Man sues Michigan parents for tossing his $29k porn collecti

[hoops902]

Apr 15, 2019 9:19:38 GMT -5 alabamagal said:

I am also thinking he is way overvaluing his collection. Items which cost a lot a when purchased many years ago (VCR tapes anyone?) are not necessarily valuable now, and a lot of it is available for free now.

DH is a collector of several sci-fi shows. He bought VCR collections, DVD collections. We still have them and I give up on suggesting he dispose of them as worthless. To him they are priceless.

I’m thinking a porn collection might be similar.

I'm not sure the fact it is available for free is so much relevant (maybe, but seems unlikely).  If we compare the magazines to comic books, the value is in the rarity and demand, not because nobody knows what's in the content, or can view the content.  

I agree he's likely overvaluing the collection...seems like most collectors do.

[Deleted]

His big problem is going to be trying to prove the value in court.  I'm guessing he doesn't have itemized appraisals to back him up. 

[justme]

If he wasn't paying them to store the property and wasn't paying them to move the property - was it legally even his anymore and not abandoned property or whatever?

[hoops902]

Apr 15, 2019 9:35:36 GMT -5 justme said:

If he wasn't paying them to store the property and wasn't paying them to move the property - was it legally even his anymore and not abandoned property or whatever?

I'm assuming he had their permission to store his stuff there, so it wouldn't be abandoned.  

I mean if you're my friend and come live with me with my permission, then you move out and ask if I can bring your stuff to you and I agree...I can't just go throw your stuff in the trash because you aren't paying me to do it.

[justme]

Apr 15, 2019 9:42:39 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Apr 15, 2019 9:35:36 GMT -5 justme said:

If he wasn't paying them to store the property and wasn't paying them to move the property - was it legally even his anymore and not abandoned property or whatever?

I'm assuming he had their permission to store his stuff there, so it wouldn't be abandoned.  

I mean if you're my friend and come live with me with my permission, then you move out and ask if I can bring your stuff to you and I agree...I can't just go throw your stuff in the trash because you aren't paying me to do it.

There has to be limits around it. I don't know what exact the limits would be though. You can't be like hey can you store my stuff here and then just leave it there forever leaving me legally obligated to keep your shit. Or like, if I say sure I can store it for a week and then you're like hey I need 3 more weeks - am I then obligated to continue to keep it if you don't come pick it up? Or if you breakup with your boyfriend and he says he's going to come by sometime to pick up his shit but it's been sitting there for weeks -- are you still obligated not to throw it out? 

Those examples don't entirely fit this instance since it seems they were ok keeping the non-porn stuff. Though the parents likely think the agreed to keep house stuff and never agreed to keep 12 boxes of porn in their "Christian household" or something ridiculous like that. 

[Pants]

If this had been multiple boxes of some other type of collection, for instance, star wars memorabilia, or baseball cards, noone would ever say his parents weren't liable for reimbursing him. Provided they approved of storing the boxes at their home, and then, without providing him an opportunity to retrieve the boxes, disposed of them, they are in the wrong. They've destroyed his property. 

The fact that it was porn and not, like, china plates of Elvis, is a red herring. His legal property, stored with permission, disposed of without his consent. 

[Pants]

Apr 15, 2019 10:10:05 GMT -5 justme said:

Apr 15, 2019 9:42:39 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

I'm assuming he had their permission to store his stuff there, so it wouldn't be abandoned.  

I mean if you're my friend and come live with me with my permission, then you move out and ask if I can bring your stuff to you and I agree...I can't just go throw your stuff in the trash because you aren't paying me to do it.

There has to be limits around it. I don't know what exact the limits would be though. You can't be like hey can you store my stuff here and then just leave it there forever leaving me legally obligated to keep your shit. Or like, if I say sure I can store it for a week and then you're like hey I need 3 more weeks - am I then obligated to continue to keep it if you don't come pick it up? Or if you breakup with your boyfriend and he says he's going to come by sometime to pick up his shit but it's been sitting there for weeks -- are you still obligated not to throw it out? 

