|
Narcissus1916 posted:There's a weird loophole where the canadian system won't cover him (I forgot the reason) Depends on the province, but it likely isn't a weird loophole. Even if he's paid into and eligible for the public system (foreign students may not be, and even if there are there's often a waiting period where they buy insurance through a provider organized by the school) the provinces generally will only pay the Canadian cost for procedures. So if something happens when you're in the US it won't come close to covering the bills because you're getting billed $200 for things that are chargeable for $20 in Canada. Anyway, you can buy travel medical for, like $20 a trip.
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
I got a drunk in public ticket (in California) and I thought "Okay, $150, that's fine, I was dumb" After court assessment fees and every other surprise fee they could imagine to tack on, it ended up being $800. At least it wasn't like the time I got a fix it ticket that they sent me to the wrong court/court date that ended up being a failure to appear... that ended up costing $350 in itself for the base on top of the other 900 in court fees and other what have you not. Yeah, the system is fan-fuckin-tastic *not white.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
The idea that being drunk in public is illegal just seems odd to me. Evidence that ten years on Nevada will change a person, I suppose. That and even back when I lived in California, I saw a lot of drunk homeless/street people and nobody batted an eye.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Whoa, how drunk do you have to be to get a drunk in public? I've slurred my way through Los angeles and the inland empire without any issues. But I'm white, so....
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:Whoa, how drunk do you have to be to get a drunk in public? I've slurred my way through Los angeles and the inland empire without any issues. But I'm white, so.... As someone who works at a SoCal liquor store: there is a certain point you get to wherein we, or someone in the surrounding neighborhood are going to call the cops on you, and it's usually because you're a screaming maniac or you're wandering through traffic or, god forbid, we refuse you service because you're too plastered to sell to and then you get in a car and speed off. If it seems like you're probably drunk with bonuses (ie, meth), that is another catapult to "Cops, now" territory. In rare cases it's because you're so messed up you've decided to cross over into actual crimes (trying to shoplift from us or starting fights), but it's a fine line between "Let the rear end in a top hat be someone else's problem" and "alright we gotta put a halt to this before it escalates". The unwritten rule of policies like this is "handle your poo poo", basically, because how the hell does anyone notice it otherwise?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
Being charged with public drunkenness means that you were drunk while doing something stupid or drunk while being annoying to a cop or drunk while being a minority.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
I was asleep in a parked car. I didn't want to dare a DUI and so I was sleeping it off when cops knocked on my window two hours into my slumber time. They were looking for an easy DUI, but thankfully my keys were in the trunk and that's the only thing they could come up with.quote:I saw a lot of drunk homeless/street people and nobody batted an eye. That really depends on the area you are in. Some parts of L.A. would have none of that poo poo and will run you out of the town via drunk in public or even worse tickets. I know that in Downtown, they do sweeps in handing out tickets to the homeless for essentially being homeless. But in those cases those tickets don't lead to anything but missed court dates and warrants issued that eventually just mean those homeless do a day or two in jail for unpaid tickets. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/19/2629581/criminalizing-homelessness/ Criminalizing the homeless isn't anything new. Jack Skeleton fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Mar 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
Jack Skeleton posted:I was asleep in a parked car. I didn't want to dare a DUI and so I was sleeping it off when cops knocked on my window two hours into my slumber time. They were looking for an easy DUI, but thankfully my keys were in the trunk and that's the only thing they could come up with. You were lucky or I've been lied to, but I've had people tell me they got arrested in a situation like that (keys in the trunk, cop just didn't give a poo poo)
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
You can get arrested for anything. The tricky part is whether you are wealthy enough to afford a lawyer who can get you out of whatever bullshit you are saddled with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
A lot of things are illegal, enforcement is pretty inconsistent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:You were lucky or I've been lied to, but I've had people tell me they got arrested in a situation like that (keys in the trunk, cop just didn't give a poo poo) Depending on your state, you can only get a DUI if your keys are in reach while you're in your car. So if your friend was unfortunate enough to have one of those little doors in the back seat of their car that opens up into the trunk, in court that can be argued as "within reach". That's why in that situation it would be best to leave them on top of one of the tires or in the gas tank compartment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:Collecting agencies are downright baffling. As a college-educated underemployed Californian from an upper-middle class family, I know a lot of people who regularly tangle and negotiate with those agencies for all manner of things. Yeah, I was glad when a lot of my debt went to debt collection, strangely enough. I settled all of it for less than half what it was and though that can affect your taxes due to the difference being reported as income, it doesn't mean poo poo to me because all my work is independent contractor and I can BS my way to not paying taxes on any of it. It's gonna take forever to get my credit score back but you know what not being in debt is pretty much loving worth it. Now if only that worked for student loans...
