|
Maybe I'm just not familiar with businesses, but what kind of insurance pays out if your sales manager made a bad deal or you paid an employee too much?
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 02:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 21:30 |
|
|
depending on how it's phrased in a claim and how your coverage works, you might get away with phrasing it like theft, but i really, really doubt an insurance company would be inclined to pay out on it. either the wife is lying a lot to her husband or the former owners are lying a LOT to their insurance company.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
like, it's fairly difficult ime to get insurance to pay for stuff they like, actually have to. i can't imagine getting them to pay for something that's entirely made up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
A 50S RAYGUN posted:depending on how it's phrased in a claim and how your coverage works, you might get away with phrasing it like theft, but i really, really doubt an insurance company would be inclined to pay out on it. I was under the assumption that at the very least they would require some evidence of prosecution. No police report, no charges, no lawsuit, nothing. On the claim, they literately printed out the payroll history and wrote "Not authorized" as their evidence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
Dude something is hosed up in this story. Consult an attorney now. You may have damages against the insurance company or debt collector. Or your wife may be lying to you. How old are y'all?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:38
|
|
|
here's a stupid question there's a defamation lawsuit going on right now between a doctor for WWE and a former wrestler for the company. this has actually reached a court room and there's ongoing testimony in front of an actual jury the former wrestler went on a podcast and basically told that the doctor hosed up his diagnosis and just gave him a Z-Pack for what he claimed was a staph infection the size of a baseball. things came to a head during the royal rumble about 4 years ago, where the wrestler suffered a concussion, and wwe got him out of the match, and the wrestler walked out of the building and out of the company the doctor sued him for defamation and the podcast owner for never pulling the defamatory material now the doctor has had a hard time proving any sort of actual damages, he didn't lose his job or anything however a third party doctor testified that he never gave a diagnosis of staph infection (there was a small cyst and the wrestler refused test that could definitively confirm whatever it was) and it wasn't baseball size and this examination was done after the royal rumble incident is there any way for a judge just to yell at both parties for being stupid, or would it likely fall that there'll be a defamation judgment in favor of the plaintiff with little to any award
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Dude something is hosed up in this story. Consult an attorney now. You may have damages against the insurance company or debt collector. Or your wife may be lying to you. 40's. If I needed to, I could pay off the entire 90,000 if I had to tomorrow. I really wouldn't prefer to go that route.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
FYI if the debt is related to a job it probably doesn’t qualify as a consumer debt and you might not have a lot of the consumer debt protections. For example, the FDCPA probably doesn’t apply to the debt because it is work related
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
so my understanding is correct and ostensibly people can't determine i owe them insane amounts of money in a way that is actually immediately collectible? it was harming my already-low faith in capitalist hellworld
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:16
|
|
|
A 50S RAYGUN posted:so my understanding is correct and ostensibly people can't determine i owe them insane amounts of money in a way that is actually immediately collectible? it was harming my already-low faith in capitalist hellworld No you need a judgement to force a collection I think
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
Any faith is too much faith FYI
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:25
|
|
|
Why isn't getting a lawyer an immediate reaction to "I am being sued for 90 grand" ?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:57
|
|
|
Lowness 72 posted:Why isn't getting a lawyer an immediate reaction to "I am being sued for 90 grand" ? He never said he was being sued, only that they contacted him. His other posts so far don’t read like there is any litigation The collection company he mentioned, allied, isn’t a law firm. If they’re gonna sue him they’ll farm it out to whatever collection law firm they use in that state/area I agree he should probably hire a lawyer tho, since a letter from an attorney is most likely the best way to get the collection agency to back off
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
There’s also his credit rating and whether the collection agency can nuke it to consider
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:He never said he was being sued, only that they contacted him. His other posts so far don’t read like there is any litigation Right, no one has sued anyone yet. Threatening letters don't really scare us into writing checks easily. My next step is to send a certified letter to the collection agency stating that I dispute there claim and ask them to send me copies of the documentation that show that my wife owes money. I want to get a feel for how much they know and how invested they are in pursuing the claim. If I start immediately with a letter from the lawyer they may decide to just take us right to court.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 13:47
|
|
|
Why are you sending a certified letter
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 13:48
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Why are you sending a certified letter I think it's fairly common, it creates a paper trail so you can prove in court that the other party received whatever you sent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 13:52
|
|
|
Hoshi posted:I think it's fairly common, it creates a paper trail so you can prove in court that the other party received whatever you sent. Yes, that's right. It may not matter in the end, but it helps to keep things organized.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
Hoshi posted:I think it's fairly common, it creates a paper trail so you can prove in court that the other party received whatever you sent. I mean it seems like a waste of money but  Try doing return receipt requested instead Or if you really want to burn money just fedex it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 13:55
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I mean it seems like a waste of money but It's only 5 bux, and the post office is 3 blocks from my house.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 13:58
|
|
|
You're supposed to send it certified when doing consumer debt stuff. At least that seems to be the recommended route.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 14:18