Those examples don't entirely fit this instance since it seems they were ok keeping the non-porn stuff. Though the parents likely think the agreed to keep house stuff and never agreed to keep 12 boxes of porn in their "Christian household" or something ridiculous like that. 

Not if you provide notice. As long as that person is not a legal tenant in your home (in which case landlord/eviction laws would apply), you have to give someone the opportunity to come get their stuff. 

[hoops902]

Apr 15, 2019 10:10:05 GMT -5 justme said:

Apr 15, 2019 9:42:39 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

I'm assuming he had their permission to store his stuff there, so it wouldn't be abandoned.  

I mean if you're my friend and come live with me with my permission, then you move out and ask if I can bring your stuff to you and I agree...I can't just go throw your stuff in the trash because you aren't paying me to do it.

There has to be limits around it. I don't know what exact the limits would be though. You can't be like hey can you store my stuff here and then just leave it there forever leaving me legally obligated to keep your shit. Or like, if I say sure I can store it for a week and then you're like hey I need 3 more weeks - am I then obligated to continue to keep it if you don't come pick it up? Or if you breakup with your boyfriend and he says he's going to come by sometime to pick up his shit but it's been sitting there for weeks -- are you still obligated not to throw it out? 

Those examples don't entirely fit this instance since it seems they were ok keeping the non-porn stuff. Though the parents likely think the agreed to keep house stuff and never agreed to keep 12 boxes of porn in their "Christian household" or something ridiculous like that. 

All of your examples include some instance of the person not really agreeing to do it, or simply leaving it there without permission.  There's no indication at all that the parents have been anything other than wholly agreeable to storing it for the time they have had it.

[NoNamePerson]

Why didn't he label the boxes? Collectible valuable do not destroy. That would have solved the problem? 

[hoops902]

Apr 15, 2019 10:27:06 GMT -5 NoNamePerson said:

Why didn't he label the boxes? Collectible valuable do not destroy. That would have solved the problem? 

Do we all need to go around labeling our things "do not destroy" to make it clear to people we don't want our belongings destroyed?

Aren't we all just kind of operating under assumptions that people don't want their things destroyed by us?  

There's no indication that the parents thought it was trash or anything.

[NoNamePerson]

Well, it would have kept mom and pop from being sued for money by their kid and kid from loosing his valuable and collectible collection. There's a lesson somewhere. Be interesting to see outcome. 

ETA if I have something worth close to $100,000 it will be stored somewhere other than mommies house. And if at mommies Mommie will be told it is valuable just in case she decides to clean out stuff I left behind.

[justme]

Apr 15, 2019 10:25:29 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Apr 15, 2019 10:10:05 GMT -5 justme said:

There has to be limits around it. I don't know what exact the limits would be though. You can't be like hey can you store my stuff here and then just leave it there forever leaving me legally obligated to keep your shit. Or like, if I say sure I can store it for a week and then you're like hey I need 3 more weeks - am I then obligated to continue to keep it if you don't come pick it up? Or if you breakup with your boyfriend and he says he's going to come by sometime to pick up his shit but it's been sitting there for weeks -- are you still obligated not to throw it out? 

Those examples don't entirely fit this instance since it seems they were ok keeping the non-porn stuff. Though the parents likely think the agreed to keep house stuff and never agreed to keep 12 boxes of porn in their "Christian household" or something ridiculous like that. 

All of your examples include some instance of the person not really agreeing to do it, or simply leaving it there without permission.  There's no indication at all that the parents have been anything other than wholly agreeable to storing it for the time they have had it.

Bet you their argument is the parents never agreed to store porn. Which is after the fact because they agreed to the boxes, but only were upset after they discovered what was in it. 

[hoops902]

Apr 15, 2019 10:53:27 GMT -5 justme said:

Apr 15, 2019 10:25:29 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

All of your examples include some instance of the person not really agreeing to do it, or simply leaving it there without permission.  There's no indication at all that the parents have been anything other than wholly agreeable to storing it for the time they have had it.

