Legal Question in Criminal Law in Minnesota

Re: Stopped payment on check

In certain situations (enough prior DWIs, etc.) police may be able to "forfeit" (take and keep) the car belonging to a driver arrested on suspicion of DWI. The owner of the car can challenge the "administrative forfeiture" of the car, if they file a challenge to it in court with the time allowed, after being given notice of the administrative forfeiture.

The law does not generally allow car to be "forfeited" from "innocent owners" -- but it is more complicated than that simple, general statement. If an owner does not file a challenge in court in time, even though "innocent," they may lose the car forever.

If this situation were brought before a court, by filing a challenge in court to the administrative forfeiture, the court would likely be interested in determining who was the true owner of the car at the time of the arrest. If driver did not then own the car, and the owner did not know the driver would drive under the influence, the owner should get the car ordered returned by the court.

From the facts posed in your question, it sounds like the true owner was the employer and father-in-law. If he had no knowledge of the driver's likelihood of driving DWI, he has a good chance of winning the car back, if he challenges the forfeiture in court with the short time period available to do so.

From your perspective, you likely want the easiest way out of the situation, whether it is getting back the car or suing on the bounced check. If you did sell the car, hand over the title, accept the check in payment, it seems likely you sold it then, and that you were not the owner afterwards. If so, you may have only the options of suing on the bounced check, making a complaint to the police for issuance of bad check, or both. If the bad check writer were convicted, he would normally be required to pay the victim (you) restitution (all the money you lost).