Datasets:

stanfordnlp

/

SHP

like 279

v7p9bu

legaladvice_train

(IN) Can my landlord force residents to use a specific internet provider? So my lease is up soon and I've been informed that if I renew residents will be charged $60/month for community Internet. We don't have a choice and there's no opt-out option. This really sucks because I already have fiber internet through a different provider and I absolutely don't want to change. Some people have told me that they can't legally force me to use their community Internet but these people don't have any solid info beyond a generic FCC post from February of this year. So I'm here to ask: is what my landlord doing illegal? Can they really force their residents to pay for and use a specific internet provider (claiming it's an "amenity") when other companies are available in the area? If not, what steps would I take to force their hand to stop this nonsense?

ibm1qy9

iblvsjr

Yes, they can legally ask you to pay for this service under their new lease. Since this is a case of renewal of the contract, they can add it in as part of the new contract. You can request to not pay and not use HOWEVER, they have no obligation to do that for you and theyll likely not make that exception. You dont need to use their internet though you can continue to use your own however you will still be charged.

They can't force you to use the service, but they can force you to pay for it as part of your lease. It's no more illegal than them raising rent $60 and providing *nothing* extra. Edit: a word

v7p9bu

legaladvice_train

(IN) Can my landlord force residents to use a specific internet provider? So my lease is up soon and I've been informed that if I renew residents will be charged $60/month for community Internet. We don't have a choice and there's no opt-out option. This really sucks because I already have fiber internet through a different provider and I absolutely don't want to change. Some people have told me that they can't legally force me to use their community Internet but these people don't have any solid info beyond a generic FCC post from February of this year. So I'm here to ask: is what my landlord doing illegal? Can they really force their residents to pay for and use a specific internet provider (claiming it's an "amenity") when other companies are available in the area? If not, what steps would I take to force their hand to stop this nonsense?

ibltg5r

ibm1qy9

They can't force you to use it, but why couldn't they force you to pay for it? (The FCC rules bind service providers, not landlords.) Look at it as raising your rent by $60 when you sign the new lease. Though how did you manage to get fiber in a rented apartment, and if fiber is available in the area why isn't your landlord going with that for "community Internet"?

Yes, they can legally ask you to pay for this service under their new lease. Since this is a case of renewal of the contract, they can add it in as part of the new contract. You can request to not pay and not use HOWEVER, they have no obligation to do that for you and theyll likely not make that exception. You dont need to use their internet though you can continue to use your own however you will still be charged.

v7p9bu

legaladvice_train

(IN) Can my landlord force residents to use a specific internet provider? So my lease is up soon and I've been informed that if I renew residents will be charged $60/month for community Internet. We don't have a choice and there's no opt-out option. This really sucks because I already have fiber internet through a different provider and I absolutely don't want to change. Some people have told me that they can't legally force me to use their community Internet but these people don't have any solid info beyond a generic FCC post from February of this year. So I'm here to ask: is what my landlord doing illegal? Can they really force their residents to pay for and use a specific internet provider (claiming it's an "amenity") when other companies are available in the area? If not, what steps would I take to force their hand to stop this nonsense?

ibltjyg

iblt5kw

You may be able to get permission from your landlord to use an alternative service, but you're still going to have to pay the fee.

They can make it a requirement under the new lease, yes. This seems to becoming more common, they are probably getting a discount or a referral bonus from the internet provider.

v7p9bu

legaladvice_train

(IN) Can my landlord force residents to use a specific internet provider? So my lease is up soon and I've been informed that if I renew residents will be charged $60/month for community Internet. We don't have a choice and there's no opt-out option. This really sucks because I already have fiber internet through a different provider and I absolutely don't want to change. Some people have told me that they can't legally force me to use their community Internet but these people don't have any solid info beyond a generic FCC post from February of this year. So I'm here to ask: is what my landlord doing illegal? Can they really force their residents to pay for and use a specific internet provider (claiming it's an "amenity") when other companies are available in the area? If not, what steps would I take to force their hand to stop this nonsense?

ibltg5r

ibltjyg

They can't force you to use it, but why couldn't they force you to pay for it? (The FCC rules bind service providers, not landlords.) Look at it as raising your rent by $60 when you sign the new lease. Though how did you manage to get fiber in a rented apartment, and if fiber is available in the area why isn't your landlord going with that for "community Internet"?

