Robert Edward Auctions has filed suit against a New York Catholic school...

[thekingofclout]

is the lead into this story...

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com...ool-loan-deal/

[oldjudge]

After reading the story, Rob did exactly what he should have. Do you have an issue with something he did?

[prewarsports]

I agree with Jay, you gotta do what you gotta do to protect yourself, your business, and your consignors. I hope Rob has a big bottle of Ibuprofin, this whole mess sounds like the headache from hell.

[jcmtiger]

Sounds like the right thing to do.

Joe

[ethicsprof]

Rob L is a prince of a fellow.
I'm sorry that he has to go through all of this stress and trauma.

all the best, Rob
barry

[gabrinus]

3rd Bass, wow, now that's funny. Maybe they can get a loan from Vanilla Ice.

has this been goin on for a while?? I thought I heard about this a while back like last yr some time.

[Exhibitman]

The lawsuit reads as a pretty sordid tale of thievery and fraud on the part of that father-son team...If accurate it sounds like the father embezzled the funds to give to his son then paid them back under threat of possible prosecution using either the funds from REA that were secured by items pledged to REA or using the items that had been pledged to REA as security for another loan.

[Peter_Spaeth]

i wonder what became of the memorabilia used as collateral that could not be authenticated to Rob's satisfaction? If the story dealt with that I missed it.

[M's_Fan]

This is the danger of providing cash advances to consignors, if the consigned items turn out to be fake, you've just handed over cash for nothing, and the consignor will certainly dispute your lack-of-authenticity claim, which is a mess that lands in court.

I've wondered what sort of interest rate REA charges on their cash advances, it has to be high (or should be high) for them to take on such crazy risk.

I also wonder how many people do the cash advance thing with REA, it might just not be worth it...

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

The lawsuit reads as a pretty sordid tale of thievery and fraud on the part of that father-son team...If accurate it sounds like the father embezzled the funds to give to his son then paid them back under threat of possible prosecution using either the funds from REA that were secured by items pledged to REA or using the items that had been pledged to REA as security for another loan.

Beyond the minor miracle of Nash's father not being criminally charged, how does he avoid being fired? Who does he have pictures of?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Beyond the minor miracle of Nash's father not being criminally charged, how does he avoid being fired? Who does he have pictures of?

Geez Mr. Defense Attorney are you assuming just cause it's in a complaint on information and belief, that it's true?

[calvindog]

No, Mr. Civil Lawyer, I'n assuming it because I can read:

"Ray Nash and lawyers representing Bishop Ford and its president declined requests for interviews from the Daily News. Bishop Ford is being counseled by Rubenstein Public Relations - the firm that advised Alex Rodriguez during last year's steroid scandal - and in a statement issued through RPR, Bishop Ford officials acknowledge that they had discovered during a 2008 audit that Ray Nash had "loaned" his son $52,551.60 in 2007.

"The loan was not authorized by the school and would not have been permitted by the school," the statement says. "Upon discovery of the loan, Mr. Nash was directed by the Board of Trustees to repay the loan immediately. Thereafter, in early April 2008, the loan was immediately repaid."

In an e-mail to the Daily News, Peter Nash acknowledged his father gave him school money to stave off foreclosure of his Cooperstown home. "I was loaned about $50,000 from the Bishop Ford Development account, through my father, to make a payment related to the mortgage on my Cooperstown home," he wrote."

Ray Nash took school funds and spent them for personal use. He did it secretly and did not pay it back until an audit turned it up. Even if there existed a contemporaneous loan document between Ray and his son (which you know full well there was not) it's still improper. It wasn't Ray's money to spend, much like it's not a secretary's money to spend when she buys herself jewelry with her boss's Platinum card.

As I said, I'm not sure what's the bigger miracle: Nash not being fired or not being indicted.

[barrysloate]

There is no interest charged on cash advances, and it's not a crazy risk. I gave out cash advances regularly in my auctions. It's a pretty standard practice. It just needs to be done carefully.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yes I read that but given that he has not been prosecuted or fired, maybe there were extenuating circumstances, or there is more to the story.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

i wonder what became of the memorabilia used as collateral that could not be authenticated to Rob's satisfaction? If the story dealt with that I missed it.

Maybe you'll read about it at haulsofshame.com someday?


Yeah, probably not.

[calvindog]

There really can't be any extenuating circumstances. The school -- whose money it is -- denied that it permitted the 'loan' or even knew about the loan. That't it. It doesn't make a difference if Nash and his son had loan agreements in place, it wasn't his money to give to his son just because his son is an unemployed imbecile with no money.

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Beyond the minor miracle of Nash's father not being criminally charged, how does he avoid being fired? Who does he have pictures of?

That's funny Jeff. At a Catholic Church, the question might be...'Who DOESN'T he have pictures of."

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by thekingofclout

That's funny Jeff. At a Catholic Church, the question might be...'Who DOESN'T he have pictures of."

What's that supposed to mean?

[ChiefBenderForever]

If the court doesn't favor REA in this suit, don't they have to pay all the attorney fee's, which would probably be more than the 52k they are going after ?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by thekingofclout

That's funny Jeff. At a Catholic Church, the question might be...'Who DOESN'T he have pictures of."

Word.

[Exhibitman]

Having advised business clients in employee embezzlement cases in the past, usually the attitude of the employer is (1) we don't want to look stupid or incompetent to our shareholders/directors/bosses (which we will if this gets out), and (2) we don't want to go through the time-suckage of prosecuting a crime, and (3) we don't want to trigger a retaliatory lawsuit (workers comp, wage claims, defamation or sexual harassment--take your pick because I've seen thieves file any or all of them), so if we get the money back quietly and the employee leaves after signing a full release, we're done.

[nolemmings]

the case is incredibly weak against the school. REA will lose, and bringing the school into what appears clear to me as a personal feud between Lifson and the Nashes is bad form.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It does seem attenuated. The school was unjustly enriched because it allowed an employee who embezzled funds to pay them back?

[benjulmag]

Sordid tales more often than not have a way of sorting themselves out. When they do, the full truth and the full picture emerge. Presumably that will happen in this instance. It'll be interesting to see if what we know now is only the tip of the iceberg.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Having advised business clients in employee embezzlement cases in the past, usually the attitude of the employer is (1) we don't want to look stupid or incompetent to our shareholders/directors/bosses (which we will if this gets out), and (2) we don't want to go through the time-suckage of prosecuting a crime, and (3) we don't want to trigger a retaliatory lawsuit (workers comp, wage claims, defamation or sexual harassment--take your pick because I've seen thieves file any or all of them), so if we get the money back quietly and the employee leaves after signing a full release, we're done.

I worked for a place that had fired a business manager for stealing about 15K.
first try was to keep him on till he repaid. He stole just enough to cover the payments. so he was fired.

About a year and a half later they needed another business manager.
Guess who they hired?
And guess what happened almost immediately.


Steve B