Bricks and Minifigs Stole a Man's $200k Lego Collection

A man gave a store merchandise on consignment, signed a contract with the store manager.

The manager lost control of the store to corporate. The goods were still there, still on display and being sold.

Corporate says, "this is mine now" and refuses to honor the contract. "It wasn't our name on it, says right here that the previous store manager signed this, and she's no longer with us." They sell the goods and keep all of the revenue, rather than just their 10% share.

It seems like theft, but it's a very common civil contract dispute. The side with possession and deeper pockets is the side with the leverage, sadly!

BUT rather than unwind the agreement and return the lego, they just kept it. Argued for it to be dealt with legally. It was, they lost, so they closed down the store rather than return the lego.

I read down to where they linked to the store's statement. They said that there's evidence that most of the collection was moved off-site in the past. They said they tried to locate what they could from the inventory list and offer it back, but the person believes they have more.

So yeah, I think there's more to the story. I don't think we're going to get it from the YouTuber making hours of content for it, though.

Even if we take what corporate says at face value (there was no agreement, or the agreement is null, or it's an agreement that the previous owners agreed to) that still just means that the store possesses property that they do not legally own. Whether or not they legally came to possess the sets seems irrelevant here.

I'm not a lawyer but I don't see how the Mansells ever stopped owning the lego sets.

"How did you acquire these sets?"

"Uhm... don't know they just appeared out of nowhere"

Straight to jail.

Hopefully, the courts will see through that tactic, and add a contempt charge on top of all the civil penalties.

Additionally, there is audio of one of the would-be defendants saying that they intend to drag things out as long as possible, basically taunting both Ed and Ben to sue him as they all understand that it is not a viable solution to the problem for Ed.

Part 2 starts with 10 separate $10,000 default judgements won against the store, but they are unable to recover any of the funds.

Ben brings a process server with him to serve new lawsuits against the owners as individuals, and 4 separate times on the same day in the same spot, cops are sent to him. The cops even take the papers from the process server, try to serve the defendant, and then give it back to the process server saying it was refused . After that they don't allow the process server to serve the papers, and then the cops show up the 4th time and Ben is eventually arrested.

If I'm reading this right, he travelled to a different state to serve the paperwork to the guy in person. He would have had to spend a lot more than $100 to do that.

He also didn't leave after the police were called, which is not all that unusual for someone who looks out their window and sees someone they're in conflict with has traveled across the country to stand in front of their door.

This is just needless YouTube drama generation. I agree, he should have paid a process server to do the job correctly, but that wouldn't be good business for his YouTube channel.

Some of the people in this thread making very definitive claims about consignments contracts without considering this specific jurisdictions should watch it... the victims here could have had an almost open and shut case if they did a bit more paperwork (and paid $20), as there is an exception for consignments over $1000 that gave some undue leverage to that corporation.

It seems like their franchisee went bust, and they bailed him out to some $ value. Taking over shit like his lease and probably some other debts.

200K is maybe what they need to recoup their losses from rescuing this store, and they have enough local LDS enforcers to make it stick.

Think of it like a restaurant chain pursuing legal action against an internal theft ring at a single location.

(I am not taking the BAM side here, just providing a rationale for their actions).

> That said, after ownership of the Salem store changed, we thoroughly documented and assessed current inventory. A few days later, we became aware of the previous arrangement, and compared our inventory assessment to the limited documentation provided by the consignor. It was clear the full list of inventory in his documentation was not located in the store. What items could be reasonably identified as allegedly belonging to the consignor was offered back to the consignor, but that offer was refused.

> A deeper dive into the sales receipts uncovered that a significantly higher volume of the listed sets had sold over the course of the consignment deal prior to the store transition. The consignor also provided a written statement to a podcast that his collection was moved offsite for security reasons. Additional attempts to restore what we could with what was in our possession, was also declined, in writing.

The dude shows up at a store. They ask him to leave multiple times. They call on the police on him. Then he says "the police are in on it" because they trespassed him. Like wow shocking that the police won't get involved in a civil matter. Then they manipulate a store employee that had nothing to do with this? That's where I stopped watching.

This is a basic contract case. If the original owner's son had no intention of suing the other party then why did he draft up a contract in the first place? Just get a fucking lawyer.

> (transitive, law, especially New Zealand)[1] To subject [someone] to a trespass notice, formally notifying them that they are prohibited from entry to a property, such that any current or future presence there will constitute trespass, (especially) criminal trespass

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/trespass#English

Personally, I have decided that The Lord's Prayer now has the new and alternative meaning when it reads:

    Forgive us our trespasses

I had never heard it until recently, and now this is the third time I've heard it used that way.

If it's a corporation, it's pretty straightforward. If they refuse to pay, you get a writ from the court that authorizes seizure of assets.

Usually that means you go their bank and the value of the judgment will be garnished by their bank and given to you.

Occasionally and theatrically, a sheriff will take you to their headquarters to seize property like computers and printers that you can sell at auction until the value is satisfied.