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
TurboFlamingChicken posted:Yeah, I was glad when a lot of my debt went to debt collection, strangely enough. I settled all of it for less than half what it was and though that can affect your taxes due to the difference being reported as income, it doesn't mean poo poo to me because all my work is independent contractor and I can BS my way to not paying taxes on any of it. It's gonna take forever to get my credit score back but you know what not being in debt is pretty much loving worth it. Now if only that worked for student loans... This is the weirdest thing with debt, at least in my experience. I once had a collection agency sending me letters because Paypal took a £400 payment out of my balance twice, but they gave up after a few months, and another agency send me a letter for unpaid phone bills after I ended my contract. Also if they offer you a payment plan to clear it you need to keep track of the balance yourself because they won't tell you when the debt is paid off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 10:19
|
|
|
njsykora posted:This is the weirdest thing with debt, at least in my experience. I once had a collection agency sending me letters because Paypal took a £400 payment out of my balance twice, but they gave up after a few months, and another agency send me a letter for unpaid phone bills after I ended my contract. Also if they offer you a payment plan to clear it you need to keep track of the balance yourself because they won't tell you when the debt is paid off. Yeah, they are required to send you a letter if you settle showing that you have paid in full. A lot of these agencies pay pennies on the dollar for debt so you can get it paid off cheap because anything over 10% is usually a win for them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 06:25
|
|
|
njsykora posted:This is the weirdest thing with debt, at least in my experience. I once had a collection agency sending me letters because Paypal took a £400 payment out of my balance twice, but they gave up after a few months, and another agency send me a letter for unpaid phone bills after I ended my contract. Also if they offer you a payment plan to clear it you need to keep track of the balance yourself because they won't tell you when the debt is paid off. I don't know what the rules are in the US but over here collection agencies are pretty much just smoke and mirrors. They'll threaten you, try to trick you and many other things to get you to pay them but they ultimately have no real legal authority as they're not the stakeholders of the debt. You'd in fact be stupid to try to resolve your debt through them (as they will tack on fees) instead of ignoring them and repaying the one that is originally owed. Though I guess that'd be impossible in the US if the debt has been sold which I don't think is actually possibly with private debt here. We do however have a government agency in charge of collecting debts with the authority to call in the police to forcefully seize your assets if your debt goes unpaid for too long. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 11:22
|
|
|
HBO running a Girls marathon this week so no episode 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the plan for this season is to do 7 episodes in a row then take a week off. They did put up a new video on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXYXuXX48m8 Thurm fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
I don't begrudge John a week off, this show is just appointment TV for me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Many days later and I am still WTF-ing about that collection agency thing. I mean, one person owed $40 ticket yet she ended up paying like hundreds to the agency and her $40 ticket still remained. WTF?! I don't understand the rules since I'm not American. Is it automatic that the collection agent is involved? Does the citizen not have a right to just pay the penalty directly? Or at least change the deal made with the collection agent? This is insane. The collection agents are EVIL. Not saying people should not be punished but the punishment should be equal to the crime. On the topic of the student-athletes, I have always thought they get something other than free education. I thought they get some money out of it. I don't follow sports so I was not aware that the students do not get a share in the profits the school is making from them. This is obviously unfair. About the main segments, the long-form ones, I do enjoy this and always look forward to it. I admire the writers for balancing the seriousness of the topic and the comedy. Although sometimes the seriousness of the topic leaves me too much in disbelief that my reaction to the humor is delayed. This is why I love the short skits they do after the long-form segment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
agatona posted:Many days later and I am still WTF-ing about that collection agency thing. I mean, one person owed $40 ticket yet she ended up paying like hundreds to the agency and her $40 ticket still remained. WTF?! I don't understand the rules since I'm not American. Is it automatic that the collection agent is involved? Does the citizen not have a right to just pay the penalty directly? Or at least change the deal made with the collection agent? This is insane. The collection agents are EVIL. Not saying people should not be punished but the punishment should be equal to the crime. Debt collectors will use a lot of threatening words towards their debtors, threatening jail time, losing their house, their job, etc. but they have no real power. The best they can hope for is a lawsuit, and even then the process is insane. Having been a process server, someone can avoid going to court up to three times (may vary depending on state/county), but until they are issued a citation for contempt they can be avoidant as hell. Honestly, the only reason I dealt with my debt was it would stop the calls but also that I whittled down the cost to not even be a third of the original debt. Debt collection is a hosed up industry run by a bunch of assholes who buy debt for pennies on the dollar and endlessly harass people. That being said people should understand how credit works and understand collateral and money management, as I wish I had known better, but also loan agencies should know better than to loan to someone with little or no credit; that's how the housing bubble burst years ago in the US. Too many drat banks giving out too many drat loans to people they should have known were not going to be able to pay it. At least that is my understanding but if someone a little more familiar with it wants to chime in we have another week of BS until the next episode.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
