|
Andy Dufresne posted:It seems excessive to talk about their poorly itemized details when they missed the 30 day window. That should be enough to ask them to return your entire deposit. I'm a Michigan landlord and yours hosed up. He missed the time frame to respond with a list of itemized damages and, as such, missed the opportunity to ding your security deposit. Apropos of nothing, you CAN be dinged for carpet cleaning if your lease specifies it be turned over clean. My standard lease does.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 06:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:23 |
|
|
Redfont posted:Another day, another someone to sue! My wife got her oil changed on Saturday, and earlier today the oil plug dropped out, leaving me stranded and with a potentially damaged engine. From what I can find we can hold meineke (the people that did the change) responsible if we can get the receipt. Well, I am a lawyer but I'm certainly not giving you legal advice because I know gently caress-all about lemon law. Instead, I'll share my experience like that other dude shared his. I brought my car in for a busted tire (not just flat, but a properly hosed tire + rim + bolts). They replaced it. A few miles later, the tire fell off the rim. Rather than piss and moan, I brought it in and politely explained the situation to them. They fixed it for free, refunded my cost, and gave me a big fat coupon book of, like, $500 in free basic maintenance. Given the value of your time and your wife's time, going in and politely explaining the situation and asking for a) a refund, b) a free repair, and c) a few years worth of free oil changes may be your best course. Meineke is a decent sized corporation, they (probably) aren't some sleazy dude operating out of a trailer in the boonies. They won me over as a customer after that, you may try to just say "hey y'all hosed up" and see what happens. Now, if you (or I) get into a major life changing accident because of their negligence, then it's time to call in the cavalry of lawyers. But if you just need an oil change and a spigot replaced, then meh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2012 09:37
|
|
|
The problem for him is once an engine has run with no oil, it's toast. It might still seem to work for now, but it will almost certainly die soon and there's no telling exactly when - basically you can never trust your car again. A "repair" boils down to replacing or rebuilding the engine, and it's highly unlikely they're going to just agree to that. Not that he shouldn't try talking to them, but you make it out to sound much simpler than it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
I live in England. I rent a flat from a very incompetent agent. My contract ran out in May of this year, but they didn't prompt me to sign a new one, yet continued to provide 'service' as normal and we corresponded many times since then. After the contract ran out, the owner of the building went into receivership and I got a notice to quit or whatever - giving a leaving date in July. I called them and spoke to them and they said that my place hadn't actually been put on the market yet and I could stay at least another 2 months on top of that, maybe more. I am now buying a house so will be leaving here soon. My original contract, which expired in May, said that I needed to give 1 month's notice before leaving so I'm wondering how much notice I need to give to move out. I do intend to give notice, because I am reasonable, but I am also interested as to whether, in a messy situation like this, I could just stop the payments, lock up and give them the keys one day given that a) the contract expired and b) they gave me formal notice that I had to leave.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2012 23:53
|
|
|
Update: We gave meineke a call after having a third party mechanic look over the engine. The car still ran but had a pretty solid knock and the mechanic determined that even though I shut it off as soon as I could, the engine was proper hosed. Fortunately meineke seems to be taking the responsibility and are currently replacing the engine. We're going to see if they get us a decent engine or try to stick anything they can find inside but they're been reasonable so far so we'll see. I don't think they haggled for any free oil changes though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2012 20:46
|
|
|
That's good to hear. I've heard so many oil-change horror stories (mostly Jiffy Lube) I would never have expected such an easy resolution. Goes to show it never hurts to ask first!
