|
Suppose you run into someone's fence accidentally (backing up with a big van for example). What are you typically liable for and is there any criminal potential? How bad would ignoring it be worst case scenario?
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 07:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 12:27 |
|
|
baquerd posted:Suppose you run into someone's fence accidentally (backing up with a big van for example). What are you typically liable for and is there any criminal potential? How bad would ignoring it be worst case scenario? Is this a serious question? You'd be liable for the damage you caused to the fence. If the owner called the police, you could be fined or maybe arrested.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 07:42
|
|
|
Loopyface posted:Is this a serious question? You'd be liable for the damage you caused to the fence. If the owner called the police, you could be fined or maybe arrested. Well, in who's opinion is the extent of the damage measured? For example, the owner might want to replace the whole thing and bring in an expensive contractor to rip it up completely, while the guy who ran into the fence might believe a repair job on the section hit is more than sufficient.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 07:45
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Well, in who's opinion is the extent of the damage measured? For example, the owner might want to replace the whole thing and bring in an expensive contractor to rip it up completely, while the guy who ran into the fence might believe a repair job on the section hit is more than sufficient. The owner of the fence gets to decide what he wants to do with it. Replace it, repair it, etc. So, don't run into poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:06
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Well, in who's opinion is the extent of the damage measured? The jury's.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:23
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:The jury's. Do you actually have a jury in civil cases? This seems like something for small claims. SWATJester posted:The owner of the fence gets to decide what he wants to do with it. Replace it, repair it, etc. So, don't run into poo poo. How is this? Why would the guy hitting the fence be liable for anything more than complete restoration of the effected section? Like if it's just a bit caved in between posts and they want to pull up the whole side.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:34
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Do you actually have a jury in civil cases? This seems like something for small claims. Because the guy will probably sue you for conversion of chattels, for which the remedy is the full value of the product. Once again, the solution: don't hit other people's poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:38
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Do you actually have a jury in civil cases? This seems like something for small claims. In civil cases? Yes, if the parties want one. In small claims? Probably not, but I have no information on the value of the fence (meaning "I don't know if it's small claims or not"). If it's small claims, then the implication of the answer is the same: the finder of fact. In that case, the judge.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:40
|
|
|
Doesn't conversion require voluntary action? Does an accident count? From what I'm hearing, I basically need to pay what they're asking. It's still pretty ridiculous, high $x hundred dollars to replace what's basically 6 feet of wood slats. Anyway, how can I write a contract that will ensure this releases my liability? Do I need a lawyer or can I figure this out with a few hours of work?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:44
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Doesn't conversion require voluntary action? Does an accident count? Get a quote from someone else on repairing that sort of fence. Offer to pay that much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:49
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Doesn't conversion require voluntary action? Does an accident count? The volitional action is you driving the truck. You intentionally drove it. Your driving caused a conversion of defendant's property. It does not matter that you did not intend to convert the property; it only matters that you intended the act which causes the conversion. In that regard, it's akin to a strict liability standard. -e- And even if that jurisdiction tort law is not favorable to that action being for conversion, you're still liable for trespass. You're going to write a contract to release future liability for running over someone's fence? Or you've already ran it over? Leif. fucked around with this message at 09:05 on Aug 5, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:58
|
|
|
baquerd posted:It's still pretty ridiculous, high $x hundred dollars to replace what's basically 6 feet of wood slats. Fences are expensive to put up and to repair properly. That's why you shouldn't run into them. And if you do, you should be expected to pay the cost of repairs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 08:58
|
|
|
JudicialRestraints posted:Get a quote from someone else on repairing that sort of fence. Offer to pay that much. I'll do this for sure. I figured out the conversion thing, this is conversion because it is a case of strict liability. How's this sound? I came up with it from browsing Wikipedia's conversion page! quote:In regard to the <DATE> conversion by deprivation of the fence owned by <FENCE OWNER> by <ME>, <FENCE OWNER> wholly releases <ME> from all outstanding potential liability arising from this incident and furthermore agrees to waive all future legal remedy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 09:00
|
|
|
Applying the facts of your specific case to the law of your jurisdiction to reach a legal conclusion is the very definition of legal advice. If you want opinions on a contract or release or whatever, consult a lawyer in your jurisdiction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 09:03
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:Applying the facts of your specific case to the law of your jurisdiction to reach a legal conclusion is the very definition of legal advice. Can't a non-lawyer freely give what would otherwise be legal advice as long as they disclaim they are not a lawyer? They are nice enough people anyway, I just want a bare minimum buffer. I'll probably end up playing with it a bit to work out some of the ambiguity and run with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 09:05
|
|
|
Non-lawyers should not be answering questions in this thread, though they do. I don't understand why you're making this into a big deal. You're going to pay them something for repairing the fence, right? The worst case scenario is that instead they sue, and you're out the FMV of the fence, plus possibly some incidentals. That's not the end of the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 09:06
|
|
|
I do greatly appreciate all the advice, just wanted to say. Wish me luck with these guys at any rate.SWATJester posted:I don't understand why you're making this into a big deal. You're going to pay them something for repairing the fence, right? The worst case scenario is that instead they sue, and you're out the FMV of the fence, plus possibly some incidentals. That's not the end of the world. The law makes me extremely nervous, I don't want to deal with anyone even vaguely related to the justice system if I can help it. This is also not an inconsequential sum of money to me, especially if I have to go start hiring lawyers or going to court (I work nights so that would be so much fun let me tell you).
