Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Rohaq
Aug 11, 2006
My mom lives in New Zealand (I'm in the UK), and has been trying to get a protection order on her husband due to his abusive behaviour (shouting, threatening, generating load arguments, one time grabbed her by the throat, etc.). It went to court today and she didn't get the order; I think that this was essentially because the vast majority of the submitted evidence was that of his word against hers. I think that as there was no solid evidence submitted, and because a protection order would essentially evict him from the house it was thrown out.

But one thing that I know is that my mom made recordings of this man's rantings during a heated argument, where he was obviously spoiling for a shouting match, and she was talking quietly and calmly, and I was rather surprised to find that this was never submitted to the court.

So my question is this: What is the stance of the NZ courts on evidence admissibility regarding conversations recorded with the knowledge of only one of the parties is aware that they are being recorded? I know that in the US, it varies depending on the state, but there seems to be little information lying around regarding New Zealand evidence law.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Rohaq
Aug 11, 2006

Too Fresh posted:

Hi,
under section 84 Domestic Violence Act 1995 (which appears to cover protection orders in this sort of case..), "In any proceedings under this Act (other than criminal proceedings), and whether by way of hearing in the first instance or by way of appeal, or otherwise, the Court may receive any evidence that it thinks fit, whether or not it is otherwise admissible in a court of law."

This means that it would come down to whether or not the judge hearing the case wanted it in or not.

I have found a couple of family court/high court cases where judges have said about similar one party consent recordings: "well, this evidence might be legal, but it isn't really relevant and it is too easily manipulable and isn't a particularly good look, so we aren't going to admit it". Of course, this is going to depend on the specific facts and context involved in the case, but the judges still weren't rejecting them automatically.

It is hard to provide you with a more specific answer given the extremely broad scope of s 84 to allow in any evidence the judge thinks relevant. It appears that there isn't an automatic exclusion.
Thanks, I'll pass this onto my mom, I think that she should really be asking her solicitor about this.

Rohaq
Aug 11, 2006
How can you 'summon' someone to court without a date, time or location? You wouldn't know where to go or when to be there. That sounds pretty much like bullshit to me.

That said, who would he report such violations to?

Rohaq
Aug 11, 2006
UK legal question here:

I've recently left rented student accommodation, and the agency that we were renting from refused to give us back our deposit based on a number of charges they wanted to make. The ones causing me concern are £188 for contract cleaning, and £262.40 for the water bill.

They sent a number of pictures of various bits of dust (these were taken after almost a month after leaving the property, so dust will have accumulated despite our best efforts), a few small cleaning items left in cupboards, some plastic bags on top of the kitchen cupboards, a freezer that was switched off and left to defrost (I was using it to store food until I left, so I couldn't exactly switch it off beforehand) and a cable modem we didn't have the tools to remove.

Whilst I can understand that they may want to make a small charge to remove the items, £188 seems incredibly excessive for cleaning. Can anyone comment on whether it's worth disputing this?

The second point is that they want to charge us for the water bill through our deposit. I checked the tenancy agreement, and I can indeed see that this was specified when we signed it, however I was under the impression that landlords cannot legally charge bills and use the tenancy deposit to pay them off, as this must either be included in the agreed rent, or the tenant should be allowed to deal with the utility company directly, so that they are entering an agreement with the utility provider and are provided with original copies of the utility bills.

I'm pretty sure the law was changed to this, or something similar to this, in order to protect the security deposits of tenants, 2 or 3 years ago, alongside similar laws stating that deposits need to be kept in a dedicated bank account to prevent them from being used for other charges. As such, is it legal for our landlord to have included this in their contract, and is it legal for them to be charging us this now? If not, what specific Acts should I be quoting here?

Rohaq
Aug 11, 2006

spog posted:

Talk to the Student Union - they often have advisors there who can give you accurate information and it is free.

I'm not at the university any more, having just moved out and graduated. We're also out of term, so the SU is closed anyway.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Rohaq
Aug 11, 2006

Pillowpants posted:

I'm from Massachusetts and not involved in any lawsuits or court cases. I just have a general question.

If I were to want to help people sign up for mint.com and help them enter in their budgets before they provide the banking information to mint that would cause all sorts of crazy liability issues, and then tell them to change the password, is that legit at all?
Personally, I would avoid this situation like the goddamned plague. Why? Because you have access to a third party system to help them with their finances, which they later enter banking details into.

Say they're lazy as gently caress (likely), and don't bother changing their password: If anything happens to their account, they may suspect you, and then you'd end up having to prove in court that you did not do it.

Find a way to help them with their finances (Google Docs spreadsheet or something?) without taking any banking details that could be used in order to steal money or commit fraud, but really, I'd avoid using a third party system that may store their personal details.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply