|
TL/DR: (California) Does an insurance company have any requirement to act in a timely and in at least marginally efficient manner? Can anything be done if their slowness and screwups end up costing the client money? The whole story: My roommate has [let's say $40,000] of professional gear, which he has insured with [let's just call them Company X]. The majority of his gear was stolen in a smash-and-grab two months ago. Some backstory on Company X: A year ago, they did some massive corporate restructuring, laid of hundreds of employees, and decided to refocus on their core profit center - insuring very high-end stuff for very wealthy people. As a result, they've been spending the past year transferring professional clients like my roommate to a new company, at the time of each client's annual renewal. As it happens, my roommate renewed with them just before they started doing that, so at this time he is one of the very few remaining clients and probably the last professional client of theirs that they will ever have to process a claim for. His policy includes coverage of rental gear after a loss, covering the period between the date of his loss to [date of insurance company payout + "reasonable" amount of time required for the purchase of new gear]. The rental coverage is however limited to a maximum of 10% of the declared value of his equipment (so, $4,000). Normally this company assesses the current replacement value for the lost gear and pays out within a week (the fact that they're paying for rental gear generally gives them incentive to get it done; it's an added cost of about $200-$500 per day). At this point however, Company X seems to have almost nobody left who is capable of handling this type of policy, and they dragged their feet on it for weeks (with my roommate and his insurance agent calling them almost daily by the end). Now there are two (and a half) issues: 1) It took so long, he racked up $4500 in rental costs (and that is after he switched to renting lower-end equipment after the first couple weeks). This is more than the 10% the policy will cover, leaving him at least $500 in the hole, due entirely to the inability of this dying and understaffed division of Company X to calculate replacement cost in a reasonable timeframe. (It's ~35 pieces of off-any-electronics-store-shelf equipment, for which they already had an itemized list; anyone could Google the current market values in an hour or less.) 1A) When they finally got around to approving his rental fee reimbursement (this took another 15 days; he mailed in his rental receipts immediately on getting the payout, they arrived at the insurance company 2 days later, and then the insurance company rep kept stalling him with "I don't see the receipts directly. Our mail department scans them and emails them to me. It should be done in a few days...."), they told him they'd approved a $3,500 rental reimbursement. Obviously this is not the $4,000 stipulated in his contract, and this at least he shouldn't have much trouble forcing them to correct, but it's yet another delay to getting reimbursed properly. 2) Despite it taking weeks to complete, their calculations of his equipment rental costs are all wrong. They sent him an itemized spreadsheet with a list of his equipment, the replacement cost they determined, and a links where each item could be purchased at various online retailers. When he went through the spreadsheet, some of the links were to completely incorrect items, generally accessories - let's say for example he had an iPod insured; the reimbursement value would be calculated as $29.99 and the link would take him to Overstock.com's "iPod charge and sync cable". Other links went to pages that said "This item has been discontinued and is no longer for sale", which results in a too-low price since the replacement cost should have been calculated based on a newer edition of the product. It also indicates to me they don't do actual internet research on current market rates, they just pull the data in for each item from some kind of internal database - this makes sense for the sake of efficiency and consistency, but only if there's someone tasked with ensuring this internal database is kept up-to-date which they are clearly not doing. Lastly, there are some items that are specifically identified in his contract as having a fixed replacement cost which they incorrectly gave him the current market value for. All told, the reimbursement they gave him was some $5,000 short of what it should have been, and now they're dragging their feet on "looking into that." The big issue here is going to be #1 - getting rental reimbursement for an amount greater than the limit in his contract. The rest of it is going to be a pain in the rear end for him, but at least he has the contract on his side for those things. I mostly included those bits to give a solid idea of just how slow and unprofessional Company X has been acting. Is there any law (again, this is California) he can point to to put pressure on the agent to reimburse his total rental costs? Obviously the contract doesn't stipulate that Company X will do anything in any amount of time (but it is of course littered with requirements that the client take various actions in a "reasonable" amount of time and in "an efficient manner"), but could it really be legal for them to (as an extreme example) take two years to process his claim?
