Bob Nersesian guest again
Did they let him keep the chip? Surely he has a friend that plays at a decent level in poker, or some other game that he could pawn the chip off. Or hell, I guess he could just go buy in with $5k cash at like craps, play for 20 min and cash out to obtain another one? Or would they track the chocolates that hard they he would still have trouble cashing 2 out over the next week or two?Quote: WizardI've wondered that too. In all fairness, we've only heard Nolan's version of the story.
Quote: RomesDid they let him keep the chip? Surely he has a friend that plays at a decent level in poker, or some other game that he could pawn the chip off. Or hell, I guess he could just go buy in with $5k cash at like craps, play for 20 min and cash out to obtain another one? Or would they track the chocolates that hard they he would still have trouble cashing 2 out over the next week or two?
They confiscated the chip but gave him a receipt!!!
Seriously!
"Here is proof we confiscated a chip from someone the receipt does not give him any legal recourse. Its just our way of showing that we legally ripped him off
$5,000 in our pockets without earning it. Whooppee!!"
That's atrocious... because if he wanted to keep in the "casino rules/law" he could at least give the chip back to the original player whom EARNED it in the casino, right? So what can he even do with the receipt? Nothing?Quote: darkozThey confiscated the chip but gave him a receipt!!!
Seriously!
Quote: RomesThat's atrocious... because if he wanted to keep in the "casino rules/law" he could at least give the chip back to the original player whom EARNED it in the casino, right? So what can he even do with the receipt? Nothing?
It's been over 10 years and it's still nothing.
If this really happened between you and me I'd think we half the difference. 1) you gave me a chip that I couldn't cash. 2) I let you give me a chip I couldn't cash. So I'd ask you for half ($2500)... after of course trying to pursue any way of cashing the chip possible.Quote: billryanIf I owe you $5,000 and give you a chip that gets confiscated, am I off the hook for the money?
Quote: RomesIf this really happened between you and me I'd think we half the difference. 1) you gave me a chip that I couldn't cash. 2) I let you give me a chip I couldn't cash. So I'd ask you for half ($2500)... after of course trying to pursue any way of cashing the chip possible.
I'm not sure I agree with that. From either side. I think we'd end up in Judge Judy Land.
We agree that I could have taken the chip and cashed it then handed you the money.
You accepted the chip as payment of $5,000. If you got mugged outside the casino and the chip robbed, would you think I owed you the money still?
If you cashed the chip and got mugged for all the money, is my debt paid? You got mugged at the cashiers window. Same thing?
If it were a stranger,
I'd consider it paid in full. If it were a friend, I'd have to think how much I valued the friendship.
I'm always curious to see peoples thought s on these sort of things.
Quote: RomesIf this really happened between you and me I'd think we half the difference. 1) you gave me a chip that I couldn't cash. 2) I let you give me a chip I couldn't cash. So I'd ask you for half ($2500)... after of course trying to pursue any way of cashing the chip possible.
??
Are you saying if you asked someone to cash a chip for you, and it got confiscated, that you would expect the person cashing you chip to compensate you for half?
What I'm saying is... if someone owes me $5k and gives me a chip I can't cash, then they really didn't pay their debt to me. At the same time, I would accepting some responsibility as well in accepting a chip (that we were both under the assumption could get cashed), aka why after exhausting all other routes I'd ask to split the loss with the person that owed me $5k. Might as well of been a counterfeit $5k chip that you can't cash.Quote: gamerfreak??
Are you saying if you asked someone to cash a chip for you, and it got confiscated, that you would expect the person cashing you chip to compensate you for half?
What's to stop someone from going "Here's a receipt for that chip you gave me... it didn't cash. You still owe me $5k."
Quote: gamerfreak??
Are you saying if you asked someone to cash a chip for you, and it got confiscated, that you would expect the person cashing you chip to compensate you for half?
That's not really the same thing. With that said, I'm not sure how I'd feel if I handed you a $5,000 chip to cash and you lost it. Not really sure if how you lost it would matter.