agatona posted:Many days later and I am still WTF-ing about that collection agency thing. I mean, one person owed $40 ticket yet she ended up paying like hundreds to the agency and her $40 ticket still remained. WTF?! I don't understand the rules since I'm not American. Is it automatic that the collection agent is involved? Does the citizen not have a right to just pay the penalty directly? Or at least change the deal made with the collection agent? This is insane. The collection agents are EVIL. Not saying people should not be punished but the punishment should be equal to the crime. It's a really complex issue that boils down to a couple of things that you have to fundamentally understand about America and why this works the way it does. It starts off with tort reform in the 90s, which I won't explain the mcdonalds hot coffee incident, but it loving snowballed hard into a big thing where people were "suing frivolously" and so tight regulations were put onto the consumers/citizens so that it would be harder to sue corporations. The other part of america is that there is rarely governmental oversight on industries like this, and in fact most things aren't heavily regulated. Though there are protections built in, you have to sue them for it. With the combination of not being able to sue easily or for much money, and no federal oversight over what happens, companies can run wild especially if you're ignorant to what the laws do to protect you. Effectively, collection agencies run wild and do illegal practices but most people don't know what processes are out there for you to fix these situations. No offense to chicken but here's an example. TurboFlamingChicken posted:Debt collectors will use a lot of threatening words towards their debtors, threatening jail time, losing their house, their job, etc. but they have no real power. The best they can hope for is a lawsuit, and even then the process is insane. Having been a process server, someone can avoid going to court up to three times (may vary depending on state/county), but until they are issued a citation for contempt they can be avoidant as hell. Honestly, the only reason I dealt with my debt was it would stop the calls but also that I whittled down the cost to not even be a third of the original debt. Each one of those threatening words are automatically a $1000 violation if you take it to court. Also phone calls can be stopped by sending a letter saying do not call me. The final problem of the entire situation is that even if you wanted to take a collection agency to court for illegal practices (which is a miserable process), or if you wanted standard protections like a listing of what charges they were bringing to you to say you owe, and what their fees are for payment, in regards to tickets specifically they do not receive these protections because they're "not debt" and the collection agency "isn't collecting a debt". The laws probably won't change either because this is lucrative for cities, and because we don't really tax all that much here in the states, they found an unofficial tax that greatly hurts the poor and the rich can write it off while thinking nothing of it. A 250 dollar ticket might be your only option and they won't offer community service because it's about justice not rehabilitation. A prime example is where i used to live you have to pay your tickets to the "Department of Revenue" which is disgusting. Basically it's all hosed and never getting fixed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
Frivolous lawsuits are like people abusing welfare or voter fraud. They are very small isolated problems that get blown up by the media and people think they are widespread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
GutBomb posted:Frivolous lawsuits are like people abusing welfare or voter fraud. They are very small isolated problems that get blown up by the media and people think they are widespread. The Mcdonalds coffee lawsuit is also a lot bigger than just hot coffee. quote:Liebeck's attorneys argued that at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C) McDonald's coffee was defective, claiming it was too hot and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served at any other establishment. McDonald's had refused several prior opportunities to settle for less than what the jury ultimately awarded. The jury damages included $160,000 to cover medical expenses and compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:The Mcdonalds coffee lawsuit is also a lot bigger than just hot coffee. Yeah, the woman had serious burns and McDonalds had been warned several times before that their coffee was above industry standard and dangerously hot. She originally only wanted her medical costs covered, but McDonalds refused so it went to court. The punitive damages were just that, punitive. Their point is to serve as a disincentive to repeat same behavior, not to give the wronged party a payday.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
The coffee was so ridiculously hot it fused her vagina shut. Don't ridicule the McDonalds hot coffee case. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:15
|
|
|
The McD's coffee case is one of those early clickbait articles that it turned out the story was radically different from reality. McD had been warned for years about the temp they served their coffee at and until the suit McD claimed "Well most consumers buy coffee and drink it an hour or so later" which was a terrible defense and did not stand up to any scrutiny. Basically, a person bought a hot liquid beverage intended for immediate consumption, but the temp it was served at precluded the possibility of her drinking it straight away, and when it spilled on her McD had to fact the noise for their "serve coffee at 200* C because our beans are bottom of the barrel garbage" and finally get the gently caress sued out of them for their practices. quote:Other documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000 Basically, McD settled suits for years until they crossed someone who didn't take a bare minimum offer and were forced to eat a multi-million dollar civil suit. pentyne fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:The coffee was so ridiculously hot it fused her vagina shut. Don't ridicule the McDonalds hot coffee case. That case is the "hurrrrr it's cold outside what global warming you stupid hippies!" of the legal field, idiots will never stop bringing it up as if it proves whatever point they think they're making.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