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 09:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Hey legal thread. This is a really odd and petty legal question. I live in a co-op in NYC with a shared common space. Last week my nanny left some of my 3 year olds balls in the backyard to dry since they were soaked. (soccer, beach & bouncy rubber). The garden is maintained by the former president of our board who doesn't have a job and treats the backyard like his personal property. The balls went missing and since I am still on the board I watched the surveillance camera footage to see if any of our buildings teens were being cocks. Turns out it was this former board president. He didn't actually throw the balls out but tossed them down an alley where we keep our trash bins. The balls we seen in the street by the Superintendant later that day but he thought we were throwing them out. Do you think the former president is responsible for the loss of the balls? I confronted him about it and he denied it. When I told him about the evidence he got irate. This guy has a major rage problem. He insists its not his problem that the balls are gone even though he removed them from a common area. I know this seems petty but its buggin' me! Thanks Is this directed to me? VVVVV King Lou fucked around with this message at 15:47 on May 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 15:02
|
|
|
Sure, but what would you do about it?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 15:08
|
|
|
I'm on the board of the building. I'm drafting this guy a letter for the board to have the managing agent send him reminding him he's not to police to touch other peoples things. He is basically a guy with a huge rage problem who thinks he owns the courtyard because he has been here since before the building went co-op in the 80's. I was just asking if legally people think he's responsible for the loss of the items because he removed them from the common area and let them go into a trash area where they disappeared from. He seemed very adamant that it wasn't his problem if they went missing after he tossed them in the trash alley. In fact he told me so through gritted teeth when I asked him about it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
King Lou posted:petty legal question § 155.05 Larceny; defined posted:1. A person steals property and commits larceny when, with intent to § 165.40 Criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree posted:A person is guilty of criminal possession of stolen property in the
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 16:31
|
|
|
Thank you! Thats very helpful.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 17:04
|
|
|
You might want to check your co-ops bylaws, too. There's probably a policy about the common areas and such.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
King Lou posted:I'm on the board of the building. I'm drafting this guy a letter for the board to have the managing agent send him reminding him he's not to police to touch other peoples things. He is basically a guy with a huge rage problem who thinks he owns the courtyard because he has been here since before the building went co-op in the 80's. I was just asking if legally people think he's responsible for the loss of the items because he removed them from the common area and let them go into a trash area where they disappeared from. He seemed very adamant that it wasn't his problem if they went missing after he tossed them in the trash alley. In fact he told me so through gritted teeth when I asked him about it. Cool. I didn't mean to sound like a dick, I would be inclined to say he is under common law standards, hence my "sure". I was just genuinely curious as to what help having the information of whether he was legally responsible or not would be.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:TL/DR: (California) Does an insurance company have any requirement to act in a timely and in at least marginally efficient manner? Can anything be done if their slowness and screwups end up costing the client money? Yes he can file a complaint with the California Insurance Commission.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:I just got into a 2 vehicle car accident around 3am in Atlanta (Fulton county). I was turning left from a side street onto a 3-lane street and was hit on the driver's side. The police officer issued me a citation since, because I was turning left, the other vehicle had the right of way, but I definitely turned with more than enough space; my guess is that they were either speeding or didn't have their lights on at that time (though they were on after the accident). In a letter from their lawyer, they stated that "He was first transported by ambulance to Grady Memorial for blunt chest trauma and was treated at the ER and released. He then sought follow-up medical care when he experienced additional injury symptoms in his back... You will note on the doctor's final visit note that [claimant] had residual symptoms of injury in his lower back. His medical bills that I have total $4,952, plus the amount of the EMS bill, which I have no yet received." Is this a normal outcome? The ambulance was definitely unnecessary as I was unharmed and the passenger in the other car was unharmed. In fact, the driver got out of the car and walked around before requesting an ambulance, getting back into his driver's seat, buckling up, then forcing the EMT's to take him out on a body board with neck brace. The "residual symptoms" are difficult to