Long story short sister got a bad DUI and wrecked her car, her bail was set pretty high for being a repeat offender and so she needed $4,000 from a bail bondsman to get out. I refused to pay despite the fact she lives in my house, but she someone conned her boyfriend into paying for her bail.
Six months later my sister breaks up with him despite not paid back any amount of money for the bail back. Now the boyfriend is texting me claiming I owe him the $4,000 cause she lives in my house and she claimed that I would pay him back. But since he’s the only one who cosigned he’s literally solely responsible for it right? He’d have to take HER to small claims court to get the money right?
It seems to be common sense that you’re not liable, but IANAL. But to clarify the circumstances - wouldn’t he be getting the money back from the bail bondsman eventually, provided she doesn’t abscond? Are we talking about timing of cashflows, and nobody is (yet) out an unrecoverable $4000? Or was that $4000 a fee that was payable for the bondsman to put up a much larger amount to the court? If the latter, is there also the question of the bondsman potentially coming after her, or coming after someone for that larger amount if she absconds and they can’t find her? Even if you have no financial liability, perhaps you should be considering the potential for a bondsman to be breaking down your door if she has given your address as her residence, I have no idea just what they are allowed to do.
If you did not agree to contribute, IMO you have no financial liability. Your sister can claim whatever she wants, but that doesn’t make it so. Ex-BF needs to take it up with the actual responsible party, namely your sister.
@Riemann, I’m no expert on the subject, never having needed such services, but I’m pretty sure you’re right.
No. If you pay the bail yourself and meet all your obligations, then you get the full amount back. But if you use a bondsman, they charge a fee (typically 10-15%) and you don’t get that back. The bondsman gets the money they put up back, and keeps your fee as their profit (or to offset the losses from people who abscond).
Right. You’re just some random, dissociated person as far as this agreement goes. It doesn’t matter even if she gave him something in writing that said “Asuka will give you $4000”. Unless you agreed to this arrangement, you’re not on the hook for anything. An exception would be if there was some reason you were legally responsible for her debts, such as her being a minor and you being her guardian. But assuming she’s an adult, this is a matter between her and her ex-boyfriend. In the very unlikely case that this goes to court, find any documentation you can that you did not initially agree to pay for her bail. If she asked over text, save the texts. If she called, save your call log from that time. They will help back up your word should this actually go to court.
If the bond was $4,000, the boyfriend didn’t pay that. He paid about 10% to the bondsman, who put up the total amount. (That’s how their business model works. If you had the total cash to post bond yourself, there’d be no need to use a bondsman)
If the boyfriend actually paid $4k to the bondsman, the total bond was probably closer to $40k. But that would be quite high for a DUI.
This is a rather classic example of where ponying up the money would probably be bad for everyone involved.
Your sister needs intervention, not bail.
Her ex is a sucker, and needs to learn to not be a sucker. $4000 is a steep price for that lesson but it’ll be worse if a more skilled con artist gets to him.
You need $4000 and to not be a sucker much more than you need your sister’s ex’s approval.
Oh, and agreements to pay the debt of another are usually governed by something called the “statute of frauds”, which requires certain contracts to be in writing in order to be enforceable.
So, even if he had a recording of you promising to pay her debt, it’s not a legal contract unless you wrote it down.
IANAL but a 40k bail for a DUI seems high to me too. But the OP said that sister was a repeat offender, so maybe the court wanted to make a point. Or the judge was in a bad mood.
Bond is usually set according to a fee schedule, based on the charges. $40k might apply if somebody died in the accident, but I would be surprised if the judge had the discretion to simply impose a higher bond to make a point.
(Remember, bond is not meant to be punitive. It’s meant to ensure that you come back to court after you are released).
$4,000 was the fee paid to the bail bondsman, her bail was set to $40,000 iirc by the court because it got raised from $10,000 after the court found this was her 3rd DUI and she was still on probation from the last one.
I don’t have proof of myself refusing to pay her bail because I was her first call in jail where she asked me to bail her out but I refused. After that she was in jail for a month before finally presumably bugging her boyfriend enough to get him to bail her out. She was with him for 4 more months until she broke up with him and moved back in with me. But this is literally the first time I found out her boyfriend paid her bond because I just didn’t ask her about it.
My only fear is that he’s going to pull some “Well if she’s living in your house then I can sue you to get money from your houses worth” thing since she doesn’t have a job and obviously can’t pay back $4,000 anytime soon.
Burden of proof is on the ex that you DID agree to pay and welshed. You wouldn’t be on the hook if it was a rando roommate, right? Ex was stupid and bailed out a chronic drunk driver who obviously hasn’t learned any lessons whatsoever, let’s see if ex is marginally smarter than your sister. Man, I really hate drunk drivers.
Wouldn’t that first phone call from your sister to you have been recorded? I thought that was more or less standard procedure at a jail unless she were talking to her lawyer, which you aren’t.
I think your best choice is to contact a lawyer and find out if this is a problem for you. Also if the ex contacts you again you can tell him that he’ll have to talk to your lawyer about the issue.