|
Shux posted:I'm hoping there might be some lurking Aussie Legal people in here. I'm in Queensland, Australia. Do not rely on those "top X law firms!" websites, lawyers/law firms get a ridiculous amount of correspondence that essentially says "Congrats, you've been voted the top Licensing Law Firm in [country]! Please fill out this card and pay us $10k to get listed". I would be super embarrassed to find out that my lawyer was stupid enough to fall for that, and it would make me question their judgement.
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:I'm not entirely sure if this is the thread for it, but hopefully it's close enough. I have a buddy in Canada who's wanting to move down to the US, but neither of us really know what that process entails. I know that you can get in via having a company or a spouse sponsor you, but is there any way to get in without those? I know vaguely about green cards and work permits, but I'm not entirely sure how to go about getting either of them. If anyone can give me some information on that stuff, it'd be much appreciated! Without a sponsor of some sort, the only real options to come to the US are as an asylee/refugee or using the diversity lottery. Canada is excluded from the lottery, and I doubt he has any asylee case to fall back on. So basically he will probably need a sponsor. The good news is that as a Canadian he can benefit from the TN program, which is basically the simplest way to get working in the US ever. He will need to find a company that wants him, though, and he does need to qualify for a professional position. What sort of work does he do? Does he have a degree?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Do any legal experts want to chime in on the ACA and its hardship exemptions? The exemptions are vague, but take #12 for instance. It seems like anyone in one of those states could file for Medicaid and claim the exemption. #13 is another one; could a 26 year old use the cancellation notice from their parents' plan here? Obviously no one really knows how these exemptions work, but isn't this something that would normally be codified in the law? How can the federal government use subjective, case by case judgment in determining whether a law is enforced or not?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
guntpuncher posted:Obviously no one really knows how these exemptions work, but isn't this something that would normally be codified in the law? The regulations that implement the hardship exemption are codified at 45 CFR 155.605(g). quote:How can the federal government use subjective, case by case judgment in determining whether a law is enforced or not? This literally happens every day at every level of government.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
I currently live in Illinois. I used to live in Mississippi between 2007-2009. While driving to work then I was given a speeding ticket one day. I waited until the last day before court when I could just pay it off (I'm guessing the equivalent of "No Contest") to call the number on the ticket I was supposed to, and the clerk told me it wasn't there. She said something along the lines of it must not have ever been filed, so I couldn't do anything with it. I figured I was off the hook. I moved several times since then, and kept my copy of the ticket just in case up until half a year ago, when I figured a 5 year old ticket wouldn't come back to bite me. During Xmas travels I went to my parents' place (which used to be my permanent address when I was in the Navy, a kind of home base for me), and they had a letter for me. It's from a collections agency that claims I owe ~$450 for the ticket/court costs. Says to make the check payable to Hancock County Justice Court, which I think was the jurisdiction of the ticket. They sent it to an address I don't live it, and my last name is horribly misspelled. So I have a mix of thoughts about this. Thoughts (1) I don't think the ticket was filed on time for me to handle out of court, but I don't remember details clearly enough to argue on the matter. (2) My parents said if they get any calls or anything they'll make it clear they don't know me/I don't live there, which is true. (3) My dad thinks the collections agency is probably crooks that somehow got ahold of info like that, but I dunno. Their BBB accreditation is high, although they also have a ton of complaints against them that call them opportunistic crooks (The BBB just says they properly gave a good effort to address the complaints) Questions (4) Is it reasonable to expect this to bite me in the butt one way or another? If I pay, am I basically being robbed? If I don't, will they try to find me/tank my credit rating? (5) They misspelled my last name (by a LOT) and used a long out of date address. Are they likely to find me? Would they already have my SSN, and likely just have fat-fingered my name? I always figured if this were a problem, it'd have come up when I try to renew my Driver License or something, but so far as I know there's never been anything outstanding legally on me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
guntpuncher posted:How can the federal government use subjective, case by case judgment in determining whether a law is enforced or not? Hello and welcome to Law!