challenge, however. Perhaps importantly, the police office said he would note in his report that the other driver was being theatrical, but I haven't seen a copy of it yet. Would my insurance have that or do I need to get one and fax it over? Obviously, I will call Liberty Mutual tomorrow morning, but I wanted to make sure I had as much helpful info as possible beforehand. Josh Lyman fucked around with this message at 00:23 on May 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:TL/DR: (California) Does an insurance company have any requirement to act in a timely and in at least marginally efficient manner? Can anything be done if their slowness and screwups end up costing the client money? I don't know if this will help your friend or not, but when I had an issue with an insurance company not reimbursing me in a timely manner, as well as them trying to get out of what I believed they owed me, I wrote a letter to my state's (WA) insurance commissioner. I conciesly explained my complaint with the insurance company. The commissioner's office contacted the insurance company about the matter a few days later, and the next day after that I had everything resolved with them.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 00:58
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Obviously, I will call Liberty Mutual tomorrow morning, but I wanted to make sure I had as much helpful info as possible beforehand. It's all pretty standard. Pleading guilty on the ticket doesn't make you automatically liable for the crash. A lot more goes into it, and the point of impact of the vehicles is going to be important so I hope there were a lot of pictures. Your adjuster/insurance company should have ordered the report, but it won't hurt anything if you get it yourself. Also while the medical does sound a bit high, I can't really comment on it without reading the records. The general thought behind the demand is x3 medical - 1/3 for the lawyer, 1/3 for the doctor, 1/3 for the claimant. So while the demand isn't ridiculous, it'll probably settle for a lot less.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
CDG posted:It's all pretty standard. Pleading guilty on the ticket doesn't make you automatically liable for the crash. A lot more goes into it, and the point of impact of the vehicles is going to be important so I hope there were a lot of pictures. Your adjuster/insurance company should have ordered the report, but it won't hurt anything if you get it yourself. I suppose when I call tomorrow, I can mention the picture, the fact the ambulance seemed unnecessary, and the police officer possibly agreeing so in the report.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Obviously, I will call Liberty Mutual tomorrow morning, but I wanted to make sure I had as much helpful info as possible beforehand.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 03:47
|
|
|
If a defendant posted his/her own bail when they were in custody, when do they get their bail money back? Is it after everything is completely finished or after attending a certain court hearing? Is there a way to contact a bail bondsman and pay the 10% fee to get the original bail money back?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 20:26
|
|
|
Busy Bee posted:If a defendant posted his/her own bail when they were in custody, when do they get their bail money back? Is it after everything is completely finished or after attending a certain court hearing? Is there a way to contact a bail bondsman and pay the 10% fee to get the original bail money back? Assuming they showed up to everything on time, they get bail back sometime (2-6 weeks, depends on the court) after the case is decided (guilty/not guilty). Don't know on the other thing, never heard of someone trying that.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 20:50
|
|
|
Busy Bee posted:Is there a way to contact a bail bondsman and pay the 10% fee to get the original bail money back? Probably not. The entire bonding business is built on collecting 10% of the bond and then putting up the money for people who don't have it. They don't offer interest-free loans.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 21:21
|
|
|
Busy Bee posted:If a defendant posted his/her own bail when they were in custody, when do they get their bail money back? Is it after everything is completely finished or after attending a certain court hearing? Is there a way to contact a bail bondsman and pay the 10% fee to get the original bail money back? Generally, it's when everything is completely finished. I'm sure a bondsman would figure out a way to take your money if you wanted to throw that 10% away. If you've got money problems, it would be a much better idea to ask your attorney to try to get you a personal recognizance bond than to flush that 10%. JesustheDarkLord posted:Probably not. The entire bonding business is built on collecting 10% of the bond and then putting up the money for people who don't have it. They don't offer interest-free loans. The way I read it was defendant posted 100% of his/her bond with the court, but can't get it back until the proceedings are finished. Defendant needs the money he/she used to post bond, so is trying to get 90% of the bond amount back from the court by giving 10% of it to the bondsman. (which he/she will never get back) joat mon fucked around with this message at 21:47 on May 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 21:45
|
|
|
