then goes behind Jill's back, sells the asset at a price only he approved, then pockets the cash.

Jill's lawyers (from a tier one firm) send a letter saying Jack has breached the contract. Jack's lawyer (a barely solvent one man band) send a letter essentially saying 'fuck you, we will fight you.'

The breach of a very clear agreement has been described as an 'open and shut' by every single qualified lawyer who has looked at this. But my question is, how long could Jack come back with nonsense and try to fight? If he is clearly in the wrong, and could end up going to prison if he doesn't co-operate, surely any lawyer (even a shit one) will advise against it?

Could you engage a bailiff or do you need a court order to get one involved. I've watched loads of Can't pay we will take it away & they often do collections for breach of contract.

@Nat6999

Could you engage a bailiff or do you need a court order to get one involved. I've watched loads of Can't pay we will take it away & they often do collections for breach of contract.

You need a court judgement in your favour to get bailiffs involved.

If you have a contract to pay your builder and you don’t pay your builder, that’s not theft. It’s breach of contract

How about if you own a car and someone sells it?

On balance it is probably a civil matter but we cannot know based on the facts as presented by the OP. There’s not enough info.

@Nat6999 bailiffs need a court order- you can’t just phone them up to say ‘he owes me’ and they go round and seize his stuff! That would be madness

@PegasusReturns

If you have a contract to pay your builder and you don’t pay your builder, that’s not theft. It’s breach of contract

How about if you own a car and someone sells it?

On balance it is probably a civil matter but we cannot know based on the facts as presented by the OP. There’s not enough info.

How wouldthey have sold a car that doesnt belong to them? .

People sell houses that don't belong to them!
www.thesun.co.uk/news/uknews/16648500/came-home-find-house-sold-new-owners/

But the OP doesn’t say she owned the sold asset, just that there was an agreement she’d get half the proceeds

I agree it’s different if she joint owned it

How wouldthey have sold a car that doesnt belong to them?

The same way any thief sells a car or anything else that doesn’t belong to them .

But the OP doesn’t say she owned the sold asset

She also doesn’t say she doesn’t. That is why I, along with the one other lawyer I recognise on this thread are saying whilst it looks like a contractual breach it’s just not clear.

This is the legal board. Whilst none of the lawyers here are offering specific legal advice it’s really unhelpful for people to come on and make bold assertions about stuff they seemingly know nothing about.

The overwhelming likelihood is that, if it’s an asset that was in the other side’s possession, and they were legally able to sell it without the OP’s consent, then this is a civil matter, or, perhaps more pertinently, an issue that the police will have zero interest in.

What that means for you OP is that there is unlikely to be any prospect of a criminal penalty to deter the other party. But, if this is a valuable asset, and your case is as strong as you suggest, you’re likely to win, and the other party will have to pay you half the value of the asset plus your and his legal costs, which should act as a deterrent from running them sky high if he’s getting competent legal advice. But you run the risk then of having to enforce the judgment if he claims to no longer have the funds to pay. It is possible to apply to freeze disputed assets, but I’ve got no idea if that’s possible in what is (by the Court’s standard) a fairly limited contractual dispute. I’d suggest you ask your solicitor about that.

Fwiw, a solicitor can, legitimately, send a bolshy denial response to a LOC If instructed to do so, even when the advice to the client is that the defence will fail.