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
Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



There's also Theft, and defamation should it turn out he's wrong.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Solomon Grundy posted:

Not basic questions. Very complicated questions in fact. You have created some sort of quasi-sublessor situation. Are you co-tenants with a side agreement, or are you some sort of landlord? Does your state's statutory tenant-landlord law apply? You could argue about these issues all the way to your state supreme court (whatever state you are in) because it is a weird relationship.

On the other hand his roommate might just be a simple lodger.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Serrath posted:

I'm not sure this question is appropriate here but I didn't want to start a whole new thread for my own (minor) legal problems.

I live in Australia (Queensland) and I was caught by a speed camera doing 12km over the speed limit. This means I'm liable for the fine imposed when you're caught doing 12 or above over the limit but less than 20. I really want to contest this but my only defense is that I simply don't think I was going that fast. I remember the date and the trip (it was only 8 days ago) and I was with my girlfriend and she flips her poo poo when I speed. It's really tough, though, because speed cameras are seen as objective... I feel like it's mistaken, even if I was speeding, I don't think I was going that much over the speed limit.

Is there any point in contesting this? Is the argument that the speed camera is wrong a valid reason to contest this or is it possible I will be further penalized for making a fuss? It's not about the money; I'm happy to pay the fine but I don't want to accrue 3 points on my licence, especially given that I don't feel the ticket is accurate.

What should I do? I have 7 days to respond to the notice of infringement. Is there any way for me to admit partial liability? Like say maybe I was speeding but I wasn't going that fast or is that like an admission of guilt?

ahahaha






No. Is what the judge will say if you try 'I feel the camera was wrong'.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Incredulous Red posted:

Your only real hope is to attack the accuracy of the camera system.

I hope he has a PhD in engineering.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Grazing Occultation posted:

I'm an Aussie living in the US. When I went home to Melbourne last year, I had an eventful (ugh!) evening: I kept one bloke from beating another to death. I'll be giving evidence soon at a committal hearing via videolink.

I'm pressing charges (assault and making threats to kill) and most likely the prosecution's main witness - I bore the brunt of the guy's rage. Well, aside from the poor bastard he attacked.

The hearing is at the Melbourne Magistrate's Court. What would the committal hearing be like? Should I expect to be grilled or will this just be the defence probing for information?

It's funny: I didn't even think about pressing charges when I gave a statement. I didn't find out until later that charges were being pressed on my behalf. I never really thought about how that worked before - is it usually so automatic?

At a committal hearing? I have no idea why they'd even need you.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



wormil posted:

Yeah, he's a real outlaw doing that five over; totally deserves being harassed week after week. Probably should be maced and beaten too. gently caress that scumbag.

It isn't harassment if he's constantly breaking the law and constantly getting warned with no substantive consequence. For 99% of the population the quickest and easiest way to get the police to ignore you is to stop breaking the law.

He's already admitted to being so tired he ended up swerving over the road and to speeding. He's also admitted that he's somehow managed to commit a violation every time.

The reasonable response is not that the officer is being a dick, the reasonable response is perhaps that the OP should stop trying to drive home at 3am when he's clearly not in a fit state to drive.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Javid posted:

Oregon:

Bought a used car some months ago, was doing some work on it this week and discovered it had been in a massive collision at some point, and then more or less stapled back together. The mechanic said it should've been cubed at that point. Obviously, this was not disclosed to me at the time of sale. Are there laws governing this, and if so how would one go about filing suit? (Civil, criminal, small claims, what)

It was bought off the owner, not a dealer, if that matters.

This looks like a 'misrepresentation rendering the contract voidable' civil claim but talk to someone from the US.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



JudicialRestraints posted:

'Caveat Emptor'

If the seller told him that the car had never been involved in an accident we'd be in business...

