- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
JeffOneShotWong posted:
Virginia state.
I'm a tenant.
My landlord hasn't been paying her condo fees. I guess she has been simply pocketing the rent checks I've been sending her instead of paying condo fees.
The condo association sends me a court order in an attempt to come after me for her outstanding debt. It turns out that it was in my lease. The condo can come after me to garnish my rent checks as payment towards my landlord's debt.
I ask my landlord about this. She says to not worry about it and to continue paying her rent and that she would take care of the debt before the court date.
I follow her instructions. A month or so later, I receive a 'show cause' court order. It turns out that the debt was never taken care of and my failure to show up in court made it look like I was in working alongside with my landlord in being a deadbeat.
I show up in court and agree to send my rent checks to the condo association instead of to my landlord. The court order states that I am not to pay rent to my landlord and that is it to be garnished and given to the condo association.
My landlord calls me and tells me that I am to pay her rent and that if I don't, I will be incurring late fees. I tell her I don't believe her and that I am simply following court orders not to pay her and will be sending it to the condo association instead.
Before I send out my rent check to the condo association at the beginning of the next month, my landlord files for bankruptcy.
Because of the bankruptcy, the condo association doesn't accept my rent checks because everything is to be put on hold. The condo association tell me to just hold on and wait.
I don't know who to pay rent to so I continue to accumulate the rent in an account knowing that I am receiving unjust enrichment in all this and will have to pay someone or something sometime down the line.
Things start breaking down in the apartment but the landlord won't fix it since I am not paying the rent she is expecting. The condo won't fix things because there are outstanding debts associated with the apartment. I end up using my own money to fix some things and have kept the receipts.
A few months later, the bankruptcy goes through and my landlord's debts are discharged.
Now my landlord is attempting to come after me for the rent money originally meant for the condo association even though the rent wasn't being accepted by the condo association.
She also is tacking on late-fees from the time I first started withholding the rent. She says the late-fees are expected since I was supposed to have been sending rent checks to the condo association and the act of not sending it to the condo association (even though the condo association wasn't accepting my rent) means the late-fees are justified.
Does she even have a case here? How much rent do I owe (ie: from time I stopped paying her to now, or from the time the debt has been discharged to now?) and to whom?
tl,dr:
Is my landlord entitled to back-rent that I have withheld from her under the instructions of a court order so that it could be garnished as payments towards my landlord's outstanding condo debt? However, said back-rent was never accepted by the condo association due to my landlord filing for bankruptcy before payment began?
If the condo you were in became part of the bankruptcy estate upon your landlord's filing, then the proceeds growing out of the property would be owed to the estate under bankruptcy law anyway.
My understanding of what you wrote is that the garnishment on the rent checks was a collection action by the condo association against your landlord. If your landlord filed in Chapter 11, 11 USC 362(a)(1) prevents the "commencement or continuation" of any judicial recovery actions (meaning garnishment). This means that the Condo Association could not legally take your money.
If your landlord restructured, she may still owe money to the condo association and the garnishment still may be in place.
So what you need to figure out is whether or not your landlord has liquidated her debt (in which case the garnishment is gone) or hasn't (in which case it may be gone). Considering your landlord was apparently allowed to keep a rental property that she owned before bankruptcy, I would not be surprised if she did NOT liquidate her debt in which case you will need to know more facts about the garnishment.
Also, in the future NEVER ignore a garnishment, depending upon your state you may end up being liable for the entirety of your landlords debt if you do so.
On the actual debt side, charging you late fees is entirely unacceptable especially considering the poo poo that began to break down which normally would have allowed you to pro-rate your rent. If your landlords entire debt is discharged, you may have had to file as a creditor during the bankruptcy proceedings (although the likelihood of you getting anything is minimal). At a minimum, I don't see the late fees as acceptable and you should probably challenge them in small claims court.
tl dr: your case is complex and will be determined based upon local laws and the terms of your landlord's bankruptcy discharge/restructuring. Get a lawyer. Everything I have said is extremely conditional and you will need someone to analyze your entire case if you want to make exact sense of it.
That said, you probably don't have to pay the late fee
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2010 21:53
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2024 13:15
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Stuntcock posted:
What if the reason for copying them was for a class-action already in place against BP, and the employer wanted $20 per stub? Just unethical, or illegal?
The statute cited says 'the actual cost of reproduction.' I'd raise my eyebrow at any bill over 30 cents a page.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2010 21:58
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
CaptainScraps posted:
Oh holy poo poo. I'm not a lawyer, I'm not your lawyer, this is not legal advice, get independent counsel. But I know a little bit about legal malpractice in Texas.
Annakie, your lawyer does not have authority to settle for you. That contract is voidable. Your lawyer has hosed up.