Quote: billryanI'm not sure I agree with that. From either side. I think we'd end up in Judge Judy Land.
We agree that I could have taken the chip and cashed it then handed you the money.
You accepted the chip as payment of $5,000. If you got mugged outside the casino and the chip robbed, would you think I owed you the money still?
If you cashed the chip and got mugged for all the money, is my debt paid? You got mugged at the cashiers window. Same thing?
If it were a stranger,
I'd consider it paid in full. If it were a friend, I'd have to think how much I valued the friendship.
I'm always curious to see peoples thought s on these sort of things.
Getting mugged is not comparable altho it certainly feels that way
A more reasonable comparison is if someone gave you a money order and you found out is was not cashable. Would you consider that fair payment?
There was an expectation that the chip was cashable with the PROPER authority (which is why I disagree with the mugging scenario. In that case you would be correct but that is not an expectation of either party to get mugged)
There is also another more sinister aspect which is knowingly handing over the chip as payment that cannot be redeemed. If it was me I would have to suspect that as well
Quote: gamerfreak??
Are you saying if you asked someone to cash a chip for you, and it got confiscated, that you would expect the person cashing you chip to compensate you for half?
Yes
In fact in NY it happens often. The casino confiscates jackpot vouchers if you owe NYS any money (jackpots are in voucher form from the slot so you can cash them later)
There are people who offer to cash them in for a percentage if the winner knows their voucher is going to be confiscated
It has happened many times where the supposed safe redeemer has an outstanding debt and the other persons winnings are taken
In every case I have heard the person cashing out was held liable although NOT in court. It was expected they would make good within the AP casino society I keep
Quote: RomesWhat I'm saying is... if someone owes me $5k and gives me a chip I can't cash, then they really didn't pay their debt to me. At the same time, I would accepting some responsibility as well in accepting a chip (that we were both under the assumption could get cashed), aka why after exhausting all other routes I'd ask to split the loss with the person that owed me $5k. Might as well of been a counterfeit $5k chip that you can't cash.
What's to stop someone from going "Here's a receipt for that chip you gave me... it didn't cash. You still owe me $5k."
If you accept the 5k chip as payment of a debt owed to you , than isn’t anything that happens after that your responsibility/problem? Whether the chip falls out of your pocket , or you’re mugged of it , that’s on you. The only circumstance I’d say falls on the person who gave you the chip is if it turns out to be counterfeit , because in that case he didn’t really give you what he said he was giving you. When you accept a chip as debt payment part of it is accepting that there may be a problem at the cage.
If I’m paying you a debt with a 5k chip , and the debt isn’t considered paid until you’ve turned it into cash, then I might as well just cash it in myself and pay you.
If I asked you to cash it because I was worried it might be a problem, that's a horse of another color.
Suppose I gave you the chip and you waited a year to try to cash it. Does that change the situation?
Quote: GreasyjohnIf I owe you $5,000 and you accept a $5,000 chip as payment, without condition, you implicitly agree to accept it without any guarantees, and the debt is legally satisfied. If you have any reservations or conditions in accepting the chip it is up to you to communicate them. The chip cost me $5,000 after all. The onus is on you.
Nolan Dalla says he told the casino who gave him the chip and the casino said they had no record of him as a player at those levels either
More than likely then the chip was given in bad faith because he knew he couldnt cash it
Quote: darkozNolan Dalla says he told the casino who gave him the chip and the casino said they had no record of him as a player at those levels either
More than likely then the chip was given in bad faith because he knew he couldnt cash it
That's different but how does one prove bad faith?
Quote: billryanThat's different but how does one prove bad faith?
Yea its difficult to prove i agree
Probably would need to question where the original guy received it from
I wouldn’t think so. I think the person taking the chip as a payment assumes all risk.
Quote: gamerfreakIf you buy a used car without a warranty, and it breaks down as you are leaving the dealers lot, do you have any recourse.
I wouldn’t think so. I think the person taking the chip as a payment assumes all risk.