|
|
|
The key is the return receipt. Sending something cmrrr is what you want, without the return receipt it's useless. Seriously though hire a lawyer. "Take us right to court?" Doubtful. But also everything has moved to email for lawyers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:The key is the return receipt. Sending something cmrrr is what you want, without the return receipt it's useless. Ok. I got an electronic return receipt for this one, but that's good to know for future communications.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 15:05
|
|
|
How does a return receipt prove I sent a letter, and not just a drawing of dickbutt?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
daslog posted:Yes we can afford a lawyer. What kills me is that I've been on her to deal with this and she thinks that it will all be fine because she didn't do anything wrong. I have tried to explain that the legal system doesn't work that way. New thread title All will be fine, I did nothing wrong...The legal system doesn’t work that way
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 16:24
|
|
|
A 50S RAYGUN posted:either the wife is lying a lot to her husband or the former owners are lying a LOT to their insurance company. Yeah. I mean I guess there's the third possibility that OP is leaving a lot of stuff out of the story he's telling us. But definitely at least one of those three things is true.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Yeah. I am leaving a lot out of the story because it's really long. Two weeks before the GM and Sale manager (they are twins) were going to sign the deal to buy the dealer from the owner's widow, the widow's financial adviser had auditors come to try to find any issues they could to stop the deal. The whole purpose of this stupid claim was to provide cover to the widow in case they got sued for breach of contract. Some of the stuff they dug up were stupid (the twins are idiots) like putting trade in cars on consignment at their friends used car lot, but all the accounting was clean and the dealership was making a profit from those transactions. I called a lawyer today who referred us to an insurance specialist. I'll let you know what he says.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
daslog posted:I called a lawyer today who referred us to an insurance specialist. I'll let you know what he says. Tell him that you're posting about it on the internet, see what he says about that
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
In general I'm enjoying the av-post subject synergy with this one.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
Devor posted:Tell him that you're posting about it on the internet, see what he says about that lmao I know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
daslog posted:I am leaving a lot out of the story because it's really long. Two weeks before the GM and Sale manager (they are twins) were going to sign the deal to buy the dealer from the owner's widow, the widow's financial adviser had auditors come to try to find any issues they could to stop the deal. The whole purpose of this stupid claim was to provide cover to the widow in case they got sued for breach of contract. Some of the stuff they dug up were stupid (the twins are idiots) like putting trade in cars on consignment at their friends used car lot, but all the accounting was clean and the dealership was making a profit from those transactions. Just wondering, are you taking seriously the possibility your wife actually was complicit in some possibly-not-quite-entirely-up-and-up poo poo and is not coming clean with you about it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Just wondering, are you taking seriously the possibility your wife actually was complicit in some possibly-not-quite-entirely-up-and-up poo poo and is not coming clean with you about it? Anything is possible, but it's extremely unlikely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
also extremely unlikely is an insurance company paying out 90k over what you're describing like a kindergarden-level scam, though. have you considered maybe the other two people were less scrupulous than your wife and she's getting targeted by association?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
like, insurance companies largely operate by finding creative and lovely ways to avoid paying out on claims, and they've literally already been convinced to pay out. I've dealt with enough insurance headaches in my life to know this is not going to wind up being some kind of clerical error.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
I'd stop guessing, not that it's not fun but you won't find the answer, there's not enough information and one of the few reliable pieces of info we have is that most of the people in the story aren't trustworthy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
So many posters are told "stop posting about it here". Obviously there's the RISK of your posts being found on our semi-public forum where you're admitting your guilt in a quintuple homocide and drug embezzlement scheme, but are there any other risks? Like, would a lawyer be able to ask for/compel all internet posts made about this during discovery? Or for you to divulge internet handles you use so they can do a google search or something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
mercenarynuker posted:So many posters are told "stop posting about it here". Obviously there's the RISK of your posts being found on our semi-public forum where you're admitting your guilt in a quintuple homocide and drug embezzlement scheme, but are there any other risks? Like, would a lawyer be able to ask for/compel all internet posts made about this during discovery? Or for you to divulge internet handles you use so they can do a google search or something? In theory yes, I could compel you or subpoena Lowtax. but it can be more complicated. Like it has to be relevant, not overly burdensome on you, not invasive of your privacy, worth it to fight over financially and logistically, etc
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Phil is an actual lawyer but I'm pretty sure he's wrong in this, I think the risk is that if they find out your forum handle you're compelled to do whatever they say
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
They don’t need your handle, AFAIK. I had my personal email compelled during a suit involving an employer, because I had discussed work stuff using that account. They never specified my email accounts, just “hand over everything related to”, as far as I saw. The other party in the suit had very deep pockets (Microsoft), so the cost might be unpalatable for others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 21:30 |
|
|
Hoshi posted:Phil is an actual lawyer but I'm pretty sure he's wrong in this, I think the risk is that if they find out your forum handle you're compelled to do whatever they say Yeah, it's like how if someone learns your true name they are able to cast spells on you and control your actions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 22:44
|
|