Over here any statement along the lines of 'the car is fit to go on the road' (ie. literally anything about the state of the car) would count as a negligent mistatement of fact.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



xaoult posted:

The letter did come from an attorney's office. This is all over an ex girlfriend actually. We don't have any problems with each other. I also have a letter from the ex stating she would release me of all legal liability even if I did want to contact her, which I do not. I'm just wondering if this cease and desist sent by her parents attorney is a bullshit scare tactic or not.

There is a shitload of relevant backstory to this that you have not elaborated on.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



xaoult posted:

No the letter didn't even look like that, it was just a standard typed up letter without any references to any laws in it at all, and there wasn't even mention of stalking in the letter. From what I understand from it it's just if she makes contact with me, and I reply, or try to make contact with her they'll try to come up with some reason for suing me.

Scan, redact and link.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



kalonji posted:

Is there anything criminal about whats going on?

How can I deal with this so I come out on top, preferably retaining my shares/the idea or domain but more importantly protect my assets.

Also, could I sue this person if they start a similar site in the near future.

Talk.To.A.Lawyer.

Do not respond to requests for information from this thread. You are potentially on the cusp of nasty civil litigation (or at more likely formal dancing around the threat of formal litigation) and you need the opinion of a qualified lawyer who needs to know far more detail about your case than you should make public knowledge.

For what it's worth, you seem to have gone out of your way to gently caress yourself and anyone trying to untangle this mess by not acting formally in a very formal relationship. Congratulations.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



kalonji posted:

I already know I could get sued, hence why its a legal problem and I have a legal question.
A vague answer that tells me what I already know is absolutely useless. Thats poo poo posting.

No, we are all telling you that your situation is serious enough that you need to visit a specialist. That's what we do here when someone has legitimate legal trouble and doesn't just need to be told "no, that's not what the law says" or "you are not in any kind of trouble".

Even if someone in the thread were a specialist they would not give you a specific answer because:
a) they would be negligent in doing so as it would require more detailed information than you have provided, information which you should not put out on a public forum; and
b) it would open themselves up to liability for having purported to give you sound legal advice.

If you see a train coming your way, don't wait until it hits you before you decide to jump out of the way. You've been forewarned that poo poo is potentially about to fly your way, you need to find out exactly how much poo poo and how you can cover yourself from it.

That means open up your local legal directory and Talk. To. A. Lawyer.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



e: oops dumb

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



cory ad portas posted:

So this girl's crazy boyfriend threatened to shoot me, apparently he's Sur13 which I doubt. Still, he kinda kept going on about how he had "a .40 for my rear end," blah blah blah.

ROTC and poo poo seriously make me not want to have to deal with this rear end in a top hat, I don't need that kind of crap around me. Any advice?

Making Death Threats is a criminal offence, go to the police?

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Vestral posted:

EDIT: I'm in Australia, but general advice from anyone still welcome.

You will want your tenancy attached to the property charges at your region's land registry in order to protect you should you Father suddenly decide to sell up. To do that you will probably need a written tenancy agreement.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Bougie Black Women posted:

Is that a rhetorical question?

No it's a relevant one.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



joat mon posted:



'someone' admitted it was him in his first post.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Reztes posted:

This is probably super

About a week ago, I was right behind a minor rear-end collision. I was about to merge back into traffic when one of the involved drivers got out of her car and flagged me down. I was on my way to work, but they asked me for a statement that I witnessed the accident. I wrote something vague about seeing the one rear-end the other, and gave them my name and phone number before leaving. No police had arrived, but I think one of the involved drivers was calling them at the time.

State Farm called me later that day, and I gave them pretty much the same statement.

Now the county sheriff's department is calling me in relation to the accident to give a statement.

I'm pretty sure I didn't do anything wrong, but I'm worried about talking to the police and inadvertently getting more involved, or charged with something. Watching that whole Don't Talk to Police video made me kinda paranoid. Southern California, by the way.