So if someone hands you a certified check or money order and it turns out some reason caused it to void you will consider yourself paid in full?
Quote: darkozSo if someone hands you a certified check or money order and it turns out some reason caused it to void you will consider yourself paid in full?
In your example, the person who owes the debt is committing fraud.
The casino is the party committing the fraud in the chip example, illegally or not.
Quote: gamerfreakIn your example, the person who owes the debt is committing fraud.
The casino is the party committing the fraud in the chip example, illegally or not.
How?
I give a (casino chip) [money order] you take it to the (casino) [bank]
(Casino says its a valid chip but they are confiscating it due to suspected shenanigans ) [bank says its a valid money order but they are confiscating it due to suspected shenanigans]
I say the (chip) [money order] was valid when you accepted it. I dont know what the (casino) [bank] is talking about. You were paid.
Take it up with the (casino) [bank]
Quote: darkozHow?
I give a (casino chip) [money order] you take it to the (casino) [bank]
(Casino says its a valid chip but they are confiscating it due to suspected shenanigans ) [bank says its a valid money order but they are confiscating it due to suspected shenanigans]
I say the (chip) [money order] was valid when you accepted it. I dont know what the (casino) [bank] is talking about. You were paid.
Take it up with the (casino) [bank]
What would be an example of shenanigans/foul play leading to someone holding a real valid $5000 chip ?
Aside from it having been physically stolen from the casino. And that’s rare as those chips are only held in the cage and higher limit tables.
AP play? Is there AP plays that lead to APs walking away with
$5000 chips ? And even still , if it wasn’t an illegal play then it’s not really shenanigans
Quote: michael99000Quote: darkozHow?
I give a (casino chip) [money order] you take it to the (casino) [bank]
(Casino says its a valid chip but they are confiscating it due to suspected shenanigans ) [bank says its a valid money order but they are confiscating it due to suspected shenanigans]
I say the (chip) [money order] was valid when you accepted it. I dont know what the (casino) [bank] is talking about. You were paid.
Take it up with the (casino) [bank]
What would be an example of shenanigans/foul play leading to someone holding a real valid $5000 chip ?
Aside from it having been physically stolen from the casino. And that’s rare as those chips are only held in the cage and higher limit tables.
AP play? Is there AP plays that lead to APs walking away with
$5000 chips ? And even still , if it wasn’t an illegal play then it’s not really shenanigans
I am 100% in agreement with you
Once again the casino told Nolan Dalla he did not have any recorded play there. The inference is that he must have come into possession through unknown unsanctioned means or "shenanigans"
Quote: billryanIf I owe you $5,000 and give you a chip that gets confiscated, am I off the hook for the money?
If it were me, I (the one who is owed $5k), would either...
-Take the $5k chip on condition I can cash it. If I can't cash it, you still owe me $5k.
-Only accept cash and not the chip. Alternatively, I go to the cage with you where you cash the $5k chip and you give me the cash.
EDIT: But if I accept a $5k chip with no stipulations and I can't cash it, then it's on me.
Quote: GreasyjohnIf I owe you $5,000 and you accept a $5,000 chip as payment, without condition, you implicitly agree to accept it without any guarantees, and the debt is legally satisfied. If you have any reservations or conditions in accepting the chip it is up to you to communicate them. The chip cost me $5,000 after all. The onus is on you.
I don't see it that way. Lacking any deal to the contrary, I think it is implied that the chip is as good as cash. I think it is up to the party that owes the $5,000 to follow through to make sure the one owed the $5,000 gets it in cash or implicitly agrees to a substitute.
Quote: RSIf it were me, I (the one who is owed $5k), would either...
-Take the $5k chip on condition I can cash it. If I can't cash it, you still owe me $5k.
-Only accept cash and not the chip. Alternatively, I go to the cage with you where you cash the $5k chip and you give me the cash.
EDIT: But if I accept a $5k chip with no stipulations and I can't cash it, then it's on me.
