|
This is a bit of a long shot, but is anyone familiar with traffic law in Victoria, Australia? I don't have an actual situation, just a friendly argument with my girlfriend about the law. I say that if you brake to avoid an animal on the road (like a neighborhood cat) and someone hits the rear of your car, it's entirely their fault and you have no fault in the accident at all. She says that if you brake to avoid an animal, and someone hits your car from the rear, you can still be charged with dangerous driving or similar. I don't see how that could possibly be - I was under the impression that if someone hit you in the back, that was always their fault unless you were reversing into them or something.
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2011 11:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
nm posted:In the US, the driver behind would be at fault. You should always be following at a distance so that you can stop at a moments notice. Yeah, this is how I was taught it. Someone pulled out of a side road 2 cars ahead of me, and stalled. The car that would have hit it swerved around, the car in front of me did an unnecessary emrgency stop (stopping like 50 metres before the obstruction), and I hit that car. I got the ticket and I felt I deserved it because I was clearly too close to stop in time. I mean, squirrel, pet dog, crawling drunk, or toddler, you don't want people going "what is that shape, exactly, and am I or am I not allowed to brake for it? The girlfriend contacted the cops via twitter to ask and they backed me up, so problem solved I guess 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2011 03:09
|
|
|
cr0y posted:So I recently moved an in the process I cracked the screen on my 42 inch LCD TV. Is there anyway this might be covered under my homeowners insurance? I kinda wanna cry a little bit. Having been a furniture mover, I'd have to say probably not but all insurance companies are different. IF it was the movers who broke it, they'll pay for it if you kick up a fuss, even if you didn't pay extra for "insurance". If you did it yourself, it's worth asking anyway. Just don't commit insurance fraud.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2011 03:44
|
|
|
sexily posted:In California. Not to go all E/N, but of course he's not making it easy. Why would he go "Yeah, sure, do it exactly the way you think is best for you"? I'm not saying you're in any way wrong with what you want, but why wouldn't the other party fight the person who instigated the divorce? The fact that the debt's in your maiden name may make things super tricky or may not. Division of the stuff will require arbitration or court if you can't come to an agreement without those things (remember, as "right" as you feel, he's feeling just as "right" - this doesn't mean that you're not the one in the right, just that you have to understand that he certainly thinks he's in the right). So no, he can't just take the stuff and leave you with all the debt, but you will have to do something legal about it since the debt's in your name. You need a lawyer, as long as it's not going to cost more than the debt. There are people who specialise in serving papers. That's not really your problem. Hatrack posted:My situation: An ex is holding my things hostage. My TV, computers ect. were moved half way across the country to her parents when we were both planning to move to Florida. Police. They will, at minimum, let you know your options. They deal with this poo poo all the time. I don't know about where you are, but in this country they will often come with you to retrieve your stuff (but not help you actually move it or anything). edit: Your post wasn't clear, but you have tried showing up and demanding your stuff back, right? I can't tell if you're still in Florida or if she came back to where you both originally were and you never even went to Florida or what. In any case, her holding on to your stuff is not OK. If you can prove it's all yours (like you have a shipping manifest or something) things will be much easier for you. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Aug 17, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2011 06:28
|
|
|
sexily posted:I'm tempted to sell all the games and movies to fund a lawyer but I think that would just cause more problems. Yes, it would, tempting though it may be. Can you get free legal aid? I know nothing about California or indeed the USA, but it seems like you're a perfect case for it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2011 18:25
|
|
|
Manwithastick posted:My wife reversed in to a car a month ago and was met with a very abusive driver. She had her 6 year old brother in the car so after she was sure everybody was ok (the other car had a dent thats all) she quickly passed on insurance details and drove on. Something similar happened to me. Contact your insurance company and they will most likely handle it. (Dickheads tried to sting me for $45,000 damage to a car that's worth $39,000 new, and also $250,000 of medical bills relating to a heart attack one of the passengers had two weeks after the accident, my insurance guys apparently told them to gently caress themselves - The kicker is that we're in Australia, so yeah, free healthcare...)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2011 12:58
|
|
|
