No problem
She too will collect her machine back after 9 years of full payment of her debt

Woman B has a receipt for when she bought it for herself or when she sold it to Woman A?

If it's the former, she can't prove she sold it. If she can prove she sold it, she again cannot prove ownership.

No case.

Get yours for just #1200

Click the link to get yours:

https:///message/ILIOQHCSUVDSF1

Let the woman A deny that she ever took any sewing machine. Almost 9 years? Let her claim she can't remember collecting any sewing machine not to talk of loaning any money to her.
Case will be dismissed! Simple!

Ehinjuola:
Hello NLanders,
I got caught up with something on my neck in my neighboood recently.

There's this woman (A) who bought a sewing machine from one woman (B) 9 years ago, suddenly woman B just came from nowhere to come and claim the sewing machine that she sold years back that she only use the machine as a collateral from woman A that she didn't sell it for her.

Now the issue is Woman A has sold the sewing Machine and also insisted that if truly woman's (B) use it as collateral for how many years now she would wish if Woman B paid her back with the interest on the money which the money is way much more than money for 100 sewing machines.

Now questions is, how will I go abt it cause I happened to be one of the landlords in my area( I guess I am the youngest) and we are called to come and judge over the matter.
1. Woman's A doesn't posses the receipt of the sewing machine and as already sold the sewing machine
2. Woman's B want the machine at any cost claiming she has the receipt with her and she will use it against woman's A in court ( If the judgement didn't suite her taste in landlord meeting)


Note: They've gone to police station around early February which they've told woman's A abt the important of receipt and also let it known to woman's B that collateral shouldn't be more than a year and after that the person you borrow something from might as well claim the ownership what you use as collateral (Don't know maybe there's any law backing it though)

Abeg let it gain more audience by pushing it to front page thanks.

. The lawalllws collateral to last for about a year. If it evident that you can not redem the collateral it will be sold and your remaining money will be returned to you if it is sold more than the money borrowed . In this case no written agreement btwn And B. For reconciliation the law on collateral will be apiled since there is no written agreement between them. It is however good that there are witnesses who can testify on this transaction btw them.

The matter is simple. She used it as collateral 9 years ago. Fine, let her pay back her debt since 9 years plus the acrued interest.

Then, victim A, after collecting repayment should go and but another machine (brand new) of the same maker for her.

From this, let's see who will lose.

..

darling2222:
Many stories like this do happen, and one very important thing is, As I read, Vitim A is the rightful owner,but sure she will have to lose her property, because she can't provide the recept, which Vitim B claims to have
So ,the initial mistake she made was she didn't request for the recept when she bought it from Vitim B

The very important thing here now is the recept,so we shouldn't make such expensive mistake next time

It may not just be as easy as that.
The essential thing here is that there was a transaction between A and B.
I also believe that the transaction was done unofficially.
So the issue of who is in possession of the product's receipt may not be the determinant of how the case will go.
Woman A can still insist that when she bought the machine, B told her that she has lost the receipt not knowing that she purposely kept it to make trouble in the future.
So long as the issue of B accusing A of stealing the machine, B has more edge against B.

If B cannot provide the collateral agreement between her and A, she should not also bring up the issue of her possessing the receipt as an evidence cos it will be knocked out on the basis of unofficial transaction of gentleman's agreement.
If the machine was as a collateral, why didn't B came for her collateral and redeeming the agreement?
If actually finance was her problem, how many time did she approach A for extension of the agreement?
What was the duration of the said agreement?
An agreement that was supposed to last for 1yr and the borrower kept quiet for 9yrs means gross default of an agreement which gives the lender right to possess the collateral.
If actually that B wants to repossess the collateral, she will need to discuss with A and agree with her on her own terms or forfeit the collateral.

If I am A, I will even go with the option that she used the machine as a collateral cos that will give me more edge against B.

Poverty so after 9years she now remember that she left sewing machine somewhere?! Where new machines are already in the market, maybe your community should contribute money and buy her new one. Now the machine is not even with her again but if she kept it in her care it's a different matter she should pay her back for her machine. Then if A claim to buy the machine why was she not given the recept then, and how much did she pay then? My judgment if she was any amount then case closed!

No need of vawulence at all

Just calm down very easy to settle

Lady B is saying she had the receipt of the machine, fine no problem

From the write up, one Lady A doesn't have any agreement paper either she bought the machine or lend money to Lady B, it shows also that lady B can't prove she gave her machine to Lady A cause no evidence as well

Lady A to stand on the ground of she knows nothing of such period

No be everything vawulence dey solve

Ehinjuola:
Hello NLanders,
I got caught up with something on my neck in my neighboood recently.