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
Pander posted:(3) My dad thinks the collections agency is probably crooks that somehow got ahold of info like that, but I dunno. Their BBB accreditation is high, although they also have a ton of complaints against them that call them opportunistic crooks (The BBB just says they properly gave a good effort to address the complaints)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 03:41
|
|
|
Contact the court in question. Generally judges can get these things pulled out of collections if they really believe you. That said, for future reference, in cases like this you really wanted to go in and get something in writing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 08:55
|
|
|
A friend of mine is selling a vehicle, private party to private party. The seller is in PA, the buyer is in NY. The buyer is concerned about titling, registration, plates, all that stuff, because of state boundaries and whatnot. The seller is concerned about liability and not getting anything coming back at him. The two parties are about two hours apart, and plan to meet in the middle, which happens to be in NY. The transaction will be cash only, just shy of $5000. The buyer, because of his concern over the plates and whatnot, has requested possibly keeping the PA plates that are on there, and mailing them back after NY state registration is complete. Buyer also wants to write the bill of sale up for $500, instead of the actual amount, to save on taxes or some poo poo. Seller doesn't care about what the bill of sale says as long as he gets the entire actual amount, in cash, at the time of sale. Seller plans on contacting a local (PA) dealership to see what should happen with the plates and title and bill of sale before taking any action. Does this sound like bad news bears, or is friend (seller) acting reasonably by entertaining this deal? I don't think friend is going to get carjacked at gunpoint when meeting this guy or anything, and even if he did, he's trying to get rid of the vehicle anyhow so oh well. The request about the plates and the bill of sale seem...not quite shady, because I can imagine buyer being wary of getting in trouble for registration issues, and not wanting to pay extra tax, but it's clearly not 100% above-board, either. Like I said, seller has made it clear he's not doing anything until checking into what he should officially do with the plates, titles, registration, and all that, but still. Any thoughts on how I should advise my friend? Bad Munki fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Dec 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
The buyer needs to get a In Transit Permit. Giving someone else your plates does sound like a bad idea. Also, I'm pretty sure the DMV calculates sales tax based on the fair market value of the car, not the price on the bill of sale.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
Guy Axlerod posted:Also, I'm pretty sure the DMV calculates sales tax based on the fair market value of the car, not the price on the bill of sale. Last time I did a person-to-person, it was fair market value or bill of sale price, whichever was highest. But yeah, they won't buy the 1/10th number on the bill of sale, they're not new at this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
Sounds like the seller is going to push for everything by-the-book, but if the buyer reeeaaally wants to put a lower price on the bill of sale just to try, and not doing so would ruin the deal, there's still a chance it'd happen. The goal is to get the spare vehicle out of his driveway, there's basically no space out there at this point, and he's had it on the market for several months now with little interest and several price drops. If this buyer really wanted to try to stiff the state of NY anyhow (regardless of feasibility) and put a lower price on the bill of sale, should the seller reasonably expect to be held liable for anything if the buyer got caught and/or tried to take some zany legal action against the seller? It's understood that nothing said here is given as legal advice, etc., and nobody will recommend "bending" the law, just curious what the seller might want to be aware of in such a situation. Also, thanks for the in-transit link, that's exactly what was needed for the titling/registration and I'll forward the info. Bad Munki fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Dec 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