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2012 23:53
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^ In a case like this, they pretty much know they're hosed and would rather get out of it cheaply. These large corporations have this down to a art, especially as this happens way too often. Redfont posted:Update: We gave meineke a call after having a third party mechanic look over the engine. The car still ran but had a pretty solid knock and the mechanic determined that even though I shut it off as soon as I could, the engine was proper hosed. Fortunately meineke seems to be taking the responsibility and are currently replacing the engine. We're going to see if they get us a decent engine or try to stick anything they can find inside but they're been reasonable so far so we'll see. I don't think they haggled for any free oil changes though. The problem, of course, being that while that used motor is the "same" as yours, you have no idea what the previous owner did to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 06:12
|
|
|
I have an employment law question, specifically related to non-competes. I'm of course not looking for a definitive answer to anything but would like to investigate my options. I'm in MN, for reference. I signed an employment contract when I got hired in a professional services business. My non-compete said that I was not to take away current clients or entice any current employees to follow me out. Pretty standard. However, it also said that I could not work in a similar position in the industry within 100 miles. That seems a little out of whack to me. I did a bunch of googling and in MN non-competes are definitely enforceable regarding the clients/employees part of it, but I also found a few things that said that a non-compete can't prevent you from basically doing a job you are qualified for. Any thoughts on this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
Non-competes are generally disfavored by courts, and must be pretty narrowly tailored to survive. Geographical limitations are common, but they have to be pretty narrow. 100 miles on its face sounds too big, but it all depends on your specific job. For some businesses that might be perfectly reasonable, while others it might be hardcore invalid. It's a tough thing to enforce. Basically if you changed jobs, the old employer would have to sue you. It's an uphill battle for them, and many times non-competes are just to scare people into following them. But if your employer is hell-bent, and the local area is more favorable to non-competes, it could be a serious complication. Does it also have a time limitation? Like not within 100 miles for 1 year after leaving? woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Aug 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
Oh yeah, should have mentioned that, 1 year. I'm a producer at a creative agency, if that helps.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 01:00
|
|
|
Generally speaking, it's a sliding scale and your employer has the burden (as woozle said) of proving reasonableness. A one-year limitation is rather reasonable, but a 100-mile radius probably is not. I'd say they'd have an uphill battle enforcing the non-compete, but it's certainly possible. If you do line up another position before leaving, talk to a local employment law attorney before you quit and start working at a new place. That way you'll have someone in place who can resist a TRO or preliminary injunction when your current employer goes for one. TRO's have awfully short timeframes for response (72 hours would not be unexpected), so it's better to have an attorney already figured out before you have to deal with it. There's a good chance your current employer won't bother, depending on who you leave to work for, how much business you take with you, how much cash they have on hand, whether you leaving kills their business/ability to compete, etc, etc. The more important you are, and the more damage your departure does to their current operations, the more likely they are to pursue action against you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
Hm, thanks for the info. I can say that I'm certainly not looking to take business or anyone with me, and I'm certainly not the only producer they have had over the last few years - I'm not exactly vital. I'd just like to find a new job without having to move or find a totally different position or go freelance or anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 02:17
|
|
|
I also always remember what my IP survey professor said, which is that usually suits to enforce non-competes frequently end in a settlement where your old job ends up paying you a salary to not do anything if enforcing the non-compete is keeping you from using your skills.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 14:40
|
|
|
I couldn't find something specific when googling so I'll give this question a shot here. My fiance wrote a book about the physics of video games. There are some images of game characters that he drew included in the book but for the most part to demonstrate how a physics equation would work in relate to the character (for example, how Kirby can fly). It's been released for free online but we've had people both on SA and off ask about physical copies, does the above essentially fall under fair use since it's for research/educational purposes? Or if we use print on demand sites like Amazon are we asking for a C&D? In the back of the book credit given where it's due, so it essentially says [character] belongs to [company] featured in [game]. My first instinct was to have it printed locally and just ship it but that is going to get far too pricey. 54 40 or fuck fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Aug 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 14:43
|
|
|
I am in Virginia, on probation and have a Drug Treatment Evaluation coming up, am I likely to be tested on site and immediately fail probation and end up with a court date? Should I just push the meeting?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 19:08
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:I am in Virginia, on probation and have a Drug Treatment Evaluation coming up, am I likely to be tested on site and immediately fail probation and end up with a court date? Should I just push the meeting? Why are you worried that you will fail the test?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 19:11