Silento Boborachi posted:Ok, I can understand that, but is that actually legal, i.e. can I refuse to hand over my notes? (I understand if the business wants me off the property I have to legally leave it) Haha, no, they can't take any of your stuff off you. The only people who can do that are the police (edit: or certain security guards in certain locations), who are going to take an extremely loving dim view of a store clerk calling them and saying "there's a bad man in my store and he's writing things down". Seriously. Even if you're taking photos in a shopping mall that has a "no photos" policy, they can't just loving confiscate your camera or your film or anything, they can just kick you out, or at most detain you until the cops arrive to deal with it depending on whether you have any stupid local laws or not. It might be different at airports or government buildings, but a loving grocery store can't arbitrarily confiscate your stuff, no. Edit: That came out pretty badly, reading back over it, but this sort of stuff makes me irrationally angry. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Aug 19, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2011 04:16
|
|
|
Old Man Pants posted:I work until 4am tonight/tomorrow morning. I usually get out of work around 430-445 and get home about 5ish. My boss has scheduled a mandatory meeting tomorrow morning at 11am, with all of the managers giving us thinly veiled threats about "you better be there or it wont be good for you" Are you paid to be there? If not they can't require it, if so it's a 'shift'. Your local or state laws will determine what the minimum time between shifts is. Here it's 8 hours unless certain circumstances apply (ie, emergency services workers who are on call). Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Aug 20, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2011 16:24
|
|
|
robodex posted:Yeah, I figured both were legal. Like I said, it's a moot point mainly because he's just decided to quit alltogether (no minimum wage job is worth the poo poo they're putting him through) but a lot of my friends started screaming "ILLEGAL" when I told them he was given a shift after the schedule was put out. I figured it was just scummy as poo poo to do that and not actually illegal. I'm a long loving way from Ontario, but changing a shift after the schedule is released isn't illegal where I am. It is a huge dick move no matter where in the world you are, especially if they didn't ask first. Good on him for quitting if they've been doing that poo poo regularly.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2011 17:13
|
|
|
I'm in Melbourne, Australia. Can a shop legally search my bags as I try to leave? If I refuse, what can they do about it? This a "debating with my friend" question rather than a "been caught stealing" question, by the way - he thinks they can physically detain you / have you charged with something if you refuse to be searched, and I disagree. I know the law won't be the same as it is in the USA, but I can't find any local resources.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2011 03:39
|
|
|
hyperbowl posted:Here's a start: Yeah, that's what I thought, thanks mate. The wording of the citizen's arrest part is what I was looking for, and it's about what I remembered "The arrestor must not only suspect a person of committing an offence but must find the person committing the offence, unless the arrestor is <<told to by a cop or assisting a cop>>" Which, I guess, means that "looking shifty" or "refusing a search" aren't grounds for arrest but "observed stealing" or "caught on CCTV" would be OK. Is that the correct way to read it? Edit: Found a HTML version of the crimes act through that site, that should be enough for him. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 07:14 on Oct 27, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2011 07:10
|
|
|
I have noticed that a lot of people, when posting a picture of a car on the internet, black out the number plate (or license plate if you're american, you know, that thing, with the registration number on it). Is there any requirement to do so when posting a pic of someone else's car? Does it make a difference if you took the photo in a public place? What if you say "ha ha ha this is a lovely car" or "look at this douchenozzle's parking"? For example, if I were to start a website where people submit photos of lovely parking, or make fun of dumb sitckers or paintjobs, would I need to black the number plates out? If so, why? (I'm not planning on starting such a site, just idly wondering if there would be legal trouble if I did).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2011 11:16
|
|
|
Editing this out. Cookie Kwan, delete your posts and don't name names on the internet. I mean gently caress, I know lots of Victorian cops, and I'm sure they would recognise your situation if I mentioned it to them, even if you used false names. Cops love talking about that sort of poo poo. They will have mentioned it to everyone in the station. There's nothing you can complain about if they were in the hosue legally, which it seems they were. I'm not an arsehole, and I'm certainly not a snitch, but god drat. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Nov 21, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2011 04:54
|
|
|
Yeah, my original post mentioned that I'm definitely not a lawyer, but this really seems like a situation where if you make a fuss, suddenly the cops officially saw X, Y and Z instead of just X. I was pretty sure that once you'd invited police inside they were free to look around (perhaps not to go through cupboards or anything, but certainly to look into rooms). I could be wrong. If the cop is a dick, he will just say that he was concerned for her safety, given the apparent nature of the call. That might even be true. None of the cops I know, in that state, will give the smallest poo poo if a bong or whatever is visible on a table when they're doing something unrelated to someone unrelated. They won't care unless they are somehow forced to care. But really, this situation is silly. A cop saw a thing which he obviously didn't care about. The worst thing you can possibly do is post about it on the internet, naming names and admitting that things happened. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 10:01 on Nov 21, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2011 09:58