It only becomes difficult if the corporation is bankrupt, which is similar to a poor person who doesn't have the money. Then it becomes a question of prioritization, e.g. do you get paid before or after lenders, and will there be any money left.

It is worth roughly $10,000 sealed in box.

I have some of the original Lego Star Wars sets. All opened and built and etc.

Including this one which I purchased for like $5 or $10

https://www.ebay.com/itm/198386156944

I also have the only Deadpool figure Lego ever put in a set that goes for $75 or $100 by itself. It was in a $20 set.

So the amount they spent could be somewhere in the thousands, but probably below $100,000.

There are explicit rules against claim splitting and you risk either the judge combining all of your filings into one case and moving it to a different court or dismissing all of the claims after the first one. There are very good reasons why a person can't keep suing you over and over for the same event.

It is however a civil matter.

Please enlighten us what other "due diligence" these people should have done for your point.

There are thousands of YouTube videos of people being arrested or being in court on charges of embezzling from their employers, committing fraud, presenting bogus checks at banks, etc.

Hacking is white collar crime. So is mortgage fraud. So is tax evasion and bribery. There are tons of prosecutions of these crimes every year.

(...See, e.g., authors vs. Anthropic. The most prolific author might make somewhere in the low six figures, the average author is gonna make ~$10k, and the lawyers representing the class asked for $300M!)

I was trying to popularize the phrase "the only thing which is illegal in America is defrauding investors" but I have no social media presence. Feel free to take it.

Regardless I agree with you on capitalism, but my take on securities fraud is less cynical. In late stage capitalism it makes _perfect sense_ that the only crime is to steal from investors - that's capitalism protecting itself.

When it comes to disputes between the poor and the rich, the police always choose to act as the rich's private security arm.

The statements made by the company are simply untrue. And the guy who lost the LEGO sets (worth 100k$ btw) is directly working with the "bloggers" because they're his last avenue. He's also incredibly grateful to them because thanks to them he at least ended up winning in small claims court.

https://bricksandminifigs.com/blog/blog/2026/05/28/bricks-mi...

The novel maneuvers "Reckless" Ben Schneider took were... amusing, at the very least.

They sell new Lego sets in stores every day. They might seem expensive for a few bags of plastic bits and some instructions, but then: They've never been cheap.

A kid can still grow up playing with Lego today, just as they've always been able to.

I still remember building my first new Lego widget. Set 918. It was just a small basic spaceship and no real accessories but a little Lego space dude. I'd already scattered the pieces around and stuck them together in strange ways when I noticed that there was an instruction book so I could assemble it the "right" way. That may have been the first instruction book I'd ever followed; I remember the sense of wonderment as I learned the value of it. That model didn't last long before I tore it apart and went back to sticking the pieces together in strange ways. :)

Anyway, it seems like it would have been about $6.50 back then, or about $31 in today's money.

That's not so different from today's prices -- in fact, it looks things may have actually gotten a bit less expensive since then for a given amount of complexity.

That's not ruination; it's the opposite of it. The kids are fine. Lego is fine.

---

I do see that someone on eBay that someone hopes to get over $2,000 for a new, sealed copy of set 918. That's a about sixteen more fuckton more than $31.

And I can't justify spending that kind of money on some Lego.

But I don't have to spend that kind of money. If I have a Lego itch that I want to scratch, then I'm a grown-ass adult. I can just go to the store or some online seller or whatever, and buy a new set that I like, and put it together.

I don't need to spend $2k to pretend relive a part of my childhood. I already experienced it once, and I remember that part very fondly.

Nothing here is ruined.

For us, LEGO was all about ingenuity, improvisation and imagination. We would build a set once, with the alternate back-of-the-box design, without the instructions. Then the real fun would begin, as the new set went in with the bricks we had.

At secondary school (age 11 in UK), the LEGO was cast aside as a mere child's toy. We had moved on and the idea of 'still playing with LEGO' would have been a social faux pas.

Nowadays kids have a ridiculous abundance of LEGO but where is the ingenuity and imagination? Or even the play time? With tablets, phones, video games and so much else, it seems that the set gets built as per the instructions and that is it, job done. The play hasn't even really started.

My parents hosted dinner parties, as was the custom at the time, when restaurants were rare. They quite liked to have our current creations on show, in a low-key way. That is how adults should do LEGO, proud of their kids' creations.

None of our LEGO had a market value, however, every brick had utility and colour value within our LEGO world. We had other things for collecting, even stamps, and they notionally had value.

Hence I am not sure what is going on with people having $200k LEGO collections. That level of abundance just isn't about play, and certainly not for kids. I have no sympathy for the guy, and although the loss is painful, at least he has a chance to grow up a bit!

P.S. Corporate LEGO also ruined it by promoting the whole AFOL thing, but the success of the company has been astounding, considering the product is plastic waste.

There's few strangers I've encountered that I've respected more and the rest are all firemen.

I was walking around though, and an associate came up to me and pointed out that the Death Star (IIRC) was about to stop being sold so if I wanted one I should grab it... "... and that we have several of it, so if you want allll of them."

I despise scalping, though, but perhaps I should.