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Why are you worried that you will fail the test? Don't answer this and incriminate yourself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 19:14
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:I am in Virginia, on probation and have a Drug Treatment Evaluation coming up, am I likely to be tested on site and immediately fail probation and end up with a court date? Should I just push the meeting? There's a TCC thread for that
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 19:39
|
|
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:Don't answer this and incriminate yourself.  it was really more a statement than a question. He's already incriminated himself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 19:42
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:I am in Virginia, on probation and have a Drug Treatment Evaluation coming up, am I likely to be tested on site and immediately fail probation and end up with a court date? Should I just push the meeting? Most judges in VA treat a missed test as a failed test. So you could try to postpone, but it may not work out. As you may know, you'll also be tested in court on the day of any hearings. Don't compound your problems: don't say gently caress it and use again. If the judge sees similar or higher numbers in court, they take it as a personal insult and you're toast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 19:49
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:I am in Virginia, on probation and have a Drug Treatment Evaluation coming up, am I likely to be tested on site and immediately fail probation and end up with a court date? Should I just push the meeting? Call your attorney. He/she should know how things work there. If you're worried about MJ, it'll take too long to clear, so fessing up (after talking with your attorney) may be the way to go. For other drugs, if you can ask to move the date back a week (you need at least 2-3 days) that would work, too. If they won't move it, don't blow it off. Call your attorney.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 21:50
|
|
|
I am guessing there isn't much you guys can tell me but this just happened this afternoon. My niece, 17 years old, is an rear end in a top hat. About every two months, she has a "melt-down" and screams, breaks poo poo, runs away for a few hours, threatens her parents and sisters, etc. My sister doesn't really handle it well (drama queen) and it usually escalates and escalates. Twice, the county cops have been called and both times have given my niece strict warnings and mentioned juvenille detention. This time, my sister tried dragging her upstairs to her room and my niece freaked out and thought my sister had broken her wrist. They went to the ER and it's bruised but not broken. Now, Social Services will be paying them a visit. Considering my niece's history, etc. there wouldn't be any chance that Social Services would take my niece and her sisters away would there? I hear horror stories about Social Services jumping in and scooping kids away for very little reason but I don't know much about this stuff. Also, should my sister and her husband get a lawyer involved now?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
jcschick posted:I am guessing there isn't much you guys can tell me but this just happened this afternoon. My niece, 17 years old, is an rear end in a top hat. About every two months, she has a "melt-down" and screams, breaks poo poo, runs away for a few hours, threatens her parents and sisters, etc. My sister doesn't really handle it well (drama queen) and it usually escalates and escalates. Twice, the county cops have been called and both times have given my niece strict warnings and mentioned juvenille detention. Physical violence against a child is not 'very little reason' to get Social Services involved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:25
|
|
|
I have a few random thoughts, in no particular order: She's 17, which means she's less than 12 months from being legally out. She could probably get emancipated pretty easily anyway. If she's so god-awful, why do they care if she'll be taken away? She might actually fare better in a change in circumstance. A splash of cold water from the real world might be just what the doctor ordered. There's a moderate shot your sister will be charged with a crime. The ER had to mandatory report, and Social Services can follow up on it. She may not need a lawyer this hot second, but she needs to start asking around and checking out her local prospects and pricing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:35
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Physical violence against a child is not 'very little reason' to get Social Services involved. I don't consider it physical violence if she grabbed her wrist to pull her upstairs in order to keep her from breaking poo poo. Hell, my parents did worse than that (spanking or an occasional slap when I was a teenager; 80s and 90s) and I might have a bruise here or there that would go away in a few days. I'm sure my niece's wrist hurt but I don't believe for one second that the mother intentionally hurt her. My niece has kicked, slapped and spit on my sister before and that was never taken to the authorities and there was absolutely never any physical retaliation on my sister's part. I'm not saying my sister is innocent in all this but a "slightly bruised wrist", as the doctor called it, doesn't seem to warrant a major response from Social Services. I could be very wrong...just trying to get my head wrapped around legal part of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:35
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:I have a few random thoughts, in no particular order: Thank you. At this point, I think a juvie detention center would be the best thing for her. She's got some serious mental problems and has been in therapy for years and on meds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:36
|
|
|
jcschick posted:I don't consider it physical violence if she grabbed her wrist to pull her upstairs in order to keep her from breaking poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:38