|
|
|
Just delete your posts. Your situation is unusual enough that it's easily recognisable without real names. The cop probably can't do that, but he seems to have been nice enough to ignore the obviously illegal things that he in all likelihood saw. Don't make a complaint. It sounds like you don't want the situation investigated, which is what will happen if you complain. Either that, or make a complaint and get a lawyer, because you're going to need one. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Nov 21, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2011 14:05
|
|
|
Shivers McGee posted:Posted this in automotive insanity but thought it might be better in here. I don't quite understand this, the car they're now offering to you is not the car you signed for? If that's the case, I'd guess you're fine. I doubt you signed anything that said you were paying X dollars "for a jeep or something, could be black or whatever and might have options, I dunno", which I don't think could be a binding contract anyway. Also, if the "too high" MSRP is in the contract you signed, I guess you could argue that you were misled if they ever bothered taking you to court, which I doubt they will.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2011 11:05
|
|
|
Jan posted:law firm, lawyers etc "Hacked" voicemail would be a tricky as gently caress case, for many reasons not least of which is that it doesn't sound like anyone can point at a possible culprit. I typed out some of the reasons that they might not want to do anything, but in short, they're lawyers and they probably have several super good reasons not to sue the poo poo out of the carrier / pursue the "hacker".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2011 04:44
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:Does anyone have experience with fighting red light tickets. I have heard conflicting advice on the subject 1. It's not worth the hassle of fighting and 2. You can just go into the court date and generally they will drop it 3. They cannot enforce them without serving you. I am pretty annoyed that I received a ticket despite the loving police sending a video with it that clearly shows I didn't even run the light. You're probably hosed, since the law everywhere I've ever known about doesn't read "You travelled right through the intersection while the light was red" it reads "You entered the intersection while the light was red". "Entered the intersection" usually means "Wheels were over the white line", and it looks like yours were, and went over after the light changed. I mean, it looks like a really close thing, but you're probably technically hosed, which is the worst kind of hosed. Whatever you do don't stand up in court and say it was OK to break this law because you only sorta kinda broke it and it's bullshit anyway and the city is robbing us and  . You can bring traffic issues up with your local governement, if they can't help they'll be able to direct you to the appropriate state or federal people. I've written to the local council here about several road issues (including one red light camera), and they've always been super helpful and they end up solving the problem (you'd be surprised what they can't even think about doing until they receive complaints). I wouldn't expect to get off this completely, but you might get a reduced fine or not lose points or whatever if it turns out heaps of people have formally complained that the camera is bullshit. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Dec 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2011 05:00
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:While this is true there are about 6 photos on the police website from the front end showing me chilling behind the white line. It's pretty funny because they conveniently cropped that out of paper ticket I got in the mail. Although I am sure that was just coincidence as I doubt they have cops sitting around photoshopping tickets. Actually, that wouldn't surprise me that much. I looked again, and it definitely looks like the first flash goes off way before you get to the line. That does strongly imply that the camera is stuffed and/or unfair. You still end up over the line, from what I can see. Expect the cops to conveniently lose those other photos if they're as corrupt as you seem to think they are. Where I am, if you're over the line you're hosed either way - you either proceeded over the line when the light was red ("ran the red"), or you "stopped in the intersection" if your wheels were already over the line when the light turned red, since you're not allowed to stop once you've entered the intersection, defined as the point at which your wheels cross the line. It's all very stupid and nitpicky. Good luck, I think you'll have it since everyone else seems to be complaining too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2011 10:24
|
|
|
Edit: poo poo, sorry, there's a whole extra page in this thread, ignore me.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2012 11:54
|
|
|
My girlfriend and I live in Melbourne, Australia. She had a 2010 Macbook Pro that had issues with freezing occasionally. She took it to the Apple Store, and they couldn't find a fault with it, and gave her a form that said they could not replicate the fault. She sold it to an Apple Reseller for $600 because she was sick of it freezing. Her first email to them said what I just said before - that the macbook was freezing occasionally and that Apple had said they could not find a fault with it. She was paid in cash, no receipts were given, and they kept us waiting for a couple of hours while they tested the laptop. That was a couple of weeks ago. The guy has just now sent her an email saying that the macbook has a fault with the graphic chip. I suspect he's going to try to get us to give the money back. He's got no legal leg to stand on, right?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2012 05:45
