|
Incredulous Red posted:So... how much money would take for a yankee to buy his way into the Louisiana elite? Depends on how elite you want to go. Do you want to fix speeding tickets or rig state contracts, or some level in between? It's not like you can go down to the corruption office, and buy an elite card, you have to buy yourself influence, and that isn't usually a simple transaction. I know you think I'm joking about the way things work down here, but I'm really not. It isn't that Louisiana is more corrupt than other states, it's just that people down here aren't ashamed of it. You kind of learn to live with it.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 12:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:44 |
|
|
I have a question concerning credit card fraud. If someone opens a card in my name without my knowledge, and proceeds to use it all over a city far away from me, what are my options? I mean, I won't get the bills, and unless I do a credit check I'll never know I have another card open. Say I do check, and discover someone has been using this fraudulent card, can I call the police and have them check video or whatever at places where the card was used? Can they pin down who was using the card based on time? Or is this a completely unrealistic expectation of how much the police card about situations like these?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 14:52
|
|
|
Call the credit card company, verify who you are and that you've never been to city X and they'll handle it. The company might get the ploice involved if it was a large enough amount of money, but there probably won't be any more interaction with you either way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 15:47
|
|
|
Lawgoons I have a bit of situation here with my old landlord. I had a lease in Pennsylvania through them from August 9, 2011 - August 9, 2012. They've been claiming I owe them money but after looking at the copy of their ledger, my bank statements and the duplicates of checks I've paid them it appears that they have been cashing my checks for the full amount yet reporting it on their ledger as less than the amount due. I don't think being stupid is a crime in this situation but is there anything I can do about this short of suing them in small claims court for the amount owed? On top of this it is past the thirty days they are given to notify me of what the return will be for my security deposit. From what I understand by not notifying me of any damages, attempting to contact me or returning the security deposit they are in violation section 250.512 of the PA Landlord Tenant Act, it says they forfeit any right to it by not contacting me in writing within 30 days. I'm not really sure what my options are here either other than contacting my local attorney general?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
First best step is to write them a letter showing the error in their ledger and demanding the return of your security deposit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
What town are you in in PA. euphronius fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Sep 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 19:49
|
|
|
euphronius posted:What town are you in in PA. The lease was in State College and my new address is in the Wilkes-Barre Scranton area.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
Dogen posted:First best step is to write them a letter showing the error in their ledger and demanding the return of your security deposit. To add to this: it's entirely possible that your landlord has been the victim of a bit of employee fraud.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 20:12
|
|
|
Why don't people have PMs!! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 20:14
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Why don't people have PMs!! I have them now  .Employee fraud was my first thought when I sat down with their financial manager. When we went over the ledger almost all of the payments I had made were shown to be less than what was taken from my bank account and what was on my duplicate checks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 20:23
|
|
|
Azuth0667 posted:I have them now Were you able to prove that at the time you went over it with the FM? If so, did they just say "no your bank's records are wrong"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 20:38
|
|
|
Dogen posted:Were you able to prove that at the time you went over it with the FM? If so, did they just say "no your bank's records are wrong"? I had my bank statements and my duplicate checks showing that the amounts my checks were written for is what they were cashed for. The FM said I had lovely handwriting and that it wasn't their fault the numbers on the ledgers were wrong. When I brought up that the value is also in print next to the number amount on the check and that my bank's statement clearly shows the correct amount was withdrawn she got defensive and loud. Then she claimed she kept all of the checks and she could get them for me but couldn't do it right then, she said she would contact me on the 7th after she found the checks but didn't. Since we met in person in her office I can't prove any of this in court which just leaves me suspicious that something not quite right is probably happening there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
Azuth0667 posted:I had my bank statements and my duplicate checks showing that the amounts my checks were written for is what they were cashed for. The FM said I had lovely handwriting and that it wasn't their fault the numbers on the ledgers were wrong. When I brought up that the value is also in print next to the number amount on the check and that my bank's statement clearly shows the correct amount was withdrawn she got defensive and loud. Then she claimed she kept all of the checks and she could get them for me but couldn't do it right then, she said she would contact me on the 7th after she found the checks but didn't. Since we met in person in her office I can't prove any of this in court which just leaves me suspicious that something not quite right is probably happening there. Guess who is committing fraud! The person who denies it happened when confronted with the actual evidence!