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:I'm speaking from the perspective of the law, not necessarily "what's correct parenting philosophy": you are incorrect. Unless it was in self-defense or defense of another, like the daughter started attacking some one and your sister subdued her by the wrist, then it was illegal. It sounds pretty clear a domestic battery occurred that could result in a charge. Just out of curiosity, would spanking a child likewise be domestic battery? What legal line is drawn between acceptable physical punishment and battery, if any?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:42
|
|
|
In VA, it's whether there's evidence after the strike. So you can slap the poo poo out of a kid if you don't leave a mark. This becomes complicated with darker skin tones, but basically if a doctor can document it, then it's over the legal line. A typical hard spank with an open hand would not cross the line. But if an hour later in a doctor's office there is still a visible mark of any kind, that cross the line (implements like belts will leave marks pretty easily). I'm too hungry to wade into why or would anything else be better, I just know that's the line here. [If it wasn't clear, this only applies to legal guardians towards their minor children.] woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Aug 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:52
|
|
|
Dogen posted:I also always remember what my IP survey professor said, which is that usually suits to enforce non-competes frequently end in a settlement where your old job ends up paying you a salary to not do anything if enforcing the non-compete is keeping you from using your skills. Talk about your optimal outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 00:32
|
|
|
jcschick posted:At this point, I think a juvie detention center would be the best thing for her. She's got some serious mental problems and has been in therapy for years and on meds. As for child abuse, it varies so widely based on not just the state, but the locality and even the charging DA (or social worker in a CFS case) that it would be really hard to say.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 07:18
|
|
|
nm posted:
As a rule of thumb, multiple Police visits would be putting big red flags on their file that this is not a stable household.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 10:48
|
|
|
Anjow posted:I live in England. You were holding on what is called a shorthold assured tenancy, and when that expired, then assuming neither you or the landlord did anything to terminate the tenancy beforehand, you will have continued to hold on exactly the same terms under what's called a statutory tenancy. The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 sets up this system. Strictly speaking, you don't need to keep re-signing a new tenancy every year with shorthold assured tenancies to remain a tenant on the same terms, although most landlords/agents will insist on going through the process if only so they can charge you an administrative fee for it. From what you say, it therefore sounds as if you should be giving one month's notice to end the tenancy from your side, since the landlord seems to have waived their notice and the tenancy is probably still in effect. In practice, you may get away with less provided you pay them the full rent for the month's notice period and any other rent owing, as although they will piss and moan about it, it's unlikely they'll waste time suing you for breach of the tenancy. After all, if you disappear overnight without giving notice, the landlord's main loss would be that rent. Still, it's at your own risk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
e
rds fucked around with this message at 23:30 on Aug 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 22:25
|
|
|
rds posted:Basically, is it likely a judge will give me more probation because [redacted] or should I start packing my stuff and properly plan for jail time? get an attorney There's no way to tell what a judge will likely do, especially if we don't know were you are. Even then, it will vary by county and by judge. I don't think you can be put jail without having an attorney, but contempt actions may be different. get an attorney joat mon fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Aug 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 22:51
|
|
|
joat mon posted:get an attorney Get an attorney and stop posting incriminating details on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
betaraywil posted:Get an attorney and stop posting incriminating details on the internet. Fair enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 23:30
|
|
|
Saw what remained of your post in the other thread. Definitely need a lawyer. You needed a lawyer when you plead. They would have explained what to do if poo poo went south. I still can't believe you and the many of the other TCC people think they can do this without lawyers. (That legal advice thread is also full of misinformation). Tip for probation: If you can't do something that is ordered, or hell if it is just slightly inconvenient, and you ask the court nicely before you are in violation, you will get almost anything if you don't abuse it. I've seen judges grant extensions to allow for a vacation to Hawaii for gently caress's sake. On the other hand, if you violated later, the burden's all on you to prove some sort of mitigation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 05:24
|
|
|
It's a pity about the terrible TCC mod who decided to quote rds in full AND THEN ASKED FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 09:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:23 |
|
|
I have an employment law question. Company A provides contracted employees to Client B. Under the terms of the contract, Company A selects the employees to work at Client B, although Client B can ask for an employee to be replaced at any time. In practice, Client B has significant input in the selection of employees, they review resumes and discuss selection with a manager from Company A. Client B has expressed their preference that certain employees not work for them due to various characteristics that are protected under employment law, such as age and National Guard membership. Are both parties legally responsible for this discrimination, or only Company A? How should the manager at Company A respond when Client B expresses a discriminatory preference?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:00
|
|