Property Sold Without Permission

[NRivas1121]

My question involves criminal law for the state of: California

Hi, I need some help here.
I moved in to my husband's house within the past year, where he lives with his brother and mother. We received a gift from a family friend, they were couches. They were not new, but they were in very good condition. My husband and I are planning on moving out by the end of this year, so we thought it wouldn't be a problem keeping our couches on the property. I came back from work maybe 2 weeks after we were given the couches and they were gone. My husband's brother decides, without permission, to sell our couches. He kept the money, and now we can't get anything from him. We were not planning on selling them, we wanted to keep them. His brother claims, that because I am not on the lease for the house, that I don't have a right to them. I told him that it was our property and that he was not allowed to sell them without permission. If he did not want them on the property, shouldn't he have told us to move them off of the property? He never once gave us a warning or anything regarding having them there. He just sold them. I want him to either a) pay us the money that he received for our property or b) to replace the property he sold without permission. How can I do this?

He will not and does not believe that we had a right to those couches, even though they were given to us.

[budwad]

Let's start with who owns the house? You say it is your husband's house but lives there with brother and mother. Who is the owner, husband, mother, or brother? Anyone living in the house who is not on the deed is a tenant and not in control of anything left on the property. Your brother in law may not have anything to say about the couches let alone take possession and sell them. But since you say you and your husband are planning to move out should we assume that the home is owned by your mother in law?

Did she give the BIL permission to sell the couches? Perhaps you should be talking to her first.

You may have to take your BIL to small claims court if he remains uncooperative.

[NRivas1121]

His mother owns the house. I will ask her about it. If she gave him permission to take my belongings then i guess i need to confront her about it. Thanks anyway *sigh

[adjusterjack]

This is between your husband and his brother. If your husband doesn't have the backbone to deal with his brother, then nothing will come of this and I suggest you and your husband get your own place as soon as you can. Nothing good will ever come of that living arrangement.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Anyone living in the house who is not on the deed is a tenant and not in control of anything left on the property.

First, a person living in a house can be an occupant, without being either a tenant or an owner.

Second, the fact that a person is an occupant (or a tenant) does not mean that they have no rights in relation to property that they leave in the premises when they move out. If a person is a tenant and has left personal property in the rental unit, the landlord should follow the procedure outlined in California Civil Code, Sec. 1951.3.

Third, it does not appear that they moved out -- it appears that the other son simply took it upon himself to sell the furniture and pocket the money.

Fourth, the homeowner is not able to legally authorize her son to sell somebody else's property.

[budwad]

First, a person living in a house can be an occupant, without being either a tenant or an owner.

OK, I got that. So what is the difference between an occupant and a tenant and in this case, would either be in a position of selling someone else's property? I suspect not.

Second, the fact that a person is an occupant (or a tenant) does not mean that they have no rights in relation to property that they leave in the premises when they move out. If a person is a tenant and has left personal property in the rental unit, the landlord should follow the procedure outlined in California Civil Code, Sec. 1951.3.

But in this case we are talking about one tenant or occupant selling another occupant or tenant's property. It's not about his own property when he moves out.

Third, it does not appear that they moved out -- it appears that the other son simply took it upon himself to sell the furniture and pocket the money.

No argument there sir.

Fourth, the homeowner is not able to legally authorize her son to sell somebody else's property.

I agree with that also but in this case, OP said they stored the property on the premises. Now was that with or without the owner's permission? Who is really the culprit? The mother that says, "Get that stuff out of here" or the brother in law that wants to make a fast buck?"

[Mr. Knowitall]

So what is the difference between an occupant and a tenant and in this case, would either be in a position of selling someone else's property?

Living in somebody else's home with their permission and without paying rent will generally make you an occupant. Occupants own their own personal property.

But in this case we are talking about one tenant or occupant selling another occupant or tenant's property. It's not about his own property when he moves out.

I was addressing adjusterjack's statements.

I agree with that also but in this case, OP said they stored the property on the premises.

And?

Now was that with or without the owner's permission?

If mom didn't want her kid to bring furniture into her home, mom can tell her kid to remove the furniture. It's not hers (or her other son's) to sell.

Who is really the culprit? The mother that says, "Get that stuff out of here" or the brother in law that wants to make a fast buck?"

We don't know that mom said a word. One way or another it appears that mom is the landlord and does not reside in the house, herself, which would basically make it none of her business.