|
For the record, Mr. Nice, you can't earn points for the law school thread in here.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
In California, what kind of protections do patients have from doctors who recommend really expensive tests without telling you how much they cost beforehand? Not sure if there is a better thread for this. Wife went to get a physical with a new doctor, and they recommended bloodwork through "Boston Heart Diagnostics." She thinks the coversation went something like, "When was the last time you had bloodwork? That long?!? You should get this!" She's pretty sure she remembers the front desk lady saying everything's covered on the way out, and she can be on my way. 3 months later, we have a $4.3k EOB with only $900 covered, and it turns out that this bloodwork is some crazy in depth analysis that she obviously doesn't need with normal blood pressure/being 30. Wife and I are freaking out since we can't really afford it, and we feel pretty much robbed since she went there for normal physical and bloodwork, which should be 100% covered routine. Of course now I'm reading reviews of similar things happening with this doctor. All the offices are closed, and tomorrow we'll be calling our insurance, and the doctor's. Assuming insurance says 'we're not paying, that stuff was a waste', and the doctor says not my problem, are there any organizations I should be calling to file complaints? I'm assuming a lawyer would be a waste of time to go after $3.5k.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Kind of a weird idle thought here. I recently heard through the grapevine that one of my wife's friends is in some deep poo poo at her job--apparently her supervisor has it out for her in a huge way and is fabricating evidence of threats and hostility from the worker towards the supervisor (edited screenshots of emails, fake social media profiles, etc.) The worker has no evidence handy that would prove the forgery and her employer is buying the supervisor's side of things without question. Is there anything she can do beyond try to make a clean exit to a less insane workplace? Are there any circumstances under which she would have a realistic avenue for recourse?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:Kind of a weird idle thought here. I recently heard through the grapevine that one of my wife's friends is in some deep poo poo at her job--apparently her supervisor has it out for her in a huge way and is fabricating evidence of threats and hostility from the worker towards the supervisor (edited screenshots of emails, fake social media profiles, etc.) The worker has no evidence handy that would prove the forgery and her employer is buying the supervisor's side of things without question. Is there anything she can do beyond try to make a clean exit to a less insane workplace? Are there any circumstances under which she would have a realistic avenue for recourse? She could contact a labor and employment lawyer about a possible hostile work environment action. Those things all seem provable in the abstract, such as producing the original emails and comparing them to the fakes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:She could contact a labor and employment lawyer about a possible hostile work environment action. Those things all seem provable in the abstract, such as producing the original emails and comparing them to the fakes. Not to mention finding the people she allegedly threatened. Or the comedy option that the allegations are all true and it's shark being lied to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
Hi Lawgoons, I'm in a bit of a sticky situation here. I live in Ontario, the GTA to be exact. I own a condo, and have a tenant who signed a 1-year lease for a bedroom. I also live in this condo. We've shared it perfectly fine up to this point, no issues. The lease is under his name only. About a month ago, he asked if his fiancé and newborn baby could come stay for a month. I said no, absolutely not. He said that was fine, and he'd find an alternate place for them to stay. Saturday, I get a text that the alternate place has fallen through, and he needs them to stay at my condo. I said this was unacceptable, and gave them 1 night to find alternate arrangements (Saturday/Sunday) Sunday, they're still there, but leave late at night. I come home Monday, and they're still there. I ask the fiancé what she's still doing there, and she starts on this long-winded ramble about how I need to understand their situation. I say I need them out of my house, and things escalate into a bit of yelling. She also invited a friend over to my home while I wasn't there, which made me really angry. The roommate asked me for more time to sort things out. I said Friday (9 Dec) was the date I need them out. I don't have any expectation that they'll leave by then. I did not have any idea there WAS a fiancé or baby when he signed the lease, was not ever mentioned. In the lease we signed, there's a clause about "quiet enjoyment of the home". I feel like I can't enjoy my home right now, I want to be there to make sure nothing gets hosed up but she gets up in my face whenever I'm around. Is there anything I can do? Is there any sort of recourse I can fall back on short of starting an eviction? Thanks. EDIT: Also, apparently a hotel or AirBnB are out of the question because "They're too expensive". My suggestion to put it on a credit card or line of credit is similarly rebuffed. MA-Horus fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Dec 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