It's loving intimidating as poo poo to sue anyone with a lawyer because literally the first thing they do in these cases is claim it's frivolous. It's also kind of vague when your case is and isn't frivolous and the worst part is that you can lose and pay the defendants court fees and lawyer fees so there's also that part. It's just a quagmire of falling into a pit of being locked into government debt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Jack Skeleton posted:I got a drunk in public ticket (in California) and I thought "Okay, $150, that's fine, I was dumb" After court assessment fees and every other surprise fee they could imagine to tack on, it ended up being $800. What's the deal here? Do you have to go to court for every ticket/fine you get? Can't you just get the ticket and jump on Paypal and pay the fine?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
xcore posted:What's the deal here? Do you have to go to court for every ticket/fine you get? Can't you just get the ticket and jump on Paypal and pay the fine? For any ticket I've received, you're given a date (usually two months out) as a scheduled court appearance. It's pretty much just to say "yes, I'm complying" and nothing more comes of it for 99% of charges. If you don't appear, however- bam, fines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
When I got a ticket last year, I showed up at the courthouse on the date specified, paid the fee at the counter, and left. It probably varies from place to place, but I never had any problems with it. Obligatory race check: I'm white. Apply grains of salt liberally...
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
For me, every ticket I've ever gotten has a court date on it that you can show up to if you decide to contest it. If you pay right away, you don't have to worry about it at all. I don't know if that's a standard across the US though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
xcore posted:What's the deal here? Do you have to go to court for every ticket/fine you get? Can't you just get the ticket and jump on Paypal and pay the fine? Depends on the offense and the locality, but where I'm from you can plead guild by signing the ticket and paying the fine. If you want to contest the ticket (plead innocent), you can take it before the magistrate. Race check: I'm white, so I actually 1) listen when a police officer talks to me and 2) read what's written on the ticket.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 11:22
|
|
|
So close.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 12:53
|
|
|
xcore posted:What's the deal here? Do you have to go to court for every ticket/fine you get? Can't you just get the ticket and jump on Paypal and pay the fine? Well one of his is a fix-it ticket, which is like if you have a tail light out you go get it replaced then show up and say "yep it's fixed here's the work order" and then you don't pay anything. Drunk in public I couldn't say, cause I can hold my liquor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Well one of his is a fix-it ticket, which is like if you have a tail light out you go get it replaced then show up and say "yep it's fixed here's the work order" and then you don't pay anything. Drunk in public is usually a fine unless you do something stupid. In Chicago they usually won't charge you with anything unless you start a fight or don't walk your rear end home when they tell you to. I've spent a night in a police station just to be let go the next day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Drunk in public I couldn't say, cause I can hold my liquor. Drunk in public is for when vagrancy or disorderly conduct aren't good enough vague catch alls and the person being charged happens to have had something to drink recently. It's not actually about blood alcohol levels and common areas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
I actually challenged my last speeding ticket just to see what happens. What happens is the officer actually shows up and presents so much evidence you basically look stupid. Now I understand why everyone takes the plea deal and no one fights them. On a good note, the only thing I got charged more for was the points, they had me pay the same fine as if I had plead guilty. Lesson learned, just pay the drat thing or try to get the court date pushed back so far that the officer may have moved to another county or you happen to nail him while on vacation so he doesn't show.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 07:41
|
|
|
TurboFlamingChicken posted:I actually challenged my last speeding ticket just to see what happens. What happens is the officer actually shows up and presents so much evidence you basically look stupid. Now I understand why everyone takes the plea deal and no one fights them. On a good note, the only thing I got charged more for was the points, they had me pay the same fine as if I had plead guilty. You don't challenge tickets to win (which will only really happen if the cop doesn't show), you challenge them to apologize to the judge, say you understand what you did was wrong and promise that it'll never happen again so he'll give you a reduced fine/fewer points. Race check: I'm white, so I'm able to accept blame for my actions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
TurboFlamingChicken posted:I actually challenged my last speeding ticket just to see what happens. What happens is the officer actually shows up and presents so much evidence you basically look stupid. Now I understand why everyone takes the plea deal and no one fights them. On a good note, the only thing I got charged more for was the points, they had me pay the same fine as if I had plead guilty. In general, yes. But like you said, you challenged it just to see what would happen. Speeding's a pretty easy case to prove if you were actually doing it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 15:24
|
|