You may not be able to pursue an action against your lawyer yet because he hasn't prejudiced you from recovering necessarily. However, you should be able to recover a lot more from the insurance company. "Lot" being more than $8500.
Seconding this. It sounds like you have an ongoing degradation to the quality if your life which will also turn into future lost income. Since liability is basically already decided this case is what attorneys like to refer to as a 'candy jar.' Any attorney that would settle for 6500 dollars is an idiot, and any attorney who would only give you 1500 of that 6500 is a crook.
I would void this contract if possible, and if impossible I would sue your attorney for malpractice and recover from HIS insurance.
Also you can probably report your attorney your local bar because it sounds like he has flat out stolen money from you.
E. also watch out for agency laws, you attorney probably had apparent authority meaning he is liable rather than the insurer. I'm not 100% on how this applies to legal malpractice in your state but I'm pretty sure it would apply in my state.
JudicialRestraints fucked around with this message at 06:24 on Sep 30, 2010
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2010 06:20
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Andrias Scheuchzeri posted:
Ugh. I think I just got hit by a chimney cleaning scam, very much like this: http://www.countytimes.com/articles/2010/07/02/news/doc4c2cad374263e918349790.txt
"Just got hit" as in the guys just left my house, after (I think!) installing a new (but over-priced?) liner. I started looking them up online while they were working because I was starting to get doubtful about what was going on; but I wasn't about to run out and say "STOP WHAT YOU'RE DOING" because...well...they were working on my chimney? "Very much like this" as in, same name and everything.
a) I'm stupid. Really stupid.
b) Do I have any options other than suck up the $1800 as a life lesson?
c) They have my credit card number. Halp?
Depends upon if they fraudulently represented themselves to you or not. If they did you may have a private cause of action, but good luck hunting them down and good luck recovering.
That said, if they were as dodgy as the people in the article your state's consumer protection bureau is going to want to know about this (and will probably institute action). In my state, consumer protection will usually fine them a ton of money and try to distribute that money to their victims. You probably won't get all of it back, but it's a lot cheaper than hiring a lawyer.
Mostly though, don't do dumb stuff like this in the future.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2010 18:04
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Andrias Scheuchzeri posted:
Thanks. I edited my post above because my SMARTER friend reminded me to do stuff like call the bank, credit card, etc. Durr. Calling consumer protection next.
God I'm a moron--aka a newish home-owner.
Stopping payments will put you in an interesting place. If they actually DID serve you, you may owe them that money. That said for them to sue you they would have to sit in one place for long enough that THEY can get sued. So if you're gonna stop payments I would make sure you have all your ducks in a row. Just in case.
If they ARE a scam you're good.
If they AREN'T you could be in trouble.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2010 18:46
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Incredulous Red posted:
You basically have to give them notice of the problem and reasonable time to cure it. From what I understand, you haven't been the one complaining to them about the dog - they've been acting on your own.
You have to send them a letter saying that this guy is in material breach of the lease, you rented the place assuming there would be no pets and they've allowed him to keep a pet, and if they don't kick him out you'd like them to terminate your obligations under the lease.
If they don't play ball with you then you might be able to leave and argue constructive eviction but it's risky and potentially time consuming. See if you can work a deal with them first. Most of all, get all your communications in writing.
He could also theoretically try to pro-rate his rent after giving them notice. It's more likely to succeed than constructive eviction but it is also risky and won't change the dog problem.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2010 19:05
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
What Fun posted:
Until yesterday, I worked for a convenience store chain in New York. When I went in for my shift, I noticed that I wasn't on the next week's schedule and asked my boss about it. She informed me that I had sold beer to a minor, and per policy I was automatically fired.
Some pertinent details
1) Apparently the minor in question was pulled over by the police with alcohol in his car(with a bunch of friends), and when they asked where he got it I was named. I have no idea who this person is.
2) My manager says I am on tape selling beer to someone without checking his I.D.
3) The police want a copy of the tape, but the store refuses to give it to them. I haven't seen this tape.
I suspect that this kid sent in someone that I know by sight(i.e have ID'd in the past) to buy the beer, and for whatever reason(maybe I turned him down and he was angry at me?) told the cops I had sold it to him. The store says I am on tape, but I haven't seen this tape, and don't know if the person that was pulled over by the police is even the person I am "on tape" selling to. They won't give the tape to the police because apparently then I can prosecuted?(my manager says, for all I know this is a lie).
Do I have any options to contest this and get my job back? Failing that, will I be eligible for unemployment? Any help greatly appreciated. For what it's worth I have never had any disciplinary issues, worked well, and was a shift leader at this store. I have no recollection of the incident in question.