I live in Wisconsin. I won a civil lawsuit for $400 (well, $494 after court fees were added) against a small local business back in September 2012. I still have not seen a single dime to indicate they're trying to make good on their obligation - what do I do? At this point it's not even REALLY about the money. Some mutual acquaintances mentioned the business owner was recently bragging about screwing me over and how I was a bitch for suing him, as well as saying that the downpayment I gave was non-refundable and how his ex business partner was liable. Although this flies in the face of the court ruling that system has done nothing to make him pay up, and basically he uses this impunity to make me seem like a shitheel to my friends. Though I'd PREFER to get something out of it, I'd consider remitting the entire amount to a third party just so long as it's taken from that douchebag. After the ruling I recall paying a small fee to put some kind of pressure on the business Illegibly Eligible fucked around with this message at 04:20 on Jan 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
Illegibly Eligible posted:I live in Wisconsin. I won a civil lawsuit for $400 (well, $494 after court fees were added) against a small local business back in September 2012. I still have not seen a single dime to indicate they're trying to make good on their obligation - what do I do? At this point it's not even REALLY about the money. Some mutual acquaintances mentioned the business owner was recently bragging about screwing me over and how I was a bitch for suing him, as well as saying that the downpayment I gave was non-refundable and how his ex business partner was liable. Although this flies in the face of the court ruling that system has done nothing to make him pay up, and basically he uses this impunity to make me seem like a shitheel to my friends. Though I'd PREFER to get something out of it, I'd consider remitting the entire amount to a third party just so long as it's taken from that douchebag. IANAL, it isn't the courts responsibility to make him pay. The lien can stay on his building until the day he dies and it gets sold or transferred to someone else. It is easier than you think to avoid a judgement. A lawyer can probably weight in on options, but it is entirely possible he will thumb his nose at you for decades. That is why people say you don't sue for small stuff or if there is no hope of recovery.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
IA also NAL but this page seems like it might help you. Garnishing earnings could work? Also this pdf in particular sounds like fun if it applies to your case because you get to get the sheriff involved which seems like a bad time for the dude.  In the course of googling this I learned in CA you can get the sheriff to walk into the person's place of business and take money out of the drat register which is awesome/terrifying.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:IANAL, it isn't the courts responsibility to make him pay. The lien can stay on his building until the day he dies and it gets sold or transferred to someone else. It is easier than you think to avoid a judgement. A lawyer can probably weight in on options, but it is entirely possible he will thumb his nose at you for decades. That is why people say you don't sue for small stuff or if there is no hope of recovery. No, the reason you don't sue for small stuff is it's a pain to collect. He can't thumb his nose at you for decades if he has stuff you can take. You just have to do some of the post-judgment process stuff. Look into writs of execution and writs of garnishment. Also, look into creditor's examinations. You can call the local small claims court to see if they have standard forms or process for that, but in normal court, generally you can issue a subpoena to compel the debtor to appear and answer questions about their finances (how many cars do you have, do you have bank accounts, etc). If they don't show then an order to show cause issues, which can lead to a warrant, but is generally a huge pain to enforce and doesn't go anywhere. But either way, you can also issue writs of execution to compel the sheriff to, as kedo said, show up and take their poo poo. The sheriffs usually charge some money, but they take their stuff and sell it at an auction. Writs of garnishment will tell their bank to give you money in their bank account, but you need to know their bank account to issue one of those. But yeah, it's not the court's responsibility to make him pay. It's your responsibility to do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Thanks Arcturas and kedo! I have no problem with it being my responsibility to follow through on this; I just figured I wasn't going to pressure him and mostly considered it an expensive lesson in dealing with shady people. His poo poo-talking tipped me though. I'm willing to spend $494 to make this process as inconvenient as possible for him. Wonder how many writs of execution that'll pay for? The guy runs a shop making collectibles (his prized creation is a life-sized dalek) and uses his shop as a gallery to also sell local artists' work. I'm certain his finances and business ventures aren't 100% above board, but I have no proof. While a creditor's examination would likely be pretty devastating I can't imagine it being hassle-free enough to get anywhere... and I'm loving the idea of the local sheriff raiding his shop for stuff to sell and leaving a disheveled and emptied storefront. Moreso because it would serve to scare away all of the trolls who hang around there selling/trading various drugs and with the BEST of luck would happen during one of the "ABDL burlesque shows" he hosts. While I'm not kinkshaming, the thought of him trying to explain to a police officer why the mostly-naked women there are TRYING to come across as children but aren't ACTUALLY children is simply hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
I apologize in advance if this isn't the right place for my question. A little over two years ago (September 2011) I purchased a web domain with the intent of creating a webcomic. I only posted a single comic before letting the site go idle, but recently decided to try making it a blog site that I might eventually make money from. I spent some time thinking up an original name for my site prior to registration, and made sure it wasn't currently being used online already. (As in ZERO matches on Google.) (I am reading the blog post here for advice on this subject. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3447030 ) Unfortunately, today I discovered that there is a podcast with similar subject matter that has adopted my chosen name, with a slight difference in capitalization, as of May 2013. So my question is this - assuming that I continue using my website as a blog, is there anything I could/should do to address this? I'm not interested in trying to get money out of the podcast guys, I just want to make sure there isn't a conflict in the future. (I already have proof that I came up with the name a full 18 months before them if that ever becomes an issue.) Thank you for your time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Grillburg posted:I apologize in advance if this isn't the right place for my question. One avenue is trademarking (one of the various parts of IP law that I handle) the name. It's not cheap, but it's not insanely expensive and it should help you (providing you keep up use) control of the title (copyrighting your website is also a good idea). Disclaimer:No comments or answers I give are meant to constitute legal advice or the creation of an Attorney-Client relationship. Sorry I have to CMA. Marshal Prolapse fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Jan 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
They would have a super hard time getting a trade-mark that stopped the podcast from using the name too. Getting the trade-mark is relatively cheap, litigating it or defending against a suit is the crazy expensive part. They should also not register the copyright for their website at this point, what would that accomplish? Domain name disputes are also something to be concerned about, but they would very likely not be able to take the domain from you. Just email them, get a coexistence agreement and link to each other since you have subject matter overlap which will help both of you with SEO. I'm not a lawyer and you're an idiot if you listen to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:They would have a super hard time getting a trade-mark that stopped the podcast from using the name too. Getting the trade-mark is relatively cheap, litigating it or defending against a suit is the crazy expensive part. Trademark would establish his site as the first in time using it and put others on notice. Also if you want to establish a working agreement with them, having the trademark, puts you at a significantly better bargaining position and also in the case of domain matter would strengthen your ownership of the domain. It would be defensive in nature, not offensive/litigation oriented. Copyright for the website is just a general suggestion for protecting IP (nature of what I do) if someones is swiping your material (not necessarily tied to this matter), it gives you more tools in the arsenal (and you can do bulk website copyrights to get around having to do each article.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Unfortunately after checking the prices for trademarks, that's definitely out of my price range right now. And the coexistence agreement seems to be based on both parties having trademarks filed in their region. (I'm in California, they're in New York City.) I didn't find one filed by them either. As for copyright, I thought that just having the website registered by me makes it my copyright as far as that is concerned?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Grillburg posted:Unfortunately after checking the prices for trademarks, that's definitely out of my price range right now. And the coexistence agreement seems to be based on both parties having trademarks filed in their region. (I'm in California, they're in New York City.) I didn't find one filed by them either. You automatically own the copyright on anything you create, you just need to register it before you can litigate it (and there are some other considerations). A coexistence agreement would depend on the two of you agreeing to not gently caress with each other, you don't necessarily need a trade-mark, it's just WAY easier to force them to agree if you have a trade-mark and they don't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