I hope people don't ignore my avatarless post. I live in the Bay Area, California. I'm looking for some advice in regards to California whistleblowers law. The company I work for is doing some shady stuff, to the tune of falsifying time sheets, as in, a person works a 16 hour shift but the time card is 8 for one person and 8 for another. I have some proof of it, and there is proof locked away in that office somewhere of it as well, since I can prove that employee A was there for all of the 16 hours and employee B wasn't. When I tried to bring it up to my supervisor, I was literally told I shouldn't be one of the "workers" that makes trouble. This SPECIFIC event happened in April, so still fairly recent. And that was fine and dandy too, except now, despite my performance being as good as it's always been (I've been praised many times by all ranks of people there, including the big boss), now I'm getting shifts cut out without being told about them, and when I call to ask why my shift was straight canceled, I'm told, literally, that "it's done for and that's that" and the phone hung up. Any other tries to speak to someone else over the phone are responded with "they don't need to talk to you about that." Do I have any sort of legal recourse against these guys, especially in regards to how the whistleblower law works so they stop screwing me out of shifts and such, at least until I can look for another job and drop these crooked jerks? Thank you.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 00:44
|
|
|
Unless it was you that were short-changed, you're not going to get any real benefit from the whistleblower stuff. I don't know CA law at all, but I imagine there are strict protections against firing/disciplining whistle-blowers. But they could still fire you for other reasons, and if they're making up reasons to cut your hours now then they've laid the groundwork to claim that it is pre-whistblower conduct. And that's if the laws even apply, and there's a million ways they can weasel out of it. If your thoughts were to threaten or hold it over them, that probably won't work out for you. Your personal work situation sucks, but they can probably get away with whatever they want. You have the option of using whistleblower protection as a shield, or the option of telling your boss that you're a "team player" and wish more shifts would work out for you. It's either vinegar or honey. You may have no control over it and your choice won't matter, but my non-legal thoughts would be that honey would give you the best shot at staying employed. woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 01:40 on May 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
Last night, I received a ticket for running a red light. This is my third ticket in 12 months, so the back states I have to appear in court, but the officer checked "no" under "Court appearance required". What should I do? I'd much prefer to just mail in the required money and have it be done with. The ticket was bullshit, anyway; I turned right on a red light in a 100% abandoned street and a cop pulled me over. I came to a complete stop and turned, which I pointed out, and he told me that the stop "wasn't complete". Would I have a chance of getting this overturned if I plead "no contest" and explain myself calmly and rationally? e: I just checked my driving records online- according to the BMV, I only have 2 points on my license and only one of the offenses have been recorded. Did I luck out and they didn't record the second offense or should I appear in court anyway? Captain Mog fucked around with this message at 15:46 on May 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 14:24
|
|
|
SlenderWhore posted:Would I have a chance of getting this overturned if I plead "no contest" and explain myself calmly and rationally? Not a lawyer, but if you're pleading "nolo contendere," it won't get overturned, because that is, effectively, a guilty plea without admitting fault. Also, the amusing fact that you're pleading "no contest" to the ticket and then contesting the ticket is amusing. My big question for you, and really, you don't need to answer publicly, merely consider it, is why avoid going to court, Especially if you want to fight the ticket?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 17:56
|
|
|
I just got a traffic ticket in Ann Arbor, MI. There's some construction around my neighborhood, and the city just added a sign that states 'No Left Turn Except Buses' to one of the residential streets I usually use to get to my house. I was cited for 'Disregarding a Traffic Control Device.' Is there any chance of at least not getting points on my license if I go to court for this? I did turn left - that's impossible to dispute. However, might the facts that a) the sign is new, and b) the signage is intended to keep people from using the residential area as a shortcut, but I do in fact live in the neighborhood, help me here?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2012 18:27
|
|
|
Without knowing how things work in MI, I would go with a solid maybe. A lot of people don't know that you can also go to court to make your case to the prosecutor or judge without disputing the facts. I would never, ever recommend doing this with a misdemeanor or above (something that can send you to jail), but assuming you can take the time and aren't a moron, there is no reason not to on a fine only. Wear a suit and act apologetic. If the prosecutor won't do it (if there is one), see if you cannot speak to the judge. I did this with great success in Minnesota at least, but I had the bonus that judges loving love law students (they hate lawyers though).