If you are in an at-will state (p. much all of america) without a contract or a union you're hosed on the employment front. Your boss can fire you for any reason except a couple special ones (trying to exercise a protected right (such as whistle blowing), race, religion, sex, age or sexual orientation)
You may have an unemployment case. If you file, and your former employers challenge it you will probably end up before an administrative law judge. After your initial denial of unemployment you're going to want to ask for a copy of the video as a discovery request. Either figure out how to do that in your jurisdiction or convince a starving law student to do it for you.
At this point you're going to want to realize that your company may have a policy requiring you to card EVERYONE. If it does you're going to want to try to prove to the judge that it was largely unenforced.
Your best bet however is trying to get some law students to help you out for free.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2010 11:39
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Coldbird posted:
This is probably a long question on a pretty pedestrian subject... kind of piddling compared to other stuff that's been posted, I'm sure.
I live in the US - Georgia, specifically Gwinnett County. I'm considering taking the homeowner's association to small claims court. I bought the house in August of last year; it is a townhouse, and I do own the land, and thus the lawn it's upon - it's just a very, very small piece of land. Not even a quarter of an acre.
Out front the lawn is about 5' long and 2' wide, and out back just the width of the house and going back maybe 30 feet up to an embankment. Now, when I bought the house, I asked the agent, what does the $60/month HOA fee cover, and I was told that it covers lawn maintenance for both the common areas and the house. It makes sense, because my house is pretty small, and there's literally nowhere you could put a lawnmower. The only way to get it from out front to out back would be roll it over the carpet, unless you want to cross through other people's land.
For the first 8-9 months, all went as planned. $60 a month, lawn was mowed for me, and common areas covered, etc. Once the last unit in the subdivision sells, suddenly they stop mowing the homeowner's lawns, and only do the common areas. Nobody is prepared, and some people's lawns turn into a jungle. My own doesn't quite become that bad, but it's certainly not great looking. I write the HOA and get a nice 'piss off, it's not in the contract'. Also odd is that, per the closing documents, I only actually own the land up to about 10 feet behind my house - the ~20 feet beyond that to the fence is listed as the common areas, yet this land isn't being mowed by them either... I asked them if I was to interpret that as them ceding me that land, but I didn't get a response.
Go forward maybe 5 months, and I get a letter from the HOA that my lawn is allegedly looking too bad to be tolerated, and I will be levied a fee of $10 a day after 10 days until I have fixed it. At this point I consult the documentation I was given at closing, and yes, it enumerates quite specifically that the HOA is responsible for lawn maintenance on both the common areas *and* the homeowner's property, unless the homeowner decides on their own to fence off their back lawn.
I write this to the HOA, and I get back that hey, piss off, you're responsible for your own lawn and will be charged. I call up Gwinnett County Courthouse and speak to a clerk in the records department, and ask if the HOA agreement on file with them has been altered at all since it was filed in 2007. She says it was not.
Now, I should clarify - this is not an HOA in the traditional sense where all the homeowners get together and vote up a president and treasurer and all that. The person in charge of the HOA is actually the builder. The agreement is written such that the homeowners can elect someone else, but he has three votes to everyone else's one until 2014, and to my knowledge there has never been an HOA meeting. The whole subdivision is only 43 townhouses. Almost nobody knows each other, and I work overnights full-time so I virtually never see my neighbors. I've only met four of them, actually, and two already moved out.
My suspicion is that the builder is basically using the HOA as a for-profit enterprise. $60 a month from each resident should cover landscaping and lawn care for all 43 homes easily; it's a total of maybe three acres, with nothing special in the way of landscaping. He suddenly cuts back on the lawn service right after he doesn't need to sell any more units, and starts levying fees on people for not cutting their own lawns. The last HOA letter stated that 20% of the neighborhood is 3 months or more past due on their HOA fees.
Now, I have the agreement in writing, but it wasn't something anyone signed. It was simply handed to me at the law office at closing. The builder/HOA president/mysterious HOA email writer has said that there is a different, 'final plat' on file with the county which supercedes this, but he hasn't provided any more information, let alone a copy, nor was I shown that before or at closing... the HOA agreement I have is notarized, but I don't know how much weight that has, if any.
Small claims court will probably cost me, but I'm not really sure how much I can expect to pay. Is it worth it? Can I win, and get him to mow the lawn, or at least recover the HOA fee? Even if I do win, is it worth it? My only actual court experience is pleading guilty to traffic violations.
Does anyone else want to see this as a derivative suit for breach of fiduciary duty?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2010 03:32
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Zealous Abattoir posted:
Can someone explain to me whats up with due process and how it affects how private colleges work with their students? I mean, I tried to read up upon the subject last night to understand her argument, but either I really am dumb (which I probably am) or she is talking out of her rear end.