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:Guess who is committing fraud! The person who denies it happened when confronted with the actual evidence! Yeah they're probably trying to pin it on someone else to buy enough time to steal more money rapidly and pack their bags before skipping town at this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
Azuth0667 posted:Then she claimed she kept all of the checks and she could get them for me but couldn't do it right then, she said she would contact me on the 7th after she found the checks but didn't. Out of curiosity, what difference would it make if she found them or not? With your copies and the matching bank statement, I would think her copies of checks would be irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 07:14
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:Out of curiosity, what difference would it make if she found them or not? With your copies and the matching bank statement, I would think her copies of checks would be irrelevant. I have no idea I'm not familiar or comfortable around legal matters myself I wish I knew. In other news I wake up this morning to this in my inbox: The Financial Manager posted:Azuth0667,
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 17:57
|
|
|
That $63 is in addition to returning your security deposit, right? I am not sure where you are, but in some states mishandling a tenants payments basically voids any claim they have to your money at all. So definitely check up on that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 18:06
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:That $63 is in addition to returning your security deposit, right? I am not sure where you are, but in some states mishandling a tenants payments basically voids any claim they have to your money at all. So definitely check up on that. They haven't said anything about my security deposit yet. So for the security deposit I sent them the certified letter since they are past 30 days. From what I understand in PA if you hold it past 30 days you lose any claim to it and when I fish out my move out form with the new address I gave them they owe me double the deposit. Section 250.512 PA Landlord-Tenant Act.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 18:15
|
|
|
I work in England and my employer is in the process of drafting a new contract onto which all employees will be moved. Part of this contract includes a waiver of the 48 hours per week maximum in the EU Working Time Directive. I do not want to regularly work more than 48 hours in a week and I don't want the company to be able to. I do sometimes do more, but I gather that this is based on an average so that's not a problem since it's not regular. 1. If I waived this, am I right in thinking that they could require me to work more than 48 hours regularly? Or would that likely depend on other clauses in my contract? 2. I gather from the text of the Directive that people may only waive this right if there is no detriment for not agreeing to waive it. Since they're not providing it as a separate option and instead lumping it in with the main contract, could any consequences for not signing the contract on that basis be regarded as a detriment to those who refuse to waive that right? I hope this makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 20:42
|
|
|
Anjow posted:I work in England and my employer is in the process of drafting a new contract onto which all employees will be moved. Part of this contract includes a waiver of the 48 hours per week maximum in the EU Working Time Directive. I do not want to regularly work more than 48 hours in a week and I don't want the company to be able to. I do sometimes do more, but I gather that this is based on an average so that's not a problem since it's not regular. Virtually everywhere in England employs of the basis of exemption from EU Working Time Directives, you are not getting out of this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 20:46
|
|
|
I was hired a few months ago with a new employer, and they contracted with a relocation company to move all of my stuff + up to 2 vehicles from Arizona to Hawaii, where I live now. I only own one car, but my girlfriend was going to move with me, so while the relocation was getting organized I asked (over the phone) whether the relocation covered a second vehicle whose title did not have my name on it. The representative said that this was fine, both vehicles just had to be located at the same residence. Both vehicles were listed on the relocation insurance forms, the relocation itemization forms, and both were moved to the destination Both vehicles were damaged during transit, so I filed a damage claim with the relocation company. They have informed me that they were not aware that I was not the owner of one of the vehicles, so now they want me to pay for the shipping cost and insurance cost of this vehicle, and then they say that they'll reimburse me for the damages on both vehicles. I explained to them that they told me that ownership was irrelevant, but they're insisting that this is not part of their policy and that I am liable for these costs. During an email exchange today, a representative told me that the name on the title doesn't matter, but I do have to be the owner (what? Isn't this determined by the title? This is why I asked about the title in the first place) What are my options and the possible repercussions of refusing to pay for the second vehicle's shipping costs? The amount that they are asking for is about 75% of the total insurance reimbursement that they say I will be paid, so I would still come out ahead even though it seems to me that the relocation company should be responsible for these costs
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
One possibility, if your gf is OK with it, is to have her sign title over to you. And then say "there ya go fuckers, now I own both". It's not fraud or anything because you're not going backwards and saying you owned it at the time. But both vehicles they transported are now yours. It's just a thought, might not work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 00:57
|
|
|