They probably won't be able to get a trademark enforceable against the other entity anyway, since their first use in commerce would post-date the other party and trademark does recognize prior user rights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
This is in Alabama, regarding constant/excessive harassment by new neighbors. I made a map to illustrate what I'm discussing so it is easier to understand. My girlfriend has lived in B for about 1.5 years, and until the past week or so A was unoccupied. She's on a month-to-month lease, and pays excessively cheap rent ($450/mo including utilities). The driveway is shared access (only way in or out) and loops around A, but we typically have parked our vehicles around X while the owner/new neighbors typically part their cars at Y or in the garage. Since the new neighbors moved in, they have made complaints repeatedly to the landlord, and directly to my girlfriend via shouting/screaming matches, and last night the husband got in my face and was calling me "Bitch", "Motherfucker", etc. because I told him to call his landlord if he had a problem with me being there - but I'll get to that in a minute. Some of the examples of complaints: 1. We used to go from X to Y and back out the entrance because it was easier than turning around, we'd just loop out. They took issue with this immediately because of reasons, i.e. his wife walked around topless and they didn't have blinds to "waking up our kids." "Don't drive around our house!" Since the complaint, we have just turned around and gone back out the way we come in to X. 2. I apparently drive too fast when leaving the driveway (general complaint I guess). 3. My girlfriend was taking her trash to the entrance (where garbage pickup is) around 12 noon and the guy's wife beat on her door and complained that she woke up her kids by daring to drive during the middle of the day. 4. Last night I was visiting and we had parked our vehicles at X and it was difficult to pull past us because we were parked side-by-side and blocking the drive. Husband beat on the door and complained that he wanted to park in the garage. I told him I was almost done eating, and I needed to clean off my hands (taco salad mess) and he started demanding that I move it IMMEDIATELY THIS INSTANT GRAWRBLBLELBE I told him that I wasn't a little kid and I'm not going to listen to him throw a tantrum, and got all sorts of "That's how it gonna be bitch? That how it gonna be? I'm gonna buy this land and evict your stupid girlfriend. I pay way more rent than she does." After repeatedly calling me "motherfucker" and "bitch" I informed him that he needed to calm down (yes, just like that) or I was going to call the police. He then called the landlord (who has active warrants and begged me not to call the police) and the landlord demanded that I leave. I told the landlord, that since my girlfriend was legally occupying the premises, that I was a guest and had every right to be there as it wasn't spelled out in her lease (and I believe relevant state/federal law prohibits landlords from prohibiting guests) that I'm not going to allow her to be bullied/harassed just because he's getting rent/selling his house to the new assholes. I said I understood that put him in a difficult position, but that I wasn't going to take demands off of anyone - including him. I also called the sheriffs and made a report of harassment, and they spoke to the rear end in a top hat neighbor who then repeatedly called/bugged the poo poo out of the landlord - but haven't heard anything else directly. The sheriff's told me that if the rear end in a top hat bought the house and wanted to evict us to just ride the 90 days and be pricks if we wanted to, so the law doesn't give a poo poo about either the landlord (although they were keen because they remembered recently trying to serve a warrant for him) or the new people. So... the only reason she isn't saying "gently caress this" and leaving anyway is because $450 a month is dirt cheap. That being said, I can only imagine she's going to get harassed in the future. How should she respond beyond logging dates/times/events and such? I sincerely doubt that the landlord is going to be able to file an eviction notice himself because he's got active warrants. So right now if she wanted I imagine she could gently caress around and not pay rent until evicted - but she is trying to be fair about it. So... A. How should she respond to further incidents of harassment? B. Is it worth riding the 90 days if he decides to try and legally evict her? C. When I explained the law regarding guests, he said he's going to make her sign a piece of paper saying she's not allowed guests. How to respond? Just a drama clusterfuck. Best neighbors I've ever had are the ones that live on my street and have for the past 10 years and we haven't so much as said "Hello."