1. Due process only applies to deprivation of property rights or things that the supreme court considers enough like property rights.
2. She would then have to prove that either
a) The school did not follow it's own procedural rules for the deprivation of this property right
b) That the school's procedures were insufficient to ensure due process
Most of the other poster's got it right, I just wanted to spell it out exactly for you.
on 1. - Property rights are usually granted by the government. If property is taken by a private individual you are usually able to sue them for either conversion (theft) or Trespass against Chattels (interference with property). I doubt that your friend could have a property right in classes she contracted for (that said there may be a breach of contract claim here).
2. The School's procedural rules seemed sufficient. She was warned, she continued to be disruptive. Unless the disruption was an otherwise protected right (I.e. she was voicing a contrary political opinion to that of the prof) she is out of luck. Even if there are other rights at issue, the professor had the right to establish time place and manner restrictions on the modes of speech which your friend violated. Unless the school had an explicit policy it violated in ejecting your friend, she's poo poo out of luck.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 19:03
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
hypocrite lecteur posted:
You're still on the hook for the money, she's not, unless the contract specifically apportions costs to each of you. Last man standing on a lease owes, if you both cut out either or both of you can be sued for the money.
Anyways even if she is in breach, you don't get to sue for damages that way. You're required to mitigate and try to find another roommate or make up the costs some other way, then can sue for the actual damages caused by the breach. You can't just sue for 10 months rent and call it a day
My understanding is that in Wisconsin, you still owe the landlord the full amount you just have a private cause of action against the girlfriend. Of course you have to mitigate, but most contracts specify who has the burden of mitigating (the person moving out).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 08:34
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Morbid Florist posted:
I have an unemployment hearing wednesday and I have absolutely no idea what I'm walking into. The short version of the story, which can be clarified if anyone answers:
quit a temporary zoo keeper job that was supposed to end in a week or two due to someone telling our boss I was badmouthing her all over the place.
Boss said the information came from "very trusted long term people" so she was inclined to believe it.
Was told the odds of me getting a full time position were nil, that the job was soon to end, and that quitting would not be a problem for her.
The poo poo talking was just the last straw, but I had gone to her previously asking to receive ANY training someone could give me. No full time person ever spent a second with me about how to work with very large animals in direct contact. My first day I told the boss that I had never worked with horses before. On this note, the day before I quit there was a microburst storm that came through and I got stepped on and headbutted by a 900lb horse flipping out in the storm, and I had no idea how to handle it.
It boils down to someone sabotaging me with my boss, never being trained in a very dangerous job, and this boss saying everyone needed to grow thicker skin.
I applied for unemployment since the zoo sent me paperwork to file for it. The state called me and asked for the story. I told them in no uncertain terms that I did quit the job, and why. They said they'd contact me if they needed any more information, and they did not. About two weeks later the checks started coming. About a month and a half later I get the employer-appeal notice.
My two questions are what am I to expect in terms of procedure for all this, and what should I do ahead of time for preparation?
I'm not 100% sure about MA, but over here you would be denied. Generally in unemployment cases the burden of proof is on the person who terminates employment. If you're fired, the Employer has to prove cause for firing (this is hard). If you quit, you have to prove cause for quitting.
Generally to get away with quitting the employer has to be asking you to do something ridiculous - personally dangerous, hostile work environment (racism/sexism/ageism), illegal job duties, job duties that would open you up to civil liaibility, etc.
Looking at your case, you appear to have quit because your boss is an rear end in a top hat. You're going to need some stronger claim than "refusal to train me" and "my contract would not have been renewed anyway" in order to collect unemployment
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2010 17:20
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Slim Killington posted:
Appreciate all the advice. And you couldn't be more correct, being pissed off about the entire thing is what's fueling it. I wanted to move in the next four months anyway, there's really no reason to just not shrug it off.
As a warning, usually the condo association fines are enforced with a lien on your property (condo). With enough unpaid fines they can usually force a sale of your condo to cover the unpaid fees. This could make moving much more difficult for you to move when you try to.
Again, as much as condo associations are collections of assholes/busybodies they have real power (as long as the owner of your property is a signatory to the governing bylaws which is usually a requirement to move into an area governed by an association)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2011 19:05
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2024 13:15
|
|
- JudicialRestraints
- Oct 26, 2007
-
Are you a LAWYER? Because I'll have you know I got GOOD GRADES in LAW SCHOOL last semester. Don't even try to argue THE LAW with me.
|
Automatonaphobia posted:
Just curious if anyone has been part of the mass porn copyright infringement cases going around and if so have you had any success with getting your case dismissed?
You can't just throw that out there without a background story.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2011 16:01
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2010 21:53