Many would argue the acceptance of something of value in explicit payment of a debt implies that item has value and lack of is not satisfying the debt
How about if I owe you money and I offer a free room as payment using my players card. You accept
And when we arrive they cancelled my free room and players card. Are you paid because you accepted the free room with no stipulations
Quote: darkozMany would argue the acceptance of something of value in explicit payment of a debt implies that item has value and lack of is not satisfying the debt
How about if I owe you money and I offer a free room as payment using my players card. You accept
And when we arrive they cancelled my free room and players card. Are you paid because you accepted the free room with no stipulations
Did I get the room? I think that answers itself....
Quote: RSDid I get the room? I think that answers itself....
And did Nolan Dalla get the money?
Facts.
Player A had a chip worth $5,000
Player A owed Player B $5,0000
Player B accepted the chip as payment.
I think we all agree on this.
Here is where the debate begins.
Player B is unable to cash chip and it is confiscated. He is out $5,000.
Player A has lost property worth $5,000 and might still owe Player B. $5,000. That's a $10,000 turn around for him.
What did Player A do wrong that he should both lose his $5,000 chip and still owe the previous $5,000? Unless the chip was obtained through fraud, I don't think he did anything wrong and is clear of his debt.
Yet, then I ask what Player B did wrong that he should be out $5,000.
What we can all agree on is that the casino owes $5,000 to somebody and I think Judge Judy would call that unjust enrichment. Casino is entitled to be made whole, not to keep the $5,000.
Quote: billryanStuff like this is why Judge Judy makes 20 million a year.
Facts.
Player A had a chip worth $5,000
Player A owed Player B $5,0000
Player B accepted the chip as payment.
I think we all agree on this.
Here is where the debate begins.
Player B is unable to cash chip and it is confiscated. He is out $5,000.
Player A has lost property worth $5,000 and might still owe Player B. $5,000. That's a $10,000 turn around for him.
What did Player A do wrong that he should both lose his $5,000 chip and still owe the previous $5,000? Unless the chip was obtained through fraud, I don't think he did anything wrong and is clear of his debt.
Yet, then I ask what Player B did wrong that he should be out $5,000.
What we can all agree on is that the casino owes $5,000 to somebody and I think Judge Judy would call that unjust enrichment. Casino is entitled to be made whole, not to keep the $5,000.
Agreed
Which brings us back to my earlier suggestion. The case should have been brought to small claims court against the casino
Quote: darkozAnd did Nolan Dalla get the money?
Dude are you serious? The debt was PAID by giving him the $5k chip, which he accepted (I assume) as debt payment. His issue is now with the casino. Do you expect the other guy to pay off a debt twice????
Quote: WizardThis is getting a little off topic, but I've loaned so-called friends money lots of times and the percentage of time I get stiffed is depressing. It is the borrower who should be bending over backwards to make sure he pays his debt, at a minimum of inconvenience to the lender. That is what I do. I loathe being in debt. I've often been put in situations where I was asked to accept sports tickets as a form of payment, necessitating that I run all over town cashing them. I accept because I know the alternative is probably not getting paid at all. A bird in the bush is worth more than no birds at all. Sorry, I just had to get that off my chest.
I don't think I owe you any money, but if I do, let me know.
Actually that goes for everyone -- although IIRC, I only owe one person on this forum money ($20), which is to be paid next time we see each other or in the same area. I got hornswoggled on the Superb Owl. :(
Quote: RSDude are you serious? The debt was PAID by giving him the $5k chip, which he accepted (I assume) as debt payment. His issue is now with the casino. Do you expect the other guy to pay off a debt twice????
I am serious. The debt was paid with a worthless piece of plastic
I know one thing. If you tried that argument with Vito Corleone you would be digging a nice hole for yourself in the desert
Quote: darkozQuote: RSDude are you serious? The debt was PAID by giving him the $5k chip, which he accepted (I assume) as debt payment. His issue is now with the casino. Do you expect the other guy to pay off a debt twice????
I am serious. The debt was paid with a worthless piece of plastic
I know one thing. If you tried that argument with Vito Corleone you would be digging a nice hole for yourself in the desert
I think that would be true on either side of the argument.
I once was sued over a couple hundred dollars in performance bonuses that I didn't feel a girl had rightfully earned. She disagreed and quit. A few months later, I get a letter from a lawyer threatening all sorts of extra damages for withholding pay, ect,ect. I cut her a check for the original amount in question.
Check is cashed and I think that's the end of it. End up getting sued. I go to court, with the letter from the lawyer, a copy of the canceled check and a copy of her drivers license to show the judge the signatures match. Girl gives some long convoluted story that even I can't follow and I know all the facts.
My turn comes and I present my evidence. Judge asks the girl if she received the check. She says yes but she didn't cash it. Judge looks at the back and at her signature and hands it to her. Girl insists she never cashed the check. Now she keeps saying she never received the money. Judge says something to the effect that you are lying. I can see where the check was deposited. Girl says yes, she deposited the check into the bank but she never got any cash. Judge asks if the money is still in the bank account. Girl says she has no idea. All she knows is she never got any cash out of the deal. Judge tells her the money is in the bank and she can take it any time she wants. Girl says the bank doesn't owe her the money ,I do. Judge dismissed the case.
Quote: billryanStuff like this is why Judge Judy makes 20 million a year.
Facts.
Player A had a chip worth $5,000
Player A owed Player B $5,0000
Player B accepted the chip as payment.
I think we all agree on this.
Here is where the debate begins.
Player B is unable to cash chip and it is confiscated. He is out $5,000.
Player A has lost property worth $5,000 and might still owe Player B. $5,000. That's a $10,000 turn around for him.
What did Player A do wrong that he should both lose his $5,000 chip and still owe the previous $5,000? Unless the chip was obtained through fraud, I don't think he did anything wrong and is clear of his debt.
Yet, then I ask what Player B did wrong that he should be out $5,000.
What we can all agree on is that the casino owes $5,000 to somebody and I think Judge Judy would call that unjust enrichment. Casino is entitled to be made whole, not to keep the $5,000.
I agree also. It would be unjust enrichment for the casino to just keep the chip.
Quote: GreasyjohnI agree also. It would be unjust enrichment for the casino to just keep the chip.
Triple agree
But its been a decade and Nolan Dalla was never paid
The casino pocketed the money
Quote: darkozTriple agree
But its been a decade and Nolan Dalla was never paid
The casino pocketed the money
Maybe the casino has spent 10 years searching exhaustingly for the rightful owner of that chip , so they can pay him.
Like OJ searching for the real killer. These things take time
Quote: darkozTriple agree
But its been a decade and Nolan Dalla was never paid
The casino pocketed the money
Somebody call Judy's people. She'll fix this in fifteen minutes or less.
Quote: WizardThis is getting a little off topic, but I've loaned so-called friends money lots of times and the percentage of time I get stiffed is depressing. It is the borrower who should be bending over backwards to make sure he pays his debt, at a minimum of inconvenience to the lender. That is what I do. I loathe being in debt. I've often been put in situations where I was asked to accept sports tickets as a form of payment, necessitating that I run all over town cashing them. I accept because I know the alternative is probably not getting paid at all. A bird in the bush is worth more than no birds at all. Sorry, I just had to get that off my chest.
Don't you owe me money for buying my Wizcoin?
but aside from that, I think many people have the type of thinking: "Who is this debt owed to, and what will they do if I don't pay?" Another thing is "how bad will this be for me if I don't pay?"
Most people probably pay off family ASAP, not so much of their legs being broken but the shame would get them to pay up quick.
Most people pay their bookies off real quick, since they wanna stay in action and can't do so unless it's paid.
Friends, that's when it starts to get a little mucky. Some people are ok with being obligated to their friends and will leisurely pay them back since nothing bad will happen if they don't pay.
Pretty sure everyone will pay off the loan shark very quick tho. Broken legs is no bueno.
Never heard of her
Don't lend anything you wouldn't give as a gift.
