Robbery Of The Car

[varik]

Jane lived with Ted for around 6 years. She got out financing and purchased a brand new, large RV by which they journeyed for around 5 of these decades. She also purchased subscriptions in two of the RV ideologies businesses, a minumum of one which was $5000 annually.
A year before she left him and shifted into her childis house, then into her own, She informed him he might have the RV if he called it inhis name.  He never did, although he lived in it for around a year. Throughout that period, he settled about the mortgage. He made no repairs, allow the insurance mistake. She's it back today, after having called law enforcement for support.
Because she decided that he might have it only when he paid her mortgage down, and never did, may he be charged with theft or other things?

[Jerardo]

Think about the next issue.
If you were an area assistant district attorney and you got this circumstance to test, do you believe that you might pursuade twelve unfamiliar jurors that this scenario truly comprises "robbery of the automobile"?
Easily were the neighborhood DA, based exclusively on which you've mentioned, even if fees were submitted, I'd proceed to ignore them in a pulse.
That one is just a civil issue between them, not at all something for your criminal justice system.

[Amwolf]

Its not theft because he had permission to use the vehicle plus she never reported it as stolen. It doesnt matter if there was a condition attached to it or not.

[Fitzwilliam]

M Read:may he be charged with robbery
No.M Read:or other things?
Truly nothing legal.
Everything you have is just a violation of an oral contract.M Read:Because she decided that he might have it only when he paid her mortgage off
Difficulty there's that her contract appears to have been that he might have possession if he paid the mortgage down.
But because he did not get title to it I do not see her having the ability to impose the mortgage benefit area of the contract.
And because he did make the funds while she'd it I do not see her having any financial damages to sue for.
Since she's it back her best guess would be to simply say good riddance to Ted and possibly make use of the RV or market it.
Nothing more silly than handling a shattered love.