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2012 20:27
|
|
|
Hey nm, while you're in the thread, is it common for judges where you are to refuse to take no contest pleas to offenses that don't have any possible civil ramifications (like they'd take one for a DUI with property damage, but not for one where there were no injuries and no crash?) In my state it seems to vary county by county.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 00:30
|
|
|
prussian advisor posted:Hey nm, while you're in the thread, is it common for judges where you are to refuse to take no contest pleas to offenses that don't have any possible civil ramifications (like they'd take one for a DUI with property damage, but not for one where there were no injuries and no crash?) In my state it seems to vary county by county. NC generally also makes it slightly easier to withdraw a plea (though it is still extremely difficult). On the other hand, Minnesota has no No Contest plea. It doesn't exist. Instead one can do an Alford plea, but that needs a good reason.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 01:08
|
|
|
nm posted:On the other hand, Minnesota has no No Contest plea. It doesn't exist. Instead one can do an Alford plea, but that needs a good reason. As a person who's legal knowledge is pretty much based on TV, I was wondering how you actually declare that plea. When asked how you plea do you say "Alford?"
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 01:37
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:As a person who's legal knowledge is pretty much based on TV, I was wondering how you actually declare that plea. When asked how you plea do you say "Alford?" You'd let everyone know it was an Alford plea. You'd have to knowledge there was enough evidence to find you, however, you are maintaining that you are not guilty and only taking the plea because you wanted the benefit.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 01:49
|
|
|
I would like to know about mental incapacity and divorce. The divorce in question is my grandmother's, and she has a lawyer. I'm in Ontario but I am interested in what Americans have to say, since it's pretty specific. Here's the deal: My step-grandfather has filed for divorce. He is living in a nursing home. My grandmother is the sole owner of what was previously the marital home. (My grandfather sold his home when they married and gave the proceeds to his children.) She's completely mentally sharp and independent. My grandfather's mental capacity is questionable. The divorce filing also alleges some pretty wild things, for example, that my grandmother was trying to poison him. Since he's been in a home, his son has attempted to block access to visiting him, change his power of attorney and so on. It's pretty likely that this is entirely a cash grab by his son, who needs money. So I have some obvious-but-difficult questions, like how competent do you have to be to request a divorce? How hard is it to prove that his son has influenced the filing? But here's the big one that I won't ask my grandmother and you all might know: How long would this probably take? My grandfather likely won't live long. Dragging it out seems like the most likely way for my grandmother to keep her house. Thanks for reading, because that was a bunch of words. Trillian fucked around with this message at 03:08 on May 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 03:06
|
|
|
I have questions pertaining to an unpaid toll that I've gotten a fine for in Queensland, Australia. I've tried googling for resources on the subject but I can't find anything for it. Essentially the gist is I didn't receive any notifications about the unpaid toll and the first time I heard about it was yesterday when I got the fine. I can request a date with the magistrate to defend myself and I just wanted to find information to see if it was worth doing or if it's just going to be a waste of time.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 05:42
|
|
|
In the US, divorce is a right similar to marriage. So, for example, divorce filing fees must be waived for indigent clients because it is a matter of right. So its a low barrier. Perhaps the court might assign an attorney to watch over the vulernable person and make sure their interests are truly represented, and that would potentialy stop any manipulation. But the bar is likely very low in terms of mental capacity. The ability to drag it out varies wildly from state to state, as far as I'm aware. But I'm not necessarily sure if the house would even be in play. She should definitely consult with an attorney, even the initial consultation would give her a sense of how it plays out in Ontario. But let's say the home was hers and paid for at the time of their marriage: he may not be able to touch the house. She should consult with an attorney regarding the timing of the marriage, purchase of the home, local laws, etc., and it's possible that she could get some good news. Push her to set an appointment with an attorney ASAP. woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 05:56 on May 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 05:51
|
|
|