Sounds fishy. Seems like it was something they would have sorted before they shipped. Did you check with your new employer to see if the shipping company billed them for shipping 2 cars?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:Sounds fishy. Seems like it was something they would have sorted before they shipped. Did you check with your new employer to see if the shipping company billed them for shipping 2 cars? According to the relocation company, my employer did get billed for two cars, saw that I only owned one of them, and then only paid for my car, so now they expect me to pay the costs (the shipment was made 3 months ago and now I am hearing about this issue, so that time might have included a bunch of correspondence between my employer and the relocation company). Should I bother asking my employer whether this actually happened? In my opinion, it is definitely something that the relocation company should have checked or at least clarified. But since I asked about it and was told that the title didn't matter, it seems to me like the representative made a mistake and now the relocation company is trying to get me to foot the bill. They're basically holding the insurance claim hostage, but hopefully I can get the insurance claim for damages without having to pay extra for the shipment (which would require convincing the relocation company that they should claim responsibility for their representative's mistake, but this feels unlikely)
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 02:50
|
|
|
Here's something I've been wondering about, in the context of torts: If the only difference between rape and intercourse is consent, and consent cannot be obtained fraudulently, does that mean that a guy could be held liable in tort if he lies to get a girl into bed? Ie, imagine a situation where a girl says that she'll consent to sleep with a guy only if he tells her that he really loves her. He proclaims his love, and the two have sex. It later comes out in a deposition that he does not, in fact, love her. Can she recover in tort?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 05:30
|
|
|
Look up the cases involving men either having affairs and not disclosing them, or having STDs and not disclosing them. I believe a number of those have been litigated as civil assaults (unwanted touching, etc). I don't recall how courts ended up coming out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 05:38
|
|
|
Some places have laws on the books about disease disclosure and some do not, which might affect some of those precedents anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 05:40
|
|
|
IzzyFnStradlin posted:Ie, imagine a situation where a girl says that she'll consent to sleep with a guy only if he tells her that he really loves her. He proclaims his love, and the two have sex. It later comes out in a deposition that he does not, in fact, love her. Can she recover in tort? In this situation, I think she loses because the promise is so flighty, and not relied upon in normal life. But if the promise was more concrete and damaging, like "I am not your boss's brother", and it turns out he is... then maybe there's something there. Then you run into the problem of damages. It'd be difficult to argue for anything more than out of pocket costs (like for medical testing). Think of it like any other fraud. The lie has to be reasonably relied upon and cause damage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 05:46
|
|
|
IzzyFnStradlin posted:If the only difference between rape and intercourse is consent, and consent cannot be obtained fraudulently, does that mean that a guy could be held liable in tort if he lies to get a girl into bed? This is not what is meant by fraud when it comes to rape (at least, not in my state). In California, to commit rape by fraud, the perpetrator must either deceive the victim into thinking they were married when they weren't, or convince the victim that intercourse serves a professional purpose (e.g., a psychologist convincing a patient she has to sleep with him to treat her reservation about sex). But most states don't have rape by fraud (also known as rape by deception) laws. Lack of consent in those states means lack of consent at the time of intercourse. Someone may fraudulently convince a person that he is a film producer and she may sleep with him because he has given the impression he puts his girlfriends in his movies, but as long as she otherwise slept with him of her own free will (i.e., no duress, force or threat of force, fear of retaliation, and of sufficient mental and physical capacity to give consent), that wouldn't legally be rape. IzzyFnStradlin posted:Ie, imagine a situation where a girl says that she'll consent to sleep with a guy only if he tells her that he really loves her. He proclaims his love, and the two have sex. It later comes out in a deposition that he does not, in fact, love her. Can she recover in tort? As far as I am aware, there is no such thing as the tort of rape in the United States. Some states have statutes allowing for civil actions against sexual abuse, and among those, some may be general and some be only for a specific circumstance such as sexual abuse of a minor, but there is no general rape cause of action. Victims who have successfully sued their rapists relied on more general causes of action such as battery, false imprisonment, intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress, and even malpractice. I'm just going to add this caveat: I am not saying I agree or disagree with any of the above. I am aware that it may run counter to popular understanding of what constitutes rape. I am only giving my understanding of the law as a lawyer who does not practice criminal law. Edit: This looks like a handy on-point article: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID883671_code254274.pdf?abstractid=883671&mirid=1 ibntumart fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Sep 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 05:51
|
|
|