If you are genuinely worried you can ask if you are under suspicison of something and they should have to tell you. But it seems overwhelmingly likely that the rear driver is going to be charged with careless driving or similar and being the third party with no personal stake in the matter your statement/testimony will be the difference between a conviction and an aquittal.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



SRQ posted:

I'm not entirely sure where to ask this, but here goes-
I'm Canadian, And I want to Emigrate to England, it's just been one of dreams for all my life and since I turned 18 recently I kicked things into gear.
How does British citizenship law apply to people who are citizens of the "Colonies"? Does being a "Subject of the Queen" grant me a fast track or something?
Thanks.

The answer to your specific question is: 'no, there is no benefit to being a Canadian citizen'. Same rules as all other non-EU persons.

Also get better dreams.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Anjow posted:

UK law, asking purely out of interest. A question that is often asked, often answered (often contradicting others), but never cited. The question itself:

If someone in a shop accidentally breaks an item that was on display, do they have to pay for it?

I assume it's a civil matter and not criminal, since there would be no mens rea, being that it's an accident. If you are able to decisively answer this question, is there any chance you could back it up? Like I said before, I never see anyone provide a source for their answer and I see people say both yes and no so I don't know which is right. 7 years ago my A-level law teacher said no, 6 months ago the programme Watchdog said yes.

Yes, you've caused damage to property belonging to someone else. The tort is negligence. There's no special reason why a shop wouldn't be afforded the same protection under the law as a person.

There are several reasons why it doesn't happen much but mainly it's because the amounts are often so small they simply aren't worth pursuing.

e: this isn't back-up able because nobody's been foolish enough to try to argue in court that they should be able to escape responsibility for causing damage 'because it's a shop'.

Alchenar fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Apr 28, 2010

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Eli Cash posted:

I got accepted to pharmacy school, so the state board of pharmacy for my intern license would be it if not additional methods. I'm pretty sure I'm hosed, though I'm sure they have accepted at least one person with a record. I did read, however, that expunging juvenile records (as opposed to adult records) erases them completely. Christ, the internet has been useless in finding info on this and the law confuses me.

Usually expunging a record means that they won't show up on external record checks, the police and the courts will still be able to see it.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Where are Traffic Offences civil cases?

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



O Hanraha-hanrahan posted:

I think I have a pretty strong case for unfair dismissal. Am I better off going to an employment tribunal or taking them to small claims to get money owed to me. Can I do both?

This is in the UK.

Employment Tribunal. It will cost less. If you have a strong case then you will probably settle anyway. Also if you go to small claims then the judge will ask why you didn't go to tribunal.

Go to your local CAB. If you are in the Greater London Area try to get them to refer your case to the Free Representation Unit.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



OzzyBlood posted:

You cannot modify a written contract with a verbal one, at all. So what they're saying doesn't hold water. IANAL however I do enjoy watching a lot of tv court

Eugh, you can sometimes and it depends where you are and what kind of contract. But it's one of those things where you go before a judge on some issue and he says "but the contract says this" and you both say "actually we agreed to change that to this don't worry about it it isn't what we are arguing over".

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



JudicialRestraints posted:

My contracts class was kind of a gigantic joke, but I do remember the professor mentioning a 'parol evidence rule'

I'm not sure what the exact content of the rule is and if jurisdictions actually use it, but I thought the jist of the rule was that verbal modifications of written contracts - especially when they directly contradicted written contracts, didn't hold much water (unless we're talking about warranties or something).

Again, IANAL (Is there an acronym for "I am just a stupid 1L" yet?) but I think the poster is ok.

He should be fine. If it came to a judge then the question that gets asked to the Health Club is "is this a standard term or was it one that was specifically for the OP and nobody else?", the inevitable follow up being "well if it is a standard term then why isn't it in your written contract?"

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Corsair Jr posted:

I was in a traffic accident about a week ago and am wondering what the best approach to take is. Essentially, I was driving down a 4 lane road and someone entered the intersection (no light), cutting me off and causing me to hit them. Both cars suffered moderate damage and my airbag deployed. I went to the hospital so I wasn't there to talk to the police. The officer later came to the hospital and wrote me a ticket for reckless driving because "witnesses said I was speeding". Is this worth getting a lawyer for? I realize reckless is a fairly serious offense but I haven't had any other traffic tickets except 2 speeding tickets about 4 years ago. One lawyer quoted a fee of $1,500 to take the case. Is that high? This is in Virginia.