You may be able to get permission from your landlord to use an alternative service, but you're still going to have to pay the fee.

v7p9bu

legaladvice_train

(IN) Can my landlord force residents to use a specific internet provider? So my lease is up soon and I've been informed that if I renew residents will be charged $60/month for community Internet. We don't have a choice and there's no opt-out option. This really sucks because I already have fiber internet through a different provider and I absolutely don't want to change. Some people have told me that they can't legally force me to use their community Internet but these people don't have any solid info beyond a generic FCC post from February of this year. So I'm here to ask: is what my landlord doing illegal? Can they really force their residents to pay for and use a specific internet provider (claiming it's an "amenity") when other companies are available in the area? If not, what steps would I take to force their hand to stop this nonsense?

iblvsjr

ibltg5r

They can't force you to use the service, but they can force you to pay for it as part of your lease. It's no more illegal than them raising rent $60 and providing *nothing* extra. Edit: a word

They can't force you to use it, but why couldn't they force you to pay for it? (The FCC rules bind service providers, not landlords.) Look at it as raising your rent by $60 when you sign the new lease. Though how did you manage to get fiber in a rented apartment, and if fiber is available in the area why isn't your landlord going with that for "community Internet"?

dj607t

legaladvice_train

Internet Provider Charged Me To Settle Someone Else's Account Alright, long story short. My former internet provider charged me almost $200 to settle someone else's overdue balance that shares the same name as me. This was after our services were cancelled. I've been talking to customer support for over a month now and it seems unlikely to be resolved. Apparently their "billing" department wants proof that my social security number is what I say it is, as it is different from the other person they have on file. I asked if they have a secure way for me to send it, and they said I can: 1. Bring it into their store(Over 4 hours away from me) 2. Fax it to their office 3. Text it to them. All of these options are unacceptable to me as I am unwilling to risk sending my social to an already shady company via insecure methods, and I'm definitely not driving 8 hours total. Is there any room for legal action in this? I feel as though they can't simply steal from people based on names.

f426952

f42c5yk

How did you pay? If its a credit card dispute immediately, and close that card and get a new number. This is why I always use a real credit card if possible with re-occurring bills. I would fax it, it's probably the most secure. Look at this point your ssn is out there, they all went public when Equifax was hacked. It's just not worth the drive or burning hours of your time to fight this in an attempt to prevent them from maybe doing something with your SSN.

I would just dispute the charge with the card or credit bureau. Does this other person also live at your address ans have the exact same DOB? They have other ways to verify you identity.

dj607t

legaladvice_train

Internet Provider Charged Me To Settle Someone Else's Account Alright, long story short. My former internet provider charged me almost $200 to settle someone else's overdue balance that shares the same name as me. This was after our services were cancelled. I've been talking to customer support for over a month now and it seems unlikely to be resolved. Apparently their "billing" department wants proof that my social security number is what I say it is, as it is different from the other person they have on file. I asked if they have a secure way for me to send it, and they said I can: 1. Bring it into their store(Over 4 hours away from me) 2. Fax it to their office 3. Text it to them. All of these options are unacceptable to me as I am unwilling to risk sending my social to an already shady company via insecure methods, and I'm definitely not driving 8 hours total. Is there any room for legal action in this? I feel as though they can't simply steal from people based on names.

f4399vo

f43vj0e

How does an ISP of all places not have a secure method for sending documents that need encryption? My little 4 person office has one for sending account sensitive stuff securely. End of the day though, you're probably worrying about something that doesn't need to be. Everyone's SSN is obviously tied to everyones account. If someone wanted to gain access to it theyre going to get the entire database vs just your SSN. Also how do they not already have your SSN? If they can verify that you are you by your SS card doesn't your account already have your SS# recorded on it? Are they assuming OkayDM gave a false SSN when signing up the 2nd time?

this is not legal advice, but it is practical advice ISP's are required by law to respond to official complaints through the FCC site I worked for close to a year to get Comcast to give me a credit that was due caused by their accident opening a second account rather than an upgrade. I got noting with their customer support. Filed an FCC Claim and it was resolved in a little more than a month. They take these very seriously https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhl5zt

drhl5lx

>I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges Oh boy, you should really read up on tenant rights and landlord responsibilities before you open yourself up to litigation.