Anjow posted:I work in England and my employer is in the process of drafting a new contract onto which all employees will be moved. Part of this contract includes a waiver of the 48 hours per week maximum in the EU Working Time Directive. I do not want to regularly work more than 48 hours in a week and I don't want the company to be able to. I do sometimes do more, but I gather that this is based on an average so that's not a problem since it's not regular. Where the hell have you been working that didn't already require everyone to waive the 48 hours maximum? As Alchenaar said, pretty much everywhere does this. In theory of course you could not sign it, and the ECJ has previously held that someone who refused to work more couldn't be moved to another position with fewer hours (Fuss (Social Policy)) but I don't know if there's any authority about whether they could get rid of you or what might happen. In reality though I can't see how not signing could do anything other than make your life hell and cause a lot of resentment on the part of your employer. It's one thing to say you are entitled not to sign it in law but another to understand the implications of not doing it on your quality of life at work and they way you are perceived within the organisation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 08:52
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:What are my options and the possible repercussions of refusing to pay for the second vehicle's shipping costs? The amount that they are asking for is about 75% of the total insurance reimbursement that they say I will be paid, so I would still come out ahead even though it seems to me that the relocation company should be responsible for these costs What does the contract/paperwork say about all this?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 16:30
|
|
|
I have a question for anyone who knows anything about UK employment/payment laws? My boyfriend has worked for a small Limited company for the past 9 months. Over the past 4 months, his boss has been really bad about paying him - he either doesn't pay him at all or only pays him some of his wages. He is also always late paying him and doesn't give him a payslip. He's also been quite bad about being upfront about this, telling my boyfriend he has been paid only for us to then discover that the money hasn't appeared. There is one other guy employed at the company who (as far as we're aware) has had some trouble getting paid too. My boyfriend has talked to his boss, stating that he needs to be paid on time (We have email evidence of this, as well as a written contract signed by his boss) and in full because we need that money desperately. His boss has basically said that he wants to pay him but he doesn't have enough money to pay him in full (Or at all, half the time). My boyfriend is currently looking for a new job and has said he won't be going back to the office until he is paid for his work. The thing we want to know is.. where do we go from here? Because it is a limited company, if the company itself doesn't have the money to pay my boyfriend, is his boss legally required to pay him out of his pocket or can he get away with not paying anything? Any advice would be much appreciated!
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 17:12
|
|
|
SleeplessInEngland posted:I have a question for anyone who knows anything about UK employment/payment laws? I doubt his boss (assuming he's registered as the director of the company) would be personally liable for any outstanding debts. Does the company genuinely not have the money though? If it is on the verge of bankruptcy and has borrowed money from banks etc on the basis of putting up its assets as security then your boyfriend probably wouldn't get anything if it came to that, but the boss doesn't sound like the most believable character in the world. It sounds like the best thing to do would be to write a formal letter to the boss notifying him that if your boyfriend isn't paid, he will have no option but to go through the courts. Normally I would recommend instructing a solicitor but if you're short on money then that might not be the best idea. It would be a good idea to contact your local Citizens Advice Bureau - they can give you more detailed advice and help with drafting an appropriate letter. They can also guide you through the process of starting a claim (fairly simple and painless process) etc if it comes to that. If the company genuinely has no money then there's not much your boyfriend can do but sometimes the prospect of legal proceedings can wake someone up and they might 'realise' that they do have more money than they thought.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 18:41
|
|
|
chemosh6969 posted:What does the contract/paperwork say about all this? That's a good question; I have requested that they send me digital copies of the relevant paperwork and a copy of the invoice that was sent to my employer for the two vehicles. I will be able to compare all of that to my personal records when I go home this weekend (from a work trip)
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:That's a good question; I have requested that they send me digital copies of the relevant paperwork and a copy of the invoice that was sent to my employer for the two vehicles. I will be able to compare all of that to my personal records when I go home this weekend (from a work trip) It did strike me as odd that they would make this claim after shipping the car. Seems like they are trying to minimize their loss due to the damage done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:It did strike me as odd that they would make this claim after shipping the car. Seems like they are trying to minimize their loss due to the damage done. The cars were covered with relocation insurance, so I don't think that they would lose money due to the damage. Although it wouldn't surprise me if they were lying and had never purchased insurance for the shipment Anyway, they're pretty incompetent - Failed to arrange for my stuff to be moved on the initial agreed-upon date. The representative just never arranged it. After waiting around all day, I called the representative and learned this. He was at least very apologetic and did schedule some movers to come out a few days later. It was pure luck that this worked out, this could have been a huge disaster. - Took nearly a month to produce the paperwork that I would need in order to register my car, according to the relocation representative they had simply lost these documents and had to make new ones and get them signed by the shipping company - The debacle in question, where they misinformed a customer about their policy regarding car ownership, shipped a car that they apparently shouldn't have shipped, and then expected the customer to pay for the relocation company's mistakes - From a coworker, they shipped his vehicle but forgot to ship the key with it These guys are idiots, I wouldn't be surprised if they were lying about this entire situation, or even misinformed regarding their own policies QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Sep 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2012 00:45