While I support your desire to not have de facto additional tenants in your home...is your tenant not allowed to have company over? Because some of the things you said there make it sound like that's what you believe. Like, you're leasing this space to this dude, he's allowed to have company. Usually a lease will have a clause about guests, even overnight ones, does yours not?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
Bad Munki posted:While I support your desire to not have de facto additional tenants in your home...is your tenant not allowed to have company over? Because some of the things you said there make it sound like that's what you believe. Like, you're leasing this space to this dude, he's allowed to have company. Usually a lease will have a clause about guests, even overnight ones, does yours not? That's where I think I'm hosed. I do not have a guests clause in the lease. Additionally, having the fiancé and baby puts me over my legal capacity for the size of unit I have (1200sq ft, 2bd. Max capacity as per my condo board 3 people) He has guests over quite often, I've never raised a fuss. They never stay more than a night. But this is his (extremely rude) fiancé and a newborn baby. It's a form lease. I've used it for 3 other roommates in years past. The only clause I can see using here is "quiet enjoyment" of the shared spaces, which harpy fiancé is absolutely disturbing. MA-Horus fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Dec 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
And if you have that clause, does it say how long they can have guests without permission from the landlord Did you use a form lease or one you wrote yourself? Edit: does the lease have any clauses about violating the condo bylaws
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:Additionally, having the fiancé and baby puts me over my legal capacity for the size of unit I have (1200sq ft, 2bd. Max capacity as per my condo board 3 people) That's probably the best place to start here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:It's a form lease. I've used it for 3 other roommates in years past. The only clause I can see using here is "quiet enjoyment" of the shared spaces, which harpy fiancé is absolutely disturbing. It sounds like this person is sharing your bathroom and kitchen facilities. Congratulations! Your situation is now complicated enough that you need to talk to a lawyer in your area. You need to ask your lawyer if what you have is a tenant or some other kind of contractual relationship with this person. The remedies available to you depend very much on the answer. Always talk to a lawyer before renting out your properties, 'standard forms' don't fit every situation. Property law is arcane and easy to misunderstand, and the source of many many headaches.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
LeschNyhan posted:Property law is arcane and easy to misunderstand, and the source of many many headaches. That explains the pounding in my head the last few days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Not to mention finding the people she allegedly threatened. The "threats" were all against the supervisor who came forward with the accusation, so there's no third parties involved. It's basically a she-said/she-said situation and the company decided from a CYA perspective that the supervisor's version is more damaging if true, so that's the one they're going off of. I don't really know either of these people personally (which is why it's just an idle thought), so the possibility that the supervisor is right did cross my mind. But my wife has several friends in that department and they all trust their coworker a lot more than their supervisor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Is it possible to put real estate and other investments into a trust for the benefit of a large extended family?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Ice Cream Barbara posted:Is it possible to put real estate and other investments into a trust for the benefit of a large extended family? Yes, absolutely. If you have a financial advisor, ask them to recommend a good trusts attorney. Or I guess if you have a bank account sufficiently large enough to get you concierge attention from your bank, they might have recommendations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Ice Cream Barbara posted:Is it possible to put real estate and other investments into a trust for the benefit of a large extended family? Probably. Get a lawyer. So long as it is for specific people it should be easily doable. If not, it still will be for the right cost.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
AlbieQuirky posted:Or I guess if you have a bank account sufficiently large enough to get you concierge attention from your bank, they might have recommendations. Or if you bank at a small local place you don't need the gigantic account to get this kind of attention and advice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:Hi Lawgoons, I'm in a bit of a sticky situation here. By Ontario law, you do not have a tenant, you have a boarder. (I'm assuming you're sharing the kitchen or other space.) Your boarder has no tenant rights, and you would not evict through the Landlord Tenant Board, you'd just tell him to leave with some "reasonable" notice (there is no actual legal standard except "be reasonable" afaik.) However, whatever your lease says about contract termination still applies and your boarder could take you to small claims. I'll bet your condo occupancy limit is reasonable grounds to terminate even if there's nothing in the contract, but you should most definitely call a lawyer to cover your rear end. You have a lease, and that makes things complicated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