Have you provided the tenants with written notice to vacate (with proper advanced notice)? Are the tenants on a lease? If so, when does it end?

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhl5lx

drhvxkx

Have you provided the tenants with written notice to vacate (with proper advanced notice)? Are the tenants on a lease? If so, when does it end?

Former CA Landlord here... #If you can get to that note, take it down ASAP. FOR GOD'S SAKE, contact a tenant's rights association and ask them what you do about this. Hopefully they will be helpful to a landlord who just wants to handle things LEGALLY. >**I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges.** This is so fucking illegal that a lawyer would be foaming at the mouth to take it on. It could even be considered blackmail. Even this: > I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out Jesus man, admitting that you are making thing shitty for them in order to get them to move out is called "constructive eviction" and is a very, VERY expensive mistake for you to make in CA. I understand your frustration. Shitty tenants suck, especially when they live in your home. But you are a landlord, and they have rights that will be *very expensive for you* (and delay getting them out) if you violate them.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhob53

drhvxkx

I'm a landlord tenant attorney in CA, but I am not yours. You need to speak with one, soon. You may have opened yourself to massive litigation. Hope and pray your tenants don't leave today based on the note. I don't know what steps you've taken to have them move out, but your attorney you hire can help guide you. You may be able to evict due to the impersonation, but don't hold your breath. End the tenancy properly and stop attempting self help at this point as you're putting yourself in a very financially tenuous place.

Former CA Landlord here... #If you can get to that note, take it down ASAP. FOR GOD'S SAKE, contact a tenant's rights association and ask them what you do about this. Hopefully they will be helpful to a landlord who just wants to handle things LEGALLY. >**I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges.** This is so fucking illegal that a lawyer would be foaming at the mouth to take it on. It could even be considered blackmail. Even this: > I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out Jesus man, admitting that you are making thing shitty for them in order to get them to move out is called "constructive eviction" and is a very, VERY expensive mistake for you to make in CA. I understand your frustration. Shitty tenants suck, especially when they live in your home. But you are a landlord, and they have rights that will be *very expensive for you* (and delay getting them out) if you violate them.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhlzf1

drhvxkx

That's not how you do it at all. Consult with a landlord-tenant attorney in California.

Former CA Landlord here... #If you can get to that note, take it down ASAP. FOR GOD'S SAKE, contact a tenant's rights association and ask them what you do about this. Hopefully they will be helpful to a landlord who just wants to handle things LEGALLY. >**I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges.** This is so fucking illegal that a lawyer would be foaming at the mouth to take it on. It could even be considered blackmail. Even this: > I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out Jesus man, admitting that you are making thing shitty for them in order to get them to move out is called "constructive eviction" and is a very, VERY expensive mistake for you to make in CA. I understand your frustration. Shitty tenants suck, especially when they live in your home. But you are a landlord, and they have rights that will be *very expensive for you* (and delay getting them out) if you violate them.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhvxkx

drhlxs2

Former CA Landlord here... #If you can get to that note, take it down ASAP. FOR GOD'S SAKE, contact a tenant's rights association and ask them what you do about this. Hopefully they will be helpful to a landlord who just wants to handle things LEGALLY. >**I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges.** This is so fucking illegal that a lawyer would be foaming at the mouth to take it on. It could even be considered blackmail. Even this: > I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out Jesus man, admitting that you are making thing shitty for them in order to get them to move out is called "constructive eviction" and is a very, VERY expensive mistake for you to make in CA. I understand your frustration. Shitty tenants suck, especially when they live in your home. But you are a landlord, and they have rights that will be *very expensive for you* (and delay getting them out) if you violate them.

It sounds as though you may not be helping your situation much. If you do things "because you want them to move out" and fail to follow proper landlord tenant laws and eviction procedures, you could very easily find yourself in all kinds of hot water. Take a step back, breathe, review the laws and regulations of your locale and talk to a real-estate attorney if needed. Then move forward with the proper steps to get rid of the problem tenants and pursue the internet/theft issues.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhlw37

drhvxkx

As a CA landlord, you have very little power to throw someone out before their lease ends. If you get those recordings from Comcast, impersonating you is absolutely a crime, and that can be used as a basis to evict. That said, you still must go to court and secure an eviction. Just leaving that note could be enough to get you fucked in court for an illegal eviction.