There's this woman (A) who bought a sewing machine from one woman (B) 9 years ago, suddenly woman B just came from nowhere to come and claim the sewing machine that she sold years back that she only use the machine as a collateral from woman A that she didn't sell it for her.

Now the issue is Woman A has sold the sewing Machine and also insisted that if truly woman's (B) use it as collateral for how many years now she would wish if Woman B paid her back with the interest on the money which the money is way much more than money for 100 sewing machines.

Now questions is, how will I go abt it cause I happened to be one of the landlords in my area( I guess I am the youngest) and we are called to come and judge over the matter.
1. Woman's A doesn't posses the receipt of the sewing machine and as already sold the sewing machine
2. Woman's B want the machine at any cost claiming she has the receipt with her and she will use it against woman's A in court ( If the judgement didn't suite her taste in landlord meeting)


Note: They've gone to police station around early February which they've told woman's A abt the important of receipt and also let it known to woman's B that collateral shouldn't be more than a year and after that the person you borrow something from might as well claim the ownership what you use as collateral (Don't know maybe there's any law backing it though)

Abeg let it gain more audience by pushing it to front page thanks.

woman A should go and get Receipt in any sales Rep and be calm.

Woman B is such a wicked soul.

Ehinjuola:
Hello NLanders,
I got caught up with something on my neck in my neighboood recently.

There's this woman (A) who bought a sewing machine from one woman (B) 9 years ago, suddenly woman B just came from nowhere to come and claim the sewing machine that she sold years back that she only use the machine as a collateral from woman A that she didn't sell it for her.

Now the issue is Woman A has sold the sewing Machine and also insisted that if truly woman's (B) use it as collateral for how many years now she would wish if Woman B paid her back with the interest on the money which the money is way much more than money for 100 sewing machines.

Now questions is, how will I go abt it cause I happened to be one of the landlords in my area( I guess I am the youngest) and we are called to come and judge over the matter.
1. Woman's A doesn't posses the receipt of the sewing machine and as already sold the sewing machine
2. Woman's B want the machine at any cost claiming she has the receipt with her and she will use it against woman's A in court ( If the judgement didn't suite her taste in landlord meeting)


Note: They've gone to police station around early February which they've told woman's A abt the important of receipt and also let it known to woman's B that collateral shouldn't be more than a year and after that the person you borrow something from might as well claim the ownership what you use as collateral (Don't know maybe there's any law backing it though)

Abeg let it gain more audience by pushing it to front page thanks.

This is why you don't open your mouth until you have spoken with a liar (sorry, lawyer)! A good lawyer could spin the story in a manner that would get woman B off the hook!

This is beyond me but wait

I will just deny any business dealing, with the holder of the receipt since there is no witness to any transaction, and the case would definitely change to her proving she gave me the sewing machine, otherwise I can just bring any receipt and claim i gave you something something

Scottz:
Victim A bought the machine
Nigeria happened to victim B she’s broke and hence got an idea from an adviser to take a bold step of reclaiming what doesn’t belong to her anymore because she’s got the receipt.

Nigerian courts will embarrass you of course
Victim B will win the case
Except victim A paid through bank transfer and a proof of payment is shown

the victim B said she did not sell it oo, but victim A make a very big mistake for not collecting the receipt

How could old deal of nine years come wake up, on top mere sewing machine poverty nah bad thing

[quote author=Ehinjuola post=112362875]Hello NLanders,
I got caught up with something on my neck in my neighboood recently.

There's this woman (A) who bought a sewing machine from one woman (B) 9 years ago, suddenly woman B just came from nowhere to come and claim the sewing machine that she sold years back that she only use the machine as a collateral from woman A that she didn't sell it for her.

Now the issue is Woman A has sold the sewing Machine and also insisted that if truly woman's (B) use it as collateral for how many years now she would wish if Woman B paid her back with the interest on the money which the money is way much more than money for 100 sewing machines.

Now questions is, how will I go abt it cause I happened to be one of the landlords in my area( I guess I am the youngest) and we are called to come and judge over the matter.
1. Woman's A doesn't posses the receipt of the sewing machine and as already sold the sewing machine
2. Woman's B want the machine at any cost claiming she has the receipt with her and she will use it against woman's A in court ( If the judgement didn't suite her taste in landlord meeting)


Note: They've gone to police station around early February which they've told woman's A abt the important of receipt and also let it known to woman's B that collateral shouldn't be more than a year and after that the person you borrow something from might as well claim the ownership what you use as collateral (Don't know maybe there's any law backing it though)

Abeg let it gain more audience by pushing it to front page thanks.
A very simple case, business law states that any loan repayment longer than 6months to 1year is called a bad debt,so woman A will win the case in court as she can agree to pay #200 as her pocket reach due to how buhari keep her situation.