Bet you their argument is the parents never agreed to store porn. Which is after the fact because they agreed to the boxes, but only were upset after they discovered what was in it. 

You don't have to agree on the contents of the boxes.  If I agree to store boxes for you, I can't decide to throw them away because I don't like the completely-legal contents of them without saying anything to you about not wanting to store them anymore.  Assuming the contents are legal, even if someone lied to you about the contents, you can't just make items your own because you say so.

[justme]

Apr 15, 2019 10:59:16 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Apr 15, 2019 10:53:27 GMT -5 justme said:

Bet you their argument is the parents never agreed to store porn. Which is after the fact because they agreed to the boxes, but only were upset after they discovered what was in it. 

You don't have to agree on the contents of the boxes.  If I agree to store boxes for you, I can't decide to throw them away because I don't like the completely-legal contents of them without saying anything to you about not wanting to store them anymore.  Assuming the contents are legal, even if someone lied to you about the contents, you can't just make items your own because you say so.

I'm not arguing they're right, I'm postulating what their argument is. That they never would have agreed if they knew it was porn, so they never agreed to store porn. 

[hoops902]

Apr 15, 2019 11:05:03 GMT -5 justme said:

Apr 15, 2019 10:59:16 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

You don't have to agree on the contents of the boxes.  If I agree to store boxes for you, I can't decide to throw them away because I don't like the completely-legal contents of them without saying anything to you about not wanting to store them anymore.  Assuming the contents are legal, even if someone lied to you about the contents, you can't just make items your own because you say so.

I'm not arguing they're right, I'm postulating what their argument is. That they never would have agreed if they knew it was porn, so they never agreed to store porn. 

It seems like their argument is really just "this stuff isn't good for you, so we threw it out, we did you a favor freeing you of this" (their argument now, or really their reasoning, not necessarily their potential future legal argument).  It would be hard to argue "we never agreed to store porn, but we never told you that you had to remove it, so we secretly trashed it".  They would SEEM to be pretty out of options in terms of "we never agreed to store this"...I'm guessing the argument is more about the value.  

I mean maybe they'll come back and argue that they DID tell him to move it out and he didn't?  I don't know.  There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of legal argument for "I never agreed to store this because it's porn, so I tossed it and just let you continue believing I was storing it for you rather than telling you to take it".  

[resolution]

I don't believe they had the right to destroy the porn, but the did originally let him move in with the condition that he not bring any porn into the house. That doesn't make what they did acceptable though.

www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-sues-parents-allegedly-destroying-his-valuable-porn-collection-n994651

The man's mother told police that she and his father had asked their son not to bring any of his pornography into their house before he moved in because they knew he "had issues with it." The parents kicked him out after a domestic incident, the police report states.

[hoops902]

Apr 16, 2019 9:29:12 GMT -5 resolution said:

I don't believe they had the right to destroy the porn, but the did originally let him move in with the condition that he not bring any porn into the house. That doesn't make what they did acceptable though.

www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-sues-parents-allegedly-destroying-his-valuable-porn-collection-n994651

The man's mother told police that she and his father had asked their son not to bring any of his pornography into their house before he moved in because they knew he "had issues with it." The parents kicked him out after a domestic incident, the police report states.

So maybe this is just me, but the part where the dad said it took "quite a while" to destroy the 12 boxes of porn and the 2 boxes of toys struck me as...odd?  Like how hard is it to actually just destroy or throw away a small number of boxes like that?  I half-expected the next line to be "because I had to look at it all to make sure it was all porn" or "because I had to find batteries to check all of the toys first".

[hoops902]

I also find it a LITTLE bit telling that the man's emails to his father indicate "if you had a problem with my belongings, then tell me, I would have found somewhere else, instead you just said nothing"...with no apparent email back from the father saying "we DID tell you that".  The only indication that the parents told him that he couldn't bring porn is mom's statement to the police after the fact when she knew they were potentially in trouble.  I tend to buy into contemporaneous communication being a bit more reliable than statements to the police after you've been accused of something.