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 09:09
|
|
|
SWATJester posted:Because the guy will probably sue you for conversion of chattels, for which the remedy is the full value of the product. In my state, a fence would not be a chattel, but rather an appurtenance to real estate. As such, the measure of damages would be the repair cost capped at the reduction in value of the real estate, with evidence of the reduction of value to the real estate being a necessary element. So the message is, don't take advice from an internet message board, because some states have weird rules like that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 12:02
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Suppose you run into someone's fence accidentally (backing up with a big van for example). What are you typically liable for and is there any criminal potential? How bad would ignoring it be worst case scenario? Don't you have auto insurance?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 13:00
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Don't you have auto insurance? It was a U-Haul, and their insurance doesn't cover this (unless I want to fight them in court too  ) and I don't have my own.I found out the fence's owner is a lawyer himself, so I graciously asked him to draw up the papers and he agreed, just putting this behind me. Edit: I did look this up an it's an appurtenance in my state too, but I really don't want to gently caress with a lawyer who's apparently retired and has nothing better than to ruin me if he so chooses. baquerd fucked around with this message at 15:12 on Aug 5, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 15:09
|
|
|
baquerd posted:I found out the fence's owner is a lawyer himself... The ancillary to SWATJester's rule: definitely don't hit a lawyer's poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 17:49
|
|
|
I'm from Louisiana. When I got divorced, my ex-wife and I had a joint credit card that was never paid off. A half-hearted search was made to find her when it went unpaid - they found me, however, and I ended up having my wages garnished over a year for a total of around $4,000. Seeing as how it was a joint account (both of our names are on all of the documents) and I paid for the whole thing, would I be entitled to collect half of the garnishment from my ex?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 18:30
|
|
|
In Louisiana any debts run up during the life of the marriage are community obligations. So yes, that portion of the credit card debt accrued before the divorce should be owed equally. You and your wife are solidary obligors and the credit card company is entitled to recover the total debt from either of you, as you've seen. Assuming no other agreement (such as a consent judgment or partition of the property you signed as part of the divorce) you are entitled to indemnification from your ex-wife for her half of the debt. This also assumes that (a) the debt on the card was accumulated during the marriage and not before, and (b) you never used the card to accumulate additional debt after the divorce. Consult an attorney.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 18:42
|
|
|
Thank you for the information. I'd have to go back and check.. I am unsure if the debt was before or during the marriage. However, the card was hers before it was made into a joint account - so if the debt is a combination of what she did before we were together and what we did as a couple, that would not change your answer, right? When we were divorced, I never used the card again; it was cut up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 18:45
|
|
|
Javid posted:Google up "[state] renter's rights" - in most cases you can do stuff like pay yourself to have it repaired and then deduct it from your rent, if the landlord fails to get off their rear end. But READ THE RIGHTS first. Thank you very much for the help, I actually had looked into that but I am having a hard time figuring out what kinds of things would be covered by this. It looks like in California I could say have the outside of the house repainted if the paint is chipping, which it is, but that isn't a huge concern for me. The big one is the problem with the electrical panel and I can't figure out if we could have that taken care of and deducted from the rent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 18:56
|
|
|
SWATJester posted:Non-lawyers should not be answering questions in this thread, though they do. When did you pass the bar again?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 18:58
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:When did you pass the bar again? Took it last month. Your point?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 19:19
|
|
|
Lawyers, please. We have enough non-lawyers giving nonsensical advice on this thread. Let's not turn on one another!
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 19:34
|
|
|
And, of course, it bears repeating that no one is actually offering legal advice in this thread - the lawgoons (students and lawyers alike) are merely giving out generalized explanations of legal principles that may apply to a goon's situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 19:37
|
|
|
Wyatt posted:Lawyers, please. We have enough non-lawyers giving nonsensical advice on this thread. Let's not turn on one another! So this is what gave that crazy guy the idea for the Motion for Restoration of Sanity!