Ehinjuola:
Hello NLanders,
I got caught up with something on my neck in my neighboood recently.

There's this woman (A) who bought a sewing machine from one woman (B) 9 years ago, suddenly woman B just came from nowhere to come and claim the sewing machine that she sold years back that she only use the machine as a collateral from woman A that she didn't sell it for her.

Now the issue is Woman A has sold the sewing Machine and also insisted that if truly woman's (B) use it as collateral for how many years now she would wish if Woman B paid her back with the interest on the money which the money is way much more than money for 100 sewing machines.

Now questions is, how will I go abt it cause I happened to be one of the landlords in my area( I guess I am the youngest) and we are called to come and judge over the matter.
1. Woman's A doesn't posses the receipt of the sewing machine and as already sold the sewing machine
2. Woman's B want the machine at any cost claiming she has the receipt with her and she will use it against woman's A in court ( If the judgement didn't suite her taste in landlord meeting)


Note: They've gone to police station around early February which they've told woman's A abt the important of receipt and also let it known to woman's B that collateral shouldn't be more than a year and after that the person you borrow something from might as well claim the ownership what you use as collateral (Don't know maybe there's any law backing it though)

Abeg let it gain more audience by pushing it to front page thanks.

This is a NO case...
Except you don't understand the issue.

First thing you need to establish is what truthfully transpired between the duo....sales transaction or lending and borrow?

If woman B can not establish the fact that she borrowed money from woman A and used the item in question, sewing machine, as collateral through documented evidence, she can't establish any case legally.

She needs to prove that she used the sewing machine as collateral.

The time frame is another thing tho but she should prove that the machine was used as collateral firstly and not sold

Let's go to court, I hope there's also a written agreement of the collateral if not I will (A) tell the Judge the amount B used as collateral in exchange for the machine is x5 of what she is giving me.

No one has monopoly of madness

I wish I'm Woman A.
Then I'll know what to do.

No case, according to Nigerian law u cannot adjudicate on a contract beyound 7 years. It has been established there is a contract between both parties since no hard document. We assume a verbal contract. After 5-7years you can not reopen any contract. For B to have kept quite beyound 5 years no case. Except she had evidence to show she contested any part of the deal within 5 years.

Is there or are there any evidence to prove that woman B sold or gave the Sewing Machine to Woman A?
I guess there is none since the receipt is still with woman B.
The thing is that the court is not moved by sentiments but by evidence and facts.

If you guys try to settle this case within yourselves and there is no headway and woman B decides to go to court, Woman A should deny ever receiving any Sewing Machine from woman B.

Since woman B claims she gave the Sewing Machine to woman A but she is still in possession of the receipt, what proof does she have that she really gave the Machine to Woman A?

Even if there was a bank transaction which I doubt there was, as long as there is no transaction summary where the Sewing Machine was mentioned, Woman A can conveniently deny ever receiving any Sewing Machine from Woman B.

Woman A can even claim that the money transferred (if there is evidence of any money transferred) to Woman B was a loan that Woman B is yet to pay back. Woman B might argue that there is no signed document to prove that the money was a loan and can say that the money was payments for something else.

If there is no proof of financial transactions, Woman A should stand her ground that no such transactions ever happened between her and Woman B.

At the end of the day, there would be no case because Woman B does not have any proof that she gave Woman A any Sewing Machine.

Since there are no evidences, any of them can claim anything. Woman A can even claim that woman B has an outstanding debt to pay based on the interests agreed after a certain period of time that Woman B fails to repay her debt.

This matter should be Claims vs Claims.
Nobody had monopoly over madness.
Two of them should kukuma mad together.

OP from what you put up there
1. It is likely woman B use the sewing machine as collateral for borrowing a loan
2. Woman B refuses respect her agreement for 8years
3. Woman A sold the sewing machine after she was tired of waiting for woman B to make a refund
4. Woman B gets upset because woman A sold her property
Note: both woman B and woman A is @ fault Woman B: for refusing to honour her agreement for over 8years
Woman A: for selling woman B sewing machine without an initial agreement letter stating that the property will be forfeited within a specified period if woman B refuses to honour her agreement.
* Woman B will get justice in court because she has a receipt of the purchase of her sewing machine.
* Woman A doesn't have an agreement letter that states clearly the term of repayment and the condition(she is likely to loose the case)
Since the matter is not going to court yet, ask both parties what was involve, I'm very sure woman B borrowed some money from woman A, woman B should be asked to refund the money she borrowed with interest of over 8years equivalent to the current exchange rate, and woman A should be asked to purchase a new sewing machine.

Ehinjuola:
Hello NLanders,
I got caught up with something on my neck in my neighboood recently.