|
|
|
If it came down to it, you can sue them for damages. That part is a slam dunk win, because regardless of fees or whatever they damaged the cars. If they wanted to sue/counterclaim for shipping the 2nd car, then they have to prove a contract with you to pay for that service. I don't see that happening. I know you don't want it to come to that, and it's highly unlikely. But the legal end results are likely one-sided towards you unless there's magical language in the contract.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2012 04:07
|
|
|
This post is about Bed Bugs!  I moved into a new apartment about a month ago. The only piece of furniture I brought with me was a futon. Its cased in leather and has no signs of bugs anywhere. Within the first week or so I started getting bites. I actually found a couple fleas during my first two weeks here. Nothing major, just a bite here and there. I complained daily about it. They had trouble giving me a set date for a flea spray as well as confirming that any spray had ever taken place. Apparently they use Schrodingers pest service, I don't know. During this time I found a tiny red roach and brought it to the office. They sent a pest guy out the next day. This is a bit of an aside but I'll elaborate what happened. I work late so I was still asleep at 1:00 in the afternoon. I wake up with a pest control guy staring down at me in my bedroom. I ask him to give me a second to get out of bed and he declines the offer to not stand over me. I'm not sure if my dick is out of my pants or not but I get up anyway and go get the bug I kept. He looks at it, says its a bed bug, asked me where it was, I tell him on some pants I owned, then he leaves. Two hours later I get a call saying I brought bed bugs into the apartment and all the cleaning will cost me 600 dollars. I'm as nice as I can about telling them that they'll have to prove I caused this or I won't pay anything. They send someone today, during the thirty minutes I'm not at home, and they confirm I have a small amount of bed bugs, not fully infested yet, and that they'll split the cost of the more simpler clean which will be 150 total on my end. Since I've been here a month and this infestation seems to be a week or two in the works, it must be my fault. She brought up how the upstairs is empty and I told her that its only been so for two weeks and I still have neighbors on either side, and another building only 6 yards away. Also she said they checked thoroughly for bed bugs before I moved in, and I was able to get a bit smart and mention how my washer/dryer was broke upon move in and the kitchen faucet was leaking water everywhere as well. Should I pay the 150 and feel successful that I've argued my way down that far or keeping fighting this bullshit? It be one thing if they could find a horde living in my mattress but I feel its a bit rough having to pay this much because most likely my neighbors are farming these things and they showed up at my place. Also apologies for the terrible sentence structure, my keyboard is breaking. EDIT I'm in Texas, I signed a bed bug addendum, and googling bed bugs brings up all sorts of Texas Apartment Association information, not in my favor. Black Cat fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Sep 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2012 07:21
|
|
|
dos4gw posted:I doubt his boss (assuming he's registered as the director of the company) would be personally liable for any outstanding debts. Does the company genuinely not have the money though? If it is on the verge of bankruptcy and has borrowed money from banks etc on the basis of putting up its assets as security then your boyfriend probably wouldn't get anything if it came to that, but the boss doesn't sound like the most believable character in the world. Honestly, we have no idea if he has the money and is just really low on funds so is choosing to keep the money and put it back into the company instead OR he literally has no money to pay my boyfriend. They're still working for clients & are obviously able to keep paying the rent on their office but the boss is pretty useless and has a tendency to fob my boyfriend off with 'I'll have your money by Friday/Saturday/Whenever' so whether he has the money or not is anyone's guess. I do know that they're owed a fair bit of money from various clients though, so perhaps that's the problem. I contacted CAB yesterday but they were pretty useless. The lady was basically just reading me the advice from the website and I'd already read that so I didn't find out anything else. The advice about the letter is a good one though, so thank you  We'll do that this week and hopefully get somewhere with it. I'm just hopeful that his boss will finally take this seriously instead of acting like it's a big joke.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2012 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:44 |
|
|
State: North Carolina Charge: Breaking and entering as a felony/larceny, running from police, and causing damage to locks. Not sure if it matters or not, but this is about someone in the armed forces. I just want to know what to expect. Is it possible to predict the kind of sentence this would carry? Sorry for not giving a lot of details. I believe this is this person's first time being formally charged with anything, but I could be wrong. I apologize if I can't ask this question here. I'm not really asking for legal advice; I'd just really like to know when I can expect to ever see this person again. Fluorescent fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Sep 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2012 17:40
|
|