[gs11rmb]

I still don't think they had the right to destroy his property.  I do continue to think that he's overestimating the value.  I read this line in the NBC story:  "he alleged the value of his collection to be $10,000 to $30,000, factoring in his "emotional attachment" to the items."

[justme]

Emotional attachment to porn? 

Welp, this guy sure is making sure that attachment stays because I'm not sure what woman would want a guy with an emotional attachment to porn.   

[hoops902]

Apr 16, 2019 13:08:06 GMT -5 justme said:

Emotional attachment to porn? 

Welp, this guy sure is making sure that attachment stays because I'm not sure what woman would want a guy with an emotional attachment to porn.   

He had 2 boxes of toys, who knows what was in there.  

On a more serious note...lots of people have emotional attachments to "collections".  That's why they have the collections in the first place.  This just happens to sound like kind of an odd collection, but it would still sound weird if he had a bunch of clocks and had an "emotional attachment" to clocks.  Having an emotional attachment to most collections is going to sound kind of odd.

[justme]

Apr 16, 2019 13:12:35 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Apr 16, 2019 13:08:06 GMT -5 justme said:

Emotional attachment to porn? 

Welp, this guy sure is making sure that attachment stays because I'm not sure what woman would want a guy with an emotional attachment to porn.   

He had 2 boxes of toys, who knows what was in there.  

On a more serious note...lots of people have emotional attachments to "collections".  That's why they have the collections in the first place.  This just happens to sound like kind of an odd collection, but it would still sound weird if he had a bunch of clocks and had an "emotional attachment" to clocks.  Having an emotional attachment to most collections is going to sound kind of odd.

I know people have collections, and some get quite caught up in it. But to be emotionally attached to everything? Definitely seems odd. I have a handful of stuffed animals from my childhood, but only 2 have emotional attachment because they're from my dead grandmothers. I also have other small collections that while I'd be bummed if I lost them I can't say I have an emotional attachment to them worth thousands. I'd be ok with just replacing everything. 

[tractor]

Apr 16, 2019 9:37:49 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Apr 16, 2019 9:29:12 GMT -5 resolution said:

I don't believe they had the right to destroy the porn, but the did originally let him move in with the condition that he not bring any porn into the house. That doesn't make what they did acceptable though.

www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-sues-parents-allegedly-destroying-his-valuable-porn-collection-n994651

So maybe this is just me, but the part where the dad said it took "quite a while" to destroy the 12 boxes of porn and the 2 boxes of toys struck me as...odd?  Like how hard is it to actually just destroy or throw away a small number of boxes like that?  I half-expected the next line to be "because I had to look at it all to make sure it was all porn" or "because I had to find batteries to check all of the toys first".

He probably burned it all. Getting those glossy magazine pages to burn takes some time. As for the toys, well they would just melt 🙂

[Tiny]

I 'store' stuff for relatives and friends.   I have a big empty basement (where I keep my "space") and I'm willing to help people out (by avoiding the cost of storage).   I generally work out a 'deal' with the person who's leaving stuff - where if by X date (usually based on 6 months past their expected "move into new digs' date) they haven't retrieved their stuff - it becomes mine to keep, throw away, give away or sell.    I currently "own" a table saw, a shelving unit, and a pinball machine - all of which I really like and find useful.  I sold off a bunch of stuff (wall art, furniture, decorative stuff) and threw away a ton of stuff (you know the junk you know is junk but you just can't part with it).    I don't open boxes until well after the X date - and even then I try to get the owner to come and get their stuff.   

It doesn't sound like the guy had gotten to the X date with his parents.   It sounds like the parents just went threw his stuff and tossed what they didn't like.    I don't agree with this. 