What would happen if you tattled on them to the landlord?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
Ice Cream Barbara posted:Is it possible to put real estate and other investments into a trust for the benefit of a large extended family? AlbieQuirky posted:Yes, absolutely. If you have a financial advisor, ask them to recommend a good trusts attorney. Or I guess if you have a bank account sufficiently large enough to get you concierge attention from your bank, they might have recommendations. Motronic posted:Or if you bank at a small local place you don't need the gigantic account to get this kind of attention and advice. Yeah, go talk to your banker and see what they say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
A woman called the police because she tried to sell marijuana and got ripped off by the buyers. World's dumbest criminals, right? No, she didn't get arrested. How in the hell do you admit to the police that you were dealing drugs and not get arrested? http://www.kttc.com/story/33997383/2016/12/07/two-arrested-after-rochester-drug-deal-gone-bad I know it is all speculation, but could it be because she did not actually possess any drugs when she talked to the police?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:A woman called the police because she tried to sell marijuana and got ripped off by the buyers. World's dumbest criminals, right? No, she didn't get arrested. How in the hell do you admit to the police that you were dealing drugs and not get arrested? A confession to a crime alone is insufficient evidence without something to corroborate it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Finding the drugs in the dudes' car would be sufficient corroboration. /\/\/\/\/\/\ SkunkDuster posted:A woman called the police because she tried to sell marijuana and got ripped off by the buyers. World's dumbest criminals, right? No, she didn't get arrested. How in the hell do you admit to the police that you were dealing drugs and not get arrested? 1. Because stealing from people is a greater social ill than marijuana? 2. cynics answer: maybe she was white? joat mon fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Dec 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
At least locally to me, crime of drug dealers against other dealers or customers has gone up lately. I doubt the property would be returned, but charges like theft and armed robbery do get filed. (Source - I work in probation and see the details of the complaints). At least for our PD, they seem to want to focus on the type of people who beat people up, break down doors, or worse. We still have a fair amount of shootings where the victim claims 100% ignorance, better to be injured than snitch...
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
Okay. So last March I bought a used car and paid the $30 extra or whatever to have their guy sit at the DMV and fill out registration for me. Since I wasn't using the car a whole lot at that point, I elected to keep my own plates and existing registration from my old vehicle and transfer it to the new vehicle until that registration expired in the spring. When I went to renew my license in the summer, I came to find out that no, their guy actually did NOT register the vehicle in my state, and that there was no prior registration history whatsoever for the VIN (this was a used car from 2002, warning flags here). I have kept every single piece of paper and receipt associated with buying the vehicle, but did not have the title, presumably I thought, because their guy had to bring the title to the DMV in order to get it registered and never ended up doing it. So the dealer and I finally get back in touch in the fall (I know, this has gone on for a long time) and he apologizes for the mistake, says they can't find the title and have to request a new one. This was in October. It's now two months later, the dealer says he's still waiting on the title. In the meantime, I'm using plates + insurance from the dealer in order to commute to work. I'm at risk of being dropped from my wife's car insurance plan because I don't have a valid registration on this thing. In my state, you need a title in order to register a vehicle from before 2001. You also need insurance to legally drive. I'm feeling kind of stuck here. What legal options do I have if the dealer who sold me this car can't come up with the title, never registered the vehicle despite my paying for him to do that, and is unable to give me an ETA on when this can be resolved? All I want to do is register this stupid car so that I can keep my insurance and not get in serious trouble if I'm pulled over. I'm also concerned that the lack of registration history + absence of title means this car was stolen, unbeknownst to me when I bought it. Am I being irrational here?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Okay. You can usually find the VIN on the dash, door, frame and engine block. You should check all of those and see if they match. You can also, depending on your state, go request a title yourself. Check the DMV and see what the process is for a lost title.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Hey all. I own a condo in WA state that I rent out. Over the thanksgiving holiday a sprinkler head broke in the unit and leaked into the utility closet while the tenant was out of state for several days. It's not final yet but it's looking like the association will argue it won't be its responsibility because while the pipes and the fire system in general is a common amenity the defective sprinkler head itself was inside the unit and is therefore my responsibility. Does anyone know if the distinction between shared and individual property/liability is spelled out anywhere at this level of defail? Would it depend on the particulars of the articles of association for the condo? Any resources I should start examining? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
