[at-l] Stiffed by Hiker

[icw39@ncfreedom.net (Clark Wright)]

Well, I've held out as long as I could stand it! :)  Here are my
thoughts, based on my legal practice and experience as owner of a small
outdoor sporting goods store:

1)  Writing on a closed account is indeed worse than bouncing a check on
an open account.
2)  People make mistakes - both unintentionally, and intentionally.
3)  Banks make mistakes, both as to NSFs and occasionally re labelling
an account as closed, when it is not.
4)  People who pay with credit cards also stiff merchants sometimes,
using the very consumer friendly provisions of the federal credit laws.
5)  It is dangerous to speak in a public forum like this of specific
individuals as having committed crimes, calling them by name and
address, no less!  None of us can possibly know all the relevant facts,
and some discretion is usually the better part of valor.
6)  Speaking in more general terms about this incident is perfectly
appropriate - i.e., something like "be on the lookout," with some
general description of the person.
7)  In North Carolina, as in most states, it is also a crime to use the
threat of criminal prosecution [i.e., the threat of swearing out a
warrant for writing a bad check] as the means to collect a private debt
[i.e., as a threat seeking to get the check paid].  Having said that, it
happens all the time . . .
8)  In general, accepting checks from hikers comes down to a personal
decision, made by the person at the time.  In this case, it looks like
she felt sorry for the guy, and because of that bent her own rules about
not taking out-of-town or out-of-state checks.  Assuming it is not a
large sum of money, my personal feelings would be to just leave it at
that, with the general warning out there for other merchants and folks
who may encounter the fellow further along the way.  And, I would offer
- again only my personal feeling - that if the right person comes along
in the future, a merchant should consider bending the rules as a
charitable gesture again, even if burned a few times in the past.  The
key is to use your judgment, only do it for small amounts, AND recognize
that one of the reasons you get so mad when you get burned, is because
you both know you were trying to do some good, AND - deep down - you
know it was your own decision [i.e., "fault"] for deciding to bend your
own rules . . .

I do not mean to judge anyone here; only to suggest not judging quite so
sharply and publicly on the list where there are criminal and legal
overtones.

I hope all of the merchants who help hikers out so awesomely on and
around the AT have a good, safe business year!

Hike on,

Thru-Thinker

KellyGoVols@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 4/7/02 4:33:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> shane@theplacewithnoname.com writes:
> 
> > ISF is very different from writing a check on a closed
> > account.  The first is sometimes explainable, the second is
> > premeditated fraud.  .
> 
> You are absolutely right.  The State Attorney's Office treat bad checks as a
> misdemeanor.  Normally, a letter stating your intent to prosecute will be
> enough to get your money.  However, writing a check on a closed account is
> considered a felony (at least in Florida) and is grounds for mandatory
> prosecution regardless if you get your money.  I'd call my local D.A. or
> State Attorney's Office.  In my opinion, people that do this sort of thing
> are the scum of the earth.
> 
> Kelly
> 
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
> _______________________________________________
> >From the AT-L mailing list         est. 1995
> Need help?  http://www.at-l.org
> Archives: http://www.backcountry.net/arch/at/
> Change your options or unsubscribe:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l