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
This isn't a legal question, man. The correct answer is put away money since the place is cheap, move, then drop a dime on the landlord (sign a piece of paper she can't have guests in the home she pays for? Rofl) and screw him and the rear end in a top hat tenants in the same go. Alternately, withhold rent for 90 days and proceed from step 2 for hilarity and drama, but I'm not a lawyer. And I'm definitely not even wearing pants.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:
1) lol at more silk drama A) There's not a ton you can do at the moment other than keep a record of everything that happens, call the police/sheriff every time in case things escalate/come to a head. Someone in Alabama will be able to help you more about the specifics. B) It's honestly probably easier for her to start looking for somewhere new to live, because the landlord and neighbour are both going to be insufferable and living near lovely people is the worst. That said, if she gets notice, why wouldn't she just stay there as long as it takes for her to find a new place? C) Just don't sign it? Why would she ever agree to that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:1) lol at more silk drama Kind of what I figured. Last question: I don't mind parking to where I'm "out of the way" so to speak, but does the landlord have any right to demand I can't even come around? Based on everything I understand, she has the right to guests as a legal tenant, and that implies her guests have a right to park on the premises right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:Kind of what I figured. Last question: I don't mind parking to where I'm "out of the way" so to speak, but does the landlord have any right to demand I can't even come around? Based on everything I understand, she has the right to guests as a legal tenant, and that implies her guests have a right to park on the premises right? Have you checked the lease in case something is mentioned there?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:Have you checked the lease in case something is mentioned there? Yes, it was just some random 2 page lease he printed off the internet. It says nothing about parking. It was a fairly informal thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:Yes, it was just some random 2 page lease he printed off the internet. It says nothing about parking. It was a fairly informal thing. Yes but many times there's something about raising rent if a guest is staying there for extended periods of time. Have you considered avoiding not causing issues by doing things like parking so you aren't blocking a driveway for someone else? I get the feeling you'd be amazed at how well things like that would work. I kid of course  I'm also sure your landlord is happy to be renting to people that call the cops out when he has warrants and would much rather have the other people leave. Have you asked the landlord to see if he'd be willing to evict them?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
chemosh6969 posted:Yes but many times there's something about raising rent if a guest is staying there for extended periods of time. Yeah, the agreement was for month-to-month with no termination. Yes, I'm perfectly willing to not cause issues - but some of the issues are unavoidable apparently (driving to take the trash to the curb which is like a quarter mile away in the middle of the day results in screaming/obscenities). In fact, I was perfectly willing to move my vehicle where I had parked it after I washed my hands until he started babbling "Motherfucker" at me. Not to mention, he could just as easily have driven around Y to get to the garage and it would have been about 50 feet further of a drive. He even said as much when he was babbling "IT'S SHORTER TO GO THIS WAY!!!1"
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
So a ridiculously stupid thing went down at my work because an idiot with a spoiled kid accused a coworker of stealing an iPod. During the police investigation, two cops interrogated her and said that they had footage of her stealing it so she should just give in. It was an incredibly stupid thing for them to say because there are no cameras in her department and her shift had been done for three hours by the time the supposed theft took place, but nonetheless she was scared shitless and just kept denying any involvement. Not that I have anything to do with this, but that has to be illegal, right? They can't just say things that aren't true like an episode of Law and Order SVU or something, right? This is in Ontario if it matters, but I doubt it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:Yeah, the agreement was for month-to-month with no termination. Are your cars obnoxiously loud or something? My condo is like twenty feet from the parking lot and not amazingly well-insulated or anything, and the only neighbor I can even hear coming and going is the one guy across the way who drives a modded Datsun 510. Unless your cars are loud enough to violate noise regulations or you are completely blocking the other tenant in or something, I wouldn't think the other tenant would be able to do anything about you parking or driving in the shared driveway. If the lease says nothing about guest or parking restrictions, then there isn't much the landlord can do either without drawing up a new lease that addresses those subjects. However, since her lease is month-to-month, the landlord can terminate it within whatever notice period is specified in the lease and/or required by law and require her to sign a new lease that does have whatever restrictions he wants (as long as they don't violate any applicable laws). Even if he can't forbid guests, he may not be required to provide any parking for them, so he could still effectively forbid you to park in or use the driveway. I wouldn't fight him any longer than absolutely necessary if he does decide to terminate the lease and evict her (or demand she sign a new one with a bunch of ridiculous