I note that you didn't say whether you actually were speeding.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Stormtrooper posted:

I have a question about copyright. Why are pictures/scans of medieval manuscripts copyrighted? (Example) Surely the original work is in the public domain, and as I understand it, you can't copyright a photo/scan of a public domain work if its intentionally a close duplicate. This is based on my understanding of American law, and most of these manuscripts are in Europe (the example I linked is in the UK). Do copyright laws differ so much that its possible to copyright such images?

To hazard a series of guesses:

a)the original work is not in the public domain (go and try to find it)
b)the work done on restoring these manuscripts may create a proprietary interest in them

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



FreshShoez posted:

So in Missouri, the law is that a landlord has to give you a bill with all the things they're spending your initial deposit on (if they don't plan on giving it back entirely) within 30 days of the lease ending. My lease ended 32 days ago, I called my landlord about it, she said she hasn't even walked through the apartment to check yet... and she is going to mail me a bill soon. Aren't I supposed to just get the whole $420 back because of the law? Am I reading something wrong? Should I be a huge douchebag or take her to court or whatever? They've made my last 2 years a living hell, and I honestly just want the entire deposit back. If I take legal action, can they try to sue me for things like replacing the 30 year old carpet or whatever else they try to fabricate?

You probably don't actually have to go as far as launching legal action. Just write a firmly worded letter to the effect of the fact that you know what the law is and she has missed the period where she is able to deduct from the deposit and that you are demanding return of the deposit.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Mdubb posted:

Yeah, I'd forgotten about that. Since he's in Germany, is he just protected against civil actions that would require him to show up for court, or would it still be possible to simply draft papers and have him sign them?

Talking to his CO is something we've discussed, but as much as he's pissed us off, we'd really rather not see him thrown in jail. He's already in quite a bit of trouble for his past actions, i.e. misconduct and insubordination.

Don't let someone gently caress your life just because you don't want them to face the concequences of their actions. There's a reason there are penalties for doing what he's doing.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Femur posted:

Am I screwed? It seems completely ridiculous that these two clauses lets them do whatever they want, without responsibility? I've contacted a lawyer to discuss my options, but I wanted some other opinions before my lawyer responds.

Depends entirely on your jurisdiction. Over here in good ol' blighty that clause would be laughed out of court. I'm given to understand that it might depend what state you are in but the odds are on you being screwed.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Ghosthotel posted:

So for the past day or so I've had some nut from a small company in australia seeking punative damages of about $308,000 or so because I apparently went out of my way to harass one of his employees. The "harassment" he's talking about was a complaint I filed with the company about said employee.

In one of his many email messages to me he openly admitted that the idea behind this wasn't to win any sort of claim, but it was purely to ensure I spend as much time and money as possible fighting this venture.

So what im asking is, it seems to me that he's not doing this because I supposedly harassed one of his employees, he's just doing it to be a dick, in which case would that be considered harassment on his part?

You forgot to say where you are from.

e: but in any case having admitted that this is an attempt at vexatious litigation you should be able to get summary judgement without any cost to yourself if he actually put a claim in

Alchenar fucked around with this message at 11:43 on Jun 19, 2010

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



JudicialRestraints posted:

Could he actually use rule 11 here?

Oh he won't get classification as a vexatious litigant but an email outright stating 'I don't actually expect to win I'm just making trouble for you' should get you dismissal on grounds of abuse of process pretty much anywhere.

e: I'm UK not US but from my experience the threshold for rule 11 like sanctions is far above what we have here. Courts don't like penalising people simply for bringing litigation so you generally have to do this kind of thing several times and get multiple warnings before you'll finally get sanctioned

Alchenar fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Jun 19, 2010

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Also Facebook has an abuse report button, use it.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Edged Hymn posted:

Hi guys, I'm 19 and live in Boston and I'm in a bit of a pickle. Long story short, I was letting my friend drive my car (he's also 19, and only has his permit) to teach him the ropes and he got in a fender bender. My car's got a busted hood and radiator, but the lady we hit just had a few scuffs on her back bumper.