|
|
|
Yeah, the original email from her to the shop said that the laptop was freezing and that Apple couldn't duplicate the fault. We waited 2 hours while they tested the laptop before handing over the cash. Nothing was signed and nothing else changed hands. We have the document from the Apple Store here - it says "Could not replicate fault". The guy didn't ask to see it, although we had it with us on the day. His contention is that "there's a world of difference" between what she said and what's actually wrong with the laptop. This despite the fact that she also said in writing that she was sick of the problems with it and was getting a PC which I would know how to fix (since I know gently caress all about macs), and the fact that he tested it in his store before handing over the money. I already told her to ignore everything he sends. She just needs reenforcement on that. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Jul 30, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2012 17:29
|
|
|
Can an Aussie goon comment on what constitutes "weapons parts" under our law? I ordered one of these http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/eeec/?srp=3 and apparently since it could be disassembled and reassembled into a butterfly knife, it counts as "illegal weapons parts" and was seized by customs. Now, I understand the law here (I think), and it's pretty clear that if I did order "weapons parts", I'm in the wrong, but I can't find the definition of "weapons parts" - there doesn't seem to be any mention in law that "anything that can be disassembled and made into something illegal is therefore illegal". The guy I spoke to on the phone compared it to "the trigger of a gun" (doesn't seem right, it's a whole item, not a component), and my assertion of "it's a bottle opener" was met with "but it could be turned into a knife", and trying to say "So could my phone or keyring" seemed like a bad idea, so I didn't say it. Additionally, similar products are offered for sale within Australia, for instance from here: http://www.outdoorswarehouse.com.au/products/Butterfly-Bottle-Opener.html So what do I do? I understand that if the law actually defines the item as illegal, I'm hosed.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
LordPants posted:Check out the regulations and see if any of those knives they mention are similar to what you ordered. I'm thinking somewhere between Part 2 (14) and Part 2 (17) there might be an answer. I don't know anything about knives so I can't tell you for sure. Yeah, I got that far, but this isn't "parts for a..." it's "shaped like a..." I can't find anything that says "if you can disassemble the item and reassemble it with different parts and it makes a weapon, it's illegal". You can buy the drat things in brick-and-mortar stores and onshore online stores here, along with combs shaped like flick knives (also illegal? I don't know, certainly you could remove the comb part and make up a knife blade that goes in the handle, which is the contention they're making about the bottle opener). It seems like they might have read the description and over-reacted, given that a friend said she ordered a "plush microbe" from thinkgeek and it was seized (and she got a letter about how it's illegal to import microbiological samples without a permit), and another friend had a shipment of chunky brass costume-jewellery rings seized because they were "brass knuckles".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2013 06:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
stubblyhead posted:I live in Washington state. Around Thanksgiving weekend or so I ordered a dishwasher online from a company based in New York. It arrived shortly before Christmas, and due to travel, illness and work I'm just now having a chance to do anything with the thing. It suffered some minor damage in shipment. I contacted the Whirlpool to get some replacement parts, but when the customer service rep asked me to read off the model and serial numbers, there was no label in the location she described. There is a similar label on the door, but the rep insisted that the model number shown there was incomplete, and that the time code that was in place of a s/n was not consistent with the s/n format for their products. She also that it would never ever be put on the door, since it's a replaceable part--it is always put on the body. I then contacted the vendor who basically said the lady from Whirlpool didn't know what she was talking about, and of course that was the serial number, and they're put on the door all the time. I've since gone to Lowe's and taken a look at their display models, and their labels were exactly where the lady from Whirlpool said they should be. It was very similar to my label, but not the same. Wow, that's a step beyond knockoff xbox controllers on ebay  Counterfeit stuff and rejects sold as new just really fascinate me on some level, so if you could let me know somehow how it works out for you, I'd really appreciate it. I'm not American, and I'm certainly not a lawyer, but isn't the Department of Homeland Security the place that deals with counterfeit goods? It's been in the newspapers here in Australia that the US DHS is taking down websites that are selling knockoffs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2013 14:10
|
|