restrictions). Hell, I'd start looking for another place to live now; it'd be worth a couple hundred bucks a month to avoid the inevitable bullshit. It's clear the other tenants are going to be assholes and the landlord is going to allow them to do so at best and be an rear end in a top hat himself at worst, so there isn't going to be a happy ending here; there are plenty of perfectly legal ways for either of them to make your girlfriend's life (and yours by extension) miserable even if he doesn't just up and terminate her lease. Edit: Cobalt Chloride posted:Not that I have anything to do with this, but that has to be illegal, right? They can't just say things that aren't true like an episode of Law and Order SVU or something, right? This is in Ontario if it matters, but I doubt it. Don't know how different Canada is, but police officers in the US can certainly lie to a suspect about things like having some sort of evidence linking a suspect to a crime. There are other lies that would invalidate an interrogation or confession, like misrepresenting legal procedures (e.g. telling them their confession can't be used in court or that they are required to answer questions without a lawyer present) or telling lies that could coerce an innocent suspect into making a false confession (like implying that he or his family is in some sort of immediate danger unless he confesses, or promising some sort of reward or favorable treatment in return for a confession), but telling a suspect they have video evidence of a crime would generally be considered fair game, since that statement alone would be very unlikely to coerce an innocent person into confessing. dennyk fucked around with this message at 03:41 on Jan 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Cobalt Chloride posted:So a ridiculously stupid thing went down at my work because an idiot with a spoiled kid accused a coworker of stealing an iPod. During the police investigation, two cops interrogated her and said that they had footage of her stealing it so she should just give in. It was an incredibly stupid thing for them to say because there are no cameras in her department and her shift had been done for three hours by the time the supposed theft took place, but nonetheless she was scared shitless and just kept denying any involvement. Nope cops can and will lie to you. It is literally part of a class they teach at the academy. I'm always amazed that people are shocked by this. This is why you don't talk to cops and lawyer up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
I have a question about someone I know. I know up front the answer is he needs to lawyer up ASAP. I'm just looking for some information on what level of trouble he could be in. On our local PD facebook page, the police are looking for 2 persons. A man and a woman. The woman allegedly stole someones purse. The police have photos from a local retail store where the alleged crime occurred. A coworker and I are fairly certain the man is someone we work with. The woman is the one who supposedly stole the purse according to what the local PD posted. So lets say he was with her when this crime occurred. I'm sure he is guilty of something if in fact it did occur. If he were to get a lawyer and talk to the police, is there anyway he could come out with minor charges/no charges if he cooperated? This is assuming she did it obviously. We're trying to contact him but I'm worried this guy is in pretty deep poo poo. He is right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
Depends. He should talk to a lawyer before going to the station. Depending on the circs he could get nothing or a state prison sentence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
dennyk posted:Are your cars obnoxiously loud or something? My condo is like twenty feet from the parking lot and not amazingly well-insulated or anything, and the only neighbor I can even hear coming and going is the one guy across the way who drives a modded Datsun 510. Unless your cars are loud enough to violate noise regulations or you are completely blocking the other tenant in or something, I wouldn't think the other tenant would be able to do anything about you parking or driving in the shared driveway. Yeah her landlord called her today and called her a liar regarding what the guy pulled last night, and said he's going to make her sign a list of demands/raise her rent by $200, and who knows what else. AFAIK retaliation is illegal, but the guy doesn't manage his property like a landlord, he just randomly acts crazy, consistently smells of coors light, and otherwise is too involved with his property to the extent of showing up without notice, going through stuff, etc. The cars are a 2008 Toyota Tacoma and a jeep. Neither is loud. I haven't brought my harley for a visit ever. The landlord is in the process of selling both properties to the dickheads, so at best I figured she could scorch earth it on the way out. She's given me cash so I could write checks to pay her rent before so she didn't have to pay cash, any way that gives me more rights?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
Move. Move move move move move move. Move. Moooooooooooooove. MOVE. I am not a lawyer, but a) your gf should move and b) if her name is on the lease she is the only party to that contract with the landlord it doesn't matter who wrote the check and c) MOOOOOOOOOOOVE THE FUUUUUUUUUUCK OOOOOOOUT! P.S. Your gf should move out Edit: what I'm trying to say here is, your girlfriend should remove herself from the situation by packing her poo poo and moving out. There is nothing to gain by not moving out, Move out, FrozenVent fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Jan 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
What is she going to gain out of this? She should find somewhere else to live as soon as possible because continuing to live there will be increasingly miserable. What do you think that having the cheques in your name is going to do?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 06:31
|
|