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 20:36
|
|
|
Yo Eleven posted:Thank you for the information. The answer is the same. If you get married and both started using the credit with both your names on it, more likely than not it all becomes community debt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2010 23:31
|
|
|
I live in Texas and I got a ticket for an expired inspection. It was well and truly expired, so I went to the municipal court building in the city I received the ticket, ready to pay my $160 and move on. I hadn't brought my copy of my ticket, so the lady behind the counter asked me for my DOB. She couldn't find my ticket with my DOB, so she asked for my phone number. No dice. License plate? Nope. I was issued the ticket some ~4 weeks ago, so it's not like it just wasn't in their system yet. I asked her how she might go about finding my ticket, and she suggested that I should bring in my copy of the ticket. Now, that sounds absolutely ridiculous to me. Why on earth would I provide them with what seems to be the only record of my ticket? My fiancee wants me to take the ticket down there and pay it, because she's scared that it's about to turn into a warrant for failure to appear - but I appeared! I have no desire to pay the fine if I don't have to, and I'll feel like a loving moron if I walk in there with my copy and she says "Oh great, that'll be $160 please." Help me lawyer goons!
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 06:04
|
|
|
You have two options. (1) Do nothing and hope that you slipped through the cracks. (2) Bring them your ticket and pay it and keep your inspection current from now on. The intricacies of this can probably be explained by a Texas lawyer with various little games about promises to appear and such but I'm not familiar with traffic court in Texas so I won't say anything. If you were in New Orleans I'd tell you to write a certified letter to the court saying that you appeared at the courthouse and were informed by court staff that no citation for you existed on record, and reviewing your files you've determined that your inspection is current (it is, right??), so you consider the matter closed, and if there is any reason they disagree with you, that you expect them to notify you in writing of that fact and provide you with a copy of the citation. But New Orleans is a jungle so not sure if that would work in Texas.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 15:35
|
|
|
I recently found a judgment for a credit card for $850 on my credit report. I was never served and it took me a really long time to actually find out where to contact to find out when and where I was served. After doing a bit of research I finally found the right people. I finally got ahold of my case ID at the city small claims court. I asked when and where I was served and the clerk who answered asked me what I look like. I told her my description (male, brown hair, 5'9", glasses, thin, 23 years old) and she said that the person who was served said they were me and met most of the description. I asked her what that was and she said early to mid 30's (I have an absolute baby face, most people assume I like 16 or 17), brown hair, average height, glasses. She told the date was July of 2009. The funny part is, the address I was "served" at I hadn't even lived at for over a year and a half from that date. At that time, I didn't even have glasses. I know that CapOne has my correct address. The court wants me to provide documentation or a bill with a mailing address from July of 2009 to prove that it wasn't me. The funny thing is that in late June of 2009, I had my license renewed to the address I was living at the time. Could I just show them that and a few pay stubs? I'm not even sure if I have any bills or anything from when I lived there, a lot of stuff has gotten lost in transition from house to house. One funny thing I did find was a late notice from Capital One which was addressed to the apartment building I lived in directly after the one where they "served" me at. It came a few months BEFORE I was "served" which means they had updated information, but went to an old address anyway. Do you think just having my updated address on my license would be enough for the court? I could provide contact info of the landlord of that apartment building to verify that I was no longer living there, would something like that work? I have every intention of paying this off, but I don't want this on my credit report. I would have dealt with this in court if I'd been informed, but this company of heathens sent some slimeball somewhere I haven't lived in years and said a person who doesn't really match my extremely generic profile was me with no verification whatsoever. And also, if I was served July 2009 an the judgment was October 2009, wouldn't I have heard something about it by now? The Sheriff hasn't showed up at my door, my wages haven't been garnished, no one's contacted me or my employer about anything. This whole thing is really disconcerting. If they'd actually done this legitimately I would have handed them a check.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 18:32
|
|
|
GENERAL RELEASE WHEREAS, it is acknowledged that on or about some date, baquerd who lives on cherry lane damaged a portion of fence located at <the property address> and owned by <the property owners>. (the "INCIDENT") WHEREAS, it is acknowledged an estimate for $x to fix poo poo was obtained, baquerd desires to tender $x to the fence people in full accord and satisfaction for the damage done to the fence; NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED, that for good and valuable consideration in good and immediately available funds, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the fence people, their heirs, successors and assigns do hereby release and discharge baquerd, his heirs, successors and assigns from any and all amounts, claims and actions, whether known or unknown, arising out of the INCIDENT. IT IS FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGED, that in the case that the tender of the $x fails to clear and/or be honored by the issuing bank that this RELEASE shall be null and void and further action, legal or otherwise, may be brought to satisfy the damage caused by the INCIDENT. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, baquerd and the fence people have caused this RELEASE to be executed and delivered this <date> Signed, Everyone That's pretty much the contract, maybe that will help someone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 20:22
|
|
|
You are loving ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 20:29
|
|
|
baquerd posted:GENERAL HILARITY Be sure to keep a signed (and notarized!) copy in your lock box at the bank. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 20:32
|
|
|
What the hell? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 20:42
|
|
|
baquerd posted:GENERAL RELEASE You and Pookie should start a layman's law practice
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 12:27 |
|
|
Hah, it's a paraphrased version of what was actually written, but glad I could entertain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2010 21:03
|
|