If the borrower avoids you because he doesn't want to pay you back, you got off cheap. They aren't people you want in your life anyway.
Quote: darkozI am serious. The debt was paid with a worthless piece of plastic
I know one thing. If you tried that argument with Vito Corleone you would be digging a nice hole for yourself in the desert
I don’t know nor care who Vito Corleone is.
If the debt is paid with a “worthless piece of plastic”, then the problem is with the guy who took the “worthless piece of plastic”. Unless there was some weird fishy sh** going on, like the chip being fake, or the guy telling the casino there’s this guy Nolan Dalla and he just stole my chip.....then it is what it is. Neither Nolan should have accepted the chocolate chip as payment and the casino shouldn’t have confiscated the chip.
Let’s say I owe you $100k. I give you $100k cash. You go to the bank to deposit the $100k cash. Then the bank’s like, “How’d you get this money? What do you do? Are you a robber thief vandal? You didn’t acquire this money.” And then the bank takes the cash and doesn’t add it to your checking/savings account. Are you really gonna come back to me and say, “Yeah so those worthless 1,000 pieces of paper got confiscated by the bank when I tried to deposit them into my bank account. So you still owe me $100k.”
Pay you in cash. You deposit it in a bank and six hundreds are fake and confiscated.
They give you a receipt for the deposit and the bills they took.
Are we even?
Quote: billryanI owe you $5,000.
Pay you in cash. You deposit it in a bank and six hundreds are fake and confiscated.
They give you a receipt for the deposit and the bills they took.
Are we even?
What happens to the other $4,400? But we’re definitely not even for the $600 of fake bills (unless I said it’s cool you give me fake bills).
If the guy accepting the chip knew there was a chance he couldn't cash it, then I think he accepted the responsibility.
If neither of them knew this was remotely possible, I don't know what to say. I think it would be unfair that one person gets hit for the entire 5k. However, if it was a loan originally, then the guy who got the loan should realize the other guy was doing him a favor making a loan in the first. Had he not had to loan the guy money they wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. I think the person who received the loan should take a bigger hit, but not for the entire amount.
Quote: WizardI don't see it that way. Lacking any deal to the contrary, I think it is implied that the chip is as good as cash. I think it is up to the party that owes the $5,000 to follow through to make sure the one owed the $5,000 gets it in cash or implicitly agrees to a substitute.
I think that legally the implication is only that the chip is genuine and not counterfeit, and that it was not obtained illegally. It is already implied that the chip is as good as cash because the $5,000 debt was satisfied by the party that accepted the chip as consideration to satisfy the debt. There is no further burden on the party giving the $5,000 chip regarding the success of its redemption. The law provides for no guarantees beyond the transaction between the two parties. The fact that the party that received the chip can not cash it out is beyond the control of the person that gave him the chip.
Quote: GreasyjohnI think that legally the implication is only that the chip is genuine and not counterfeit, and that it was not obtained illegally. It is already implied that the chip is as good as cash because the $5,000 debt was satisfied by the party that accepted the chip as consideration to satisfy the debt. There is no further burden on the party giving the $5,000 chip regarding the success of its redemption. The law provides for no guarantees beyond the transaction between the two parties. The fact that the party that received the chip can not cash it out is beyond the control of the person that gave him the chip.
Are you certain the law provides no guarantees? You have legal precedent by way of example?
There seems to be a misunderstanding that if there were no express agreements made between the parties then the chip is given as is. Usually its the opposite in court of law. WITHOUT an express agreement for this situation both parties have legitimate arguments and most likely both will split the difference depending on jurisdiction and judge
I had a landlord friend who was so scared of bad tenants he refused to sign or offer leases. He didnt want to be stuck with a nightmare tenant for up to a year. I cautioned him against it but wouldnt listen after all it was his property. No way someone could keep him from it if there was no lease
That cost him a 2 year legal battle when he got the tenants from hell.
Pets? No lease no restrictions
And on and on.
No express agreements does not make a matter of dispute easier. Quite the opposite
