1. BAM expresses that the original franchise owner (Chrystal) was heavily in debt to BAM ($175,000 ) owed to BAM

2. When Chystal told BAM of her intent to sell, BAM 'repossessed' her store and her inventory to help cover her debt (really, it was the her LLC's debt, but I'm using Chrysal as a shorthand). There is a clause in the franchise agreement that says everything IN the store will be repossessed. Afterwards BAM characterizes Chrystal's actions as 'abandoning' her store

3. BAM valued the repossessed inventory at $38,000 and subtracted that amount from her $175,000 debt.

4. BAM then sold the repossessed inventory to another franchisee who took over the store location (Baker Bricks, LLC).

5. BAM argues that this agreement and rules only provide consignment IFF BAM receives a request in writing and approves the consignment.

6. BAM says they never were informed of the agreement and disallows consignment.

7. BAM says the consignment was a PRIVATE agreement between Chrystal and Mansell.

8. BAM questions the veracity of the agreement as they claim the only version they have is unsigned.

9. BAM completes the sale to Baker Bricks, LLC and claims "Baker did not at any time acquire, take over or assume any obligations of Chrystal or Salem LLC"

Then things go off the rails as Mansell is trying to figure out what happened to his LEGO.

Isn't that bad for BAM?

IF:

1. it's a PRIVATE agreement between Mansell and Chrystal

2. The agreement state Mansell is the owner of the lego until sold

3. Mansell's legos were repossessed by BAM

THEN:

What legal right do they have to 'repossess' and then sell the Lego to Baker?