Massachusetts tenancy question here. So in currently in a 1 year lease, ending July 31. Sent the leasing office a letter requesting to break the lease on July 1, so a month early. They have a policy that if they rent out the apartment, you will be let out of the lease. I call to follow up last week, and am told that while they won't be able to find someone to fill the lease, I need to be out by July 1 because that was when I requested to break the lease. Also, they want me to pay the full month rent in July, even though I will not be able to stay there. When I say that I will just stay the full lease, they claim I can't because they have someone moving in Aug 1 and need to prepare the apartment, leaving me in a situation where I am expected to pay the last month on the lease, and not live there for that month. Is this legal? I have no problem moving out early with rent adjusted for the moth, or staying and paying, but I do have a problem with paying a months rent for an apartment I won't even be living in.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 06:47
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:I just got a traffic ticket in Ann Arbor, MI. There's some construction around my neighborhood, and the city just added a sign that states 'No Left Turn Except Buses' to one of the residential streets I usually use to get to my house. I was cited for 'Disregarding a Traffic Control Device.' I used to do a lot of criminal defense work in Ann Arbor, and I'm now up in Lansing. There will not be a prosecutor at your hearing. It will be you, other defendants, a few officers, and the judge. You'll have a chance to discuss it with the officer beforehand. What I'd do is gauge how the officer is feeling. He might dismiss it. Tell him what you just said. It's new, you live there, etc. If he isn't willing to do that, ask if he'd give you an Impeding Traffic or a Defective Equipment ticket. Neither of these give points on your license as they aren't extrapolated to the Secretary of State. You'd have to pay between 90 and 160 dollars for those, but you wouldn't have points. Usually they are willing to do this, because the city would still get their fine and they often don't care about your SoS record. As an aside, where is this new sign? I'm in A2 all the time to see my brother and would rather not get hit by the construction.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 07:14
|
|
|
causticBeet posted:Massachusetts tenancy question here. Read your lease. What does it say about breaking it? Generally, you will have to pay extra when you break a lease.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 13:06
|
|
|
Getting my ducks in a row on a potential headache. I'm studying abroad in Italy at present. I'm splitting the cost of an apartment with another student. He broke a window (just the glass pane) a few days ago and despite his claims that he will get it fixed, he hasn't done jackshit (no phone calls, emails, or going to a glazier). As such, I'm fairly certain our security deposit will be forfeited when our lease expires next week (yes, panes of glass don't cost 300 euros, but I'm expecting the landlord will try to gently caress the foreigners which is why we decided to try to get it fixed ourselves). I paid the entire security deposit in exchange for him fronting the reservation deposit. He claims if he can't get it fixed, he'll reimburse me for any deductions from the security deposit. However, I highly doubt I will ever see that money (based on a general pattern of being tremendously self-absorbed) unless I was to file a small claims suit (roughly $400 is a lot of money to a broke grad student). My questions are: Does it matter where the incident occurred? Does it matter if he and I live in different states (MA and MO, respectively)? Google tells me my court may not have jurisdiction, but it is not a lawyer. Is a verbal agreement sufficient based on the dollar amount if he doesn't repay me prior to departure (i.e. should I get something in writing)?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 20:05
|
|
|
spregalia posted:Does it matter where the incident occurred? 1) Yes 2) Yes 3) Almost certainly not, but good luck getting him to sign anything based on your description of the situation
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 21:57
|
|
|
Dogen posted:1) Yes Do the Yeses in 1) and 2) imply I'm SOL?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2012 22:20
|
|
|
Yeah unless you sue him in MA or serve him process in MO somehow
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2012 02:39
|
|
|
BirdOfPlay posted:Not a lawyer, but if you're pleading "nolo contendere," it won't get overturned, because that is, effectively, a guilty plea without admitting fault. Also, the amusing fact that you're pleading "no contest" to the ticket and then contesting the ticket is amusing. I just want it to be over with so I can move on with my life. I called the clerk of court today and explained the situation. She looked up my driving record and was only able to find one violation within the past year and told me to just mail the ticket in. Hopefully it'll fly under the radar and this is the last I hear of it. I highly doubt they're going to scrutinize one minor $170 traffic ticket that is marked "no personal appearance required". Just in case, though, I'm going to call sometime Monday and make sure everything went okay. Captain Mog fucked around with this message at 04:29 on May 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2012 03:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
spregalia posted:Do the Yeses in 1) and 2) imply I'm SOL? Yes, and even if you could magically sue him and land a judgment, the practical reality of collecting on that judgment is really tough. Try to get the cash now, or the window fixed. He's going to vanish into the wind, and you probably won't have a legal remedy.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2012 05:05
|
|