That said, I'm wondering why the parents went thru their son's stuff...  maybe the porn was stored in clear plastic bins?      I'm kind of on the guys side.  Even if his parents didn't like the stuff they were storing they shouldn't have throw it away.   I'm not a big fan of porn.  But as a collector of "old stuff" - I have to wonder if the "porn" was what we all think of as "porn" - especially if it was pre-1980's kind of stuff.   (Have you all ever looked at WWII plane's nose art?   or pin up art?  there were all sorts of risque (it's porn) craptastic crap from the 40's and 50's - ashtrays, bar war, magazines, wall art  that probably IS collectible and valuable.)  And then there's video - I can imagine the old super 8mm films are quite collectible (hey, I was baffled by the modern movie Super 8 -- I thought for sure it was about porn.... but no, it was about kids and their super 8 camera.... who knew).     

I would side with the guy.  I don't parents have the right to treat their children like teenagers for their entire life.   

[NastyWoman]

Apr 16, 2019 9:40:59 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

I also find it a LITTLE bit telling that the man's emails to his father indicate "if you had a problem with my belongings, then tell me, I would have found somewhere else, instead you just said nothing"...with no apparent email back from the father saying "we DID tell you that".  The only indication that the parents told him that he couldn't bring porn is mom's statement to the police after the fact when she knew they were potentially in trouble.  I tend to buy into contemporaneous communication being a bit more reliable than statements to the police after you've been accused of something.

This guy is 40 years old and he still didn't know his parents would have problems with him keeping porn in their house? I think nobody is telling the truth in this story, but if this were my son he could be sleeping under a bridge and I still would not let him in my house again.

BTW, the parents could have told him (as in verbally) that he couldn't keep that stuff in their house and there would be no proof that they had.

[haapai]

I want to know if he declared the value of his collectibles when he was going through the divorce. 

[Deleted]

Apr 17, 2019 18:49:51 GMT -5 haapai said:

I want to know if he declared the value of his collectibles when he was going through the divorce. 

[hoops902]

Apr 17, 2019 16:55:15 GMT -5 NastyWoman said:

Apr 16, 2019 9:40:59 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

I also find it a LITTLE bit telling that the man's emails to his father indicate "if you had a problem with my belongings, then tell me, I would have found somewhere else, instead you just said nothing"...with no apparent email back from the father saying "we DID tell you that".  The only indication that the parents told him that he couldn't bring porn is mom's statement to the police after the fact when she knew they were potentially in trouble.  I tend to buy into contemporaneous communication being a bit more reliable than statements to the police after you've been accused of something.

This guy is 40 years old and he still didn't know his parents would have problems with him keeping porn in their house? I think nobody is telling the truth in this story, but if this were my son he could be sleeping under a bridge and I still would not let him in my house again.

BTW, the parents could have told him (as in verbally) that he couldn't keep that stuff in their house and there would be no proof that they had.

Even if they did tell him, they still don't have a legal right to throw his stuff out.  

That said, I wasn't really speaking to proof of whether they told him.  They claim after the fact that they told him he couldn't, but the emails at the time supposedly have him saying "You should have told me".  A reasonable person who had already told him would respond "we DID tell you that you schmuck".  I'm not saying they had to TELL him via email, but it's quite telling when someone says "You should have done this" and the person doesn't respond with some version of "I did", but then later claims that "I did" only after being sued.

If there are discussions about how you should have acted in the moment, that are documented in writing, and you never once mention you took that specific action (even when someone directly tells you that you should have at the time)...but once sued you say you did...that doesn't seem to pass a reasonable standard for being true (for all we know, there is an email out there where they said "we did tell you that", but the parents haven't mentioned it which seems...odd).  If you told your kid he couldn't bring his porn into your house, you threw it out, and he later emailed you saying "You should have just told me I couldn't have it there rather than sitting quietly by and saying nothing then tossing it"...it's hard for me to imagine you wouldn't lead off your response back "I did tell you that" in some variation.

[Wisconsin Beth]

My uncle had his porn collection burn in a garage fire.  His insurance company didn't want to pay out for it but eventually did.  I don't remember a dollar amount though.  But he had stuff from the 70s and 80s, I think.  Maybe Hustler or Playboy?  But as I understand it, it was all magazines, stored in weather resistant bins.