I suspect that's probably a see an attorney question. If covered by insurance, you should probably talk with them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Over the thanksgiving holiday a sprinkler head broke in the unit and leaked into the utility closet while the tenant was out of state for several days. Ask them why their faulty sprinkler system's water flow alarm did not activate to alert for this easily foreseen and common event.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Hey all. I own a condo in WA state that I rent out. Over the thanksgiving holiday a sprinkler head broke in the unit and leaked into the utility closet while the tenant was out of state for several days. It's not final yet but it's looking like the association will argue it won't be its responsibility because while the pipes and the fire system in general is a common amenity the defective sprinkler head itself was inside the unit and is therefore my responsibility. Condo docs probably specify that everything inside the studs is your property and responsibility but yeah read the docs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
Some associations carry "walls in" insurance that includes coverage for interior fixtures, but usually not any upgrades. Most only cover studs out. Typically a bank will require the homeowner to carry thier own walls in policy if it is not covered by the HOA before lending on a condo. Hope you bought some insurance if it isn't covered by your association.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Update: The management company is waiting to hear back from the association's lawyer but his preliminary assessment is that the CC&Rs are ambiguous as to responsibility for the sprinkler heads themselves. They're being annoying and not forwarding me a softcopy of the documents and it apparently takes $40 and 2 weeks to get them from the WA secretary of state corporations. I'm speaking to an adjustor tomorrow but my policy for the unit is nicknamed 'fire' on the safeco website so that's not promising.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Well, whatever you do, don't ignore this answer:Motronic posted:Ask them why their faulty sprinkler system's water flow alarm did not activate to alert for this easily foreseen and common event. Because even if everything inside the studs is your problem, the water source that should have been screaming that it was flooding someone's unit is OUTSIDE your space, it'd sorta be like them feeding a garden hose in through your window and leaving it on for the weekend, and claiming it's your problem because you are responsible for closing the nozzle since it was inside your unit (code violations from their poo poo apparently not alarming notwithstanding.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Update: The management company is waiting to hear back from the association's lawyer but his preliminary assessment is that the CC&Rs are ambiguous as to responsibility for the sprinkler heads themselves. They're being annoying and not forwarding me a softcopy of the documents and it apparently takes $40 and 2 weeks to get them from the WA secretary of state corporations. "Fire insurance" is basically synonymous with "homeowners insurance." I wouldn't worry until you talk with an agent or adjuster and see if it is a covered loss.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
Oh boy this is a fun one!https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/5ip0u9/i_added_our_pdf_brochure_to_our_competitors_usbs/ posted:So our competitors had a huge box of USB's sent to us rather than them with the intention of the USB's to be sent out to all their clients. I added a PDF brochure on to each USB then sent them back to our competitors. They sent them all out without realising my PDFs were on each one. Called this morning threating legal action. Do they have a case ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
That's actually hilarious
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Not a case that's a slam dunk
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
It's in London. I think if they were going to pursue legal action they wouldn't have bothered calling up and yelling at them first though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Gumbel2Gumbel posted:It's in London. I think if they were going to pursue legal action they wouldn't have bothered calling up and yelling at them first though. Maybe they yelled at them because they're mad, and will also pursue legal action because they're mad
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:Maybe they yelled at them because they're mad, and will also pursue legal action because they're mad What if the OP had just tossed all of them in the dumpster? Does he have any legal obligation to find the owner and return the items? I ask because a similar thing happened to me where we got a box of Ikea hardware delivered to our office a couple years ago. It was addressed to us, but we certainly didn't order it. I spent about 10 minutes on hold with Ikea trying to remedy it before deciding it wasn't worth my time and I chucked all of it in the dumpster.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 23:30
|
|