There's this woman (A) who bought a sewing machine from one woman (B) 9 years ago, suddenly woman B just came from nowhere to come and claim the sewing machine that she sold years back that she only use the machine as a collateral from woman A that she didn't sell it for her.

Now the issue is Woman A has sold the sewing Machine and also insisted that if truly woman's (B) use it as collateral for how many years now she would wish if Woman B paid her back with the interest on the money which the money is way much more than money for 100 sewing machines.

Now questions is, how will I go abt it cause I happened to be one of the landlords in my area( I guess I am the youngest) and we are called to come and judge over the matter.
1. Woman's A doesn't posses the receipt of the sewing machine and as already sold the sewing machine
2. Woman's B want the machine at any cost claiming she has the receipt with her and she will use it against woman's A in court ( If the judgement didn't suite her taste in landlord meeting)


Note: They've gone to police station around early February which they've told woman's A abt the important of receipt and also let it known to woman's B that collateral shouldn't be more than a year and after that the person you borrow something from might as well claim the ownership what you use as collateral (Don't know maybe there's any law backing it though)

Abeg let it gain more audience by pushing it to front page thanks.

Na poverty cause all these one. Fighting and going to court because of sewing machine of 9years ago for that matter. Can she even competently prove that she gave out sewing machine as collateral? Any written documents or they are both just frustrated and looking for ways to vent.

there is something called equitable right of redemption in mortgage law (read it), and also when a morgagor will be estopped from redeeming after time to redeem has elapsed (read also)

Irrespective of the fact that woman A had no receipt, she still has an equitable lien over the machine and can approach the court to compel woman B to perfect the contract.

also since the buyer has purchased the machine for value without notice, then he acquired a full right over the machine and such machine cannot be retrieved from the Seller being woman A or B

Woman A was at fault for saying the truth she should have told her the machine was burgled along with her shop some years back and case closed but now she will have to purchase another machine for her because she claimed to have sold it which is not right, needless to worry woman B will pay back the money she borrowed along with accrued interest of 9 years it really shouldn't have been a case but the receipt put it's on

Ehinjuola:
Hello NLanders,
I got caught up with something on my neck in my neighboood recently.

There's this woman (A) who bought a sewing machine from one woman (B) 9 years ago, suddenly woman B just came from nowhere to come and claim the sewing machine that she sold years back that she only use the machine as a collateral from woman A that she didn't sell it for her.

Now the issue is Woman A has sold the sewing Machine and also insisted that if truly woman's (B) use it as collateral for how many years now she would wish if Woman B paid her back with the interest on the money which the money is way much more than money for 100 sewing machines.

Now questions is, how will I go abt it cause I happened to be one of the landlords in my area( I guess I am the youngest) and we are called to come and judge over the matter.
1. Woman's A doesn't posses the receipt of the sewing machine and as already sold the sewing machine
2. Woman's B want the machine at any cost claiming she has the receipt with her and she will use it against woman's A in court ( If the judgement didn't suite her taste in landlord meeting)


Note: They've gone to police station around early February which they've told woman's A abt the important of receipt and also let it known to woman's B that collateral shouldn't be more than a year and after that the person you borrow something from might as well claim the ownership what you use as collateral (Don't know maybe there's any law backing it though)

Abeg let it gain more audience by pushing it to front page thanks.

Possession is a big part of proving ownership. The woman voluntarily gave up the machine for money. Either a loan or sold it. She now came back after 9 years. She has no right to the machine due to the time that has passed. Let her go to court. She will be wasting her time. Why is she coming after 9 years?

ikeno:
if you watch "judge Judy",then there's no case at all.victim B sold a sewing machine 9yrs ago now she wants to reclaim it.
what if victim A's shop was burgled and the machine was stolen.
or the machine got spoiled and she had to discard it.
in my own opinion, victim A has no case.she can't have her cake and eat it.
she sold her sewing machine 9yrs ago and she was paid now she wants to collect another money after 9yrs.

You're confusing us here o

Shey na Victim A sell Machine 9 yrs ago nae?

GreatAdvice:
This is a very simple case and anyone with half a brain should know that Woman B gave it to Woman A as collateral. It doesn't matter if its 9yrs ago or 9 days ago; Woman A needs to pay the money needed to buy a brand new machine in 2022, plus an annualised interest of 30% and severance pay for all the pain and suffering she has inflicted on Woman B. This is a very sad case, you should never sell someone's property that was handed over to you as collateral unless they default on their debt agreement.

9 years seems More like an overdue debt default....

Afonjamuslim24:
Only cone headed Afonjas from the muddy sad west can be this unreasonable in their dealings with fellow humans. They think just like their Slave master, from sad west Iragbiji who still thinks Lagos is his after so many years.

Can u tell the whole world what you gain from this your pointless statement.