She filed a claim with the insurance company and I got the accident forms I have to fill out in the mail. My question is, if I put my friend down as the operator of the vehicle, am I gonna be royally hosed? The police know he was driving illegally, but didn't seem to care and neither did the lady we hit. I just don't want my parents to get surcharged an outrageous amount since they've been under a lot of financial stress. I've learned my lesson and my friend and I are splitting the repair bill, but I really don't want my parents to have to pay for my dumb rear end mistake. Any suggestions?

I can shortern this post into a single question:
"Should I commit insurance fraud when I know the Police are aware that the statement I intend to make is false?"

For future reference when something like this happens the best course of action is to offer to settle up with the other driver without involving the insurance companies.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



JudicialRestraints posted:

You will get destroyed. On the plus side you will probably give an ADA and your traffic cop a minor headache so go for it, I guess.

The thing is we won't get a trip report for how badly he was laughed at at 'no reasonable person obeys the two second rule' so there's no payoff.

PoOKiE! it should be a big red siren that even soley from your own biased account everyone here is convinced you deserved that ticket. If you are serious about wanting to fight it, lawyer up. The only thing this thread can do is laugh at you more.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



ODC posted:

My friend is in a situation and I'm trying to help direct them to the best lawyer and options for them.

She wants a contract lawyer. There may be a context specific route you can go but at a minimum she should be suing for specific performance on the contract that they've failed to deliver on.

Surely the company has terms and conditions that detail payment?

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



ODC posted:

She had already given them the check, the just hadn't cashed it yet. Basically after two weeks, she was trying to figure out what to do and called her bank. The bank said they hadn't cashed the check yet and could stop payment on it.

I'll be calling her here in a little bit to talk to her about it.

I mean the delivery contract should state whether payment needs to be in advance or not. If it does then the best course of action is probably what gvibes posted.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Robawesome posted:

I've got what I hope is a straightforward question on behalf of a friend. Is it illegal for police to use information obtained in a crime to get a warrant? A friend of mine was robbed early this year, and the police executed a search warrant at his house a month or so later based on information received from the person apprehended for invading his home. Is this legal?

edit: Canada, if that matters.

Your answer is no (it's not illegal), because otherwise police informants would be impossible.

Well actually yes and no. The police can't use information they've gathered by committing a crime but that isn't what's happened here.

Alchenar fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Jul 14, 2010

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Robawesome posted:

But in this case it's not an informant, it's a crime they didn't have any direction in. The way I see it, without the information from the robbery suspect (who likely got a deal for his information), they wouldn't have any information to obtain a warrant.

edit to your edit: the police didn't commit a crime, but this certainly wasn't an informant before he robbed my friend. It doesn't sound like you're sure of your answer in this regard.

I'm not sure about your logic about information from someone who isn't an informant being illegal when by definition that's how they become an informant.

I'm not a Canadian lawyer and rules on admissability vary across jurisdiction but as a general rule as long as the police themselves haven't done anything dodgy then it's admissible.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008



Robawesome posted:

Thank you very much for your reply. I will surely note those terms as I believe they directly apply. If it helps, it's drugs I'm referring to and not a laptop, so I suppose it's not unreasonable for police to assume the staleness doesn't apply to a drug house but reliability of a first-time informant should be an issue.

edit: mboger yes, but obviously he didn't claim it was drugs that were taken from him. It also occurred in a security building with cameras so the landlord would have reported it had he not. Perhaps content wasn't the term I should have used

I want you to bear in mind that you just told us your friend was in possession of drugs on a public forum.

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