Former CA Landlord here... #If you can get to that note, take it down ASAP. FOR GOD'S SAKE, contact a tenant's rights association and ask them what you do about this. Hopefully they will be helpful to a landlord who just wants to handle things LEGALLY. >**I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges.** This is so fucking illegal that a lawyer would be foaming at the mouth to take it on. It could even be considered blackmail. Even this: > I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out Jesus man, admitting that you are making thing shitty for them in order to get them to move out is called "constructive eviction" and is a very, VERY expensive mistake for you to make in CA. I understand your frustration. Shitty tenants suck, especially when they live in your home. But you are a landlord, and they have rights that will be *very expensive for you* (and delay getting them out) if you violate them.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhpe0r

drhvxkx

So, where to start? California distinguishes between lodgers and renters. "My home" in this case is ambiguous - is it where *you live* (making them lodgers), or simply a place you own (making them tenants)? Next up, does the rental agreement include Internet and wireless? If yes, then turning it off is a breach of contract. You cannot do this. Then, this: > I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof? You could issue a notice-to-vacate based on criminal behavior *if* you have proof. You can also make a police report. You cannot simply notice people to be gone immediately outside of some very narrow circumstances (most of which pertain to domestic violence). > my parents Who is the landlord in this situation? You or your parents? If you want these individuals gone, follow the proper California eviction process for lodgers. If you want them arrested or noticed-to-vacate based on criminal behavior, file the police report and then give them *legal* notice to depart.

Former CA Landlord here... #If you can get to that note, take it down ASAP. FOR GOD'S SAKE, contact a tenant's rights association and ask them what you do about this. Hopefully they will be helpful to a landlord who just wants to handle things LEGALLY. >**I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges.** This is so fucking illegal that a lawyer would be foaming at the mouth to take it on. It could even be considered blackmail. Even this: > I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out Jesus man, admitting that you are making thing shitty for them in order to get them to move out is called "constructive eviction" and is a very, VERY expensive mistake for you to make in CA. I understand your frustration. Shitty tenants suck, especially when they live in your home. But you are a landlord, and they have rights that will be *very expensive for you* (and delay getting them out) if you violate them.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhlzf1

drhob53

That's not how you do it at all. Consult with a landlord-tenant attorney in California.

I'm a landlord tenant attorney in CA, but I am not yours. You need to speak with one, soon. You may have opened yourself to massive litigation. Hope and pray your tenants don't leave today based on the note. I don't know what steps you've taken to have them move out, but your attorney you hire can help guide you. You may be able to evict due to the impersonation, but don't hold your breath. End the tenancy properly and stop attempting self help at this point as you're putting yourself in a very financially tenuous place.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhob53

drhlxs2

I'm a landlord tenant attorney in CA, but I am not yours. You need to speak with one, soon. You may have opened yourself to massive litigation. Hope and pray your tenants don't leave today based on the note. I don't know what steps you've taken to have them move out, but your attorney you hire can help guide you. You may be able to evict due to the impersonation, but don't hold your breath. End the tenancy properly and stop attempting self help at this point as you're putting yourself in a very financially tenuous place.

It sounds as though you may not be helping your situation much. If you do things "because you want them to move out" and fail to follow proper landlord tenant laws and eviction procedures, you could very easily find yourself in all kinds of hot water. Take a step back, breathe, review the laws and regulations of your locale and talk to a real-estate attorney if needed. Then move forward with the proper steps to get rid of the problem tenants and pursue the internet/theft issues.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhlw37

drhob53

As a CA landlord, you have very little power to throw someone out before their lease ends. If you get those recordings from Comcast, impersonating you is absolutely a crime, and that can be used as a basis to evict. That said, you still must go to court and secure an eviction. Just leaving that note could be enough to get you fucked in court for an illegal eviction.

I'm a landlord tenant attorney in CA, but I am not yours. You need to speak with one, soon. You may have opened yourself to massive litigation. Hope and pray your tenants don't leave today based on the note. I don't know what steps you've taken to have them move out, but your attorney you hire can help guide you. You may be able to evict due to the impersonation, but don't hold your breath. End the tenancy properly and stop attempting self help at this point as you're putting yourself in a very financially tenuous place.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhlxs2

drhlzf1

It sounds as though you may not be helping your situation much. If you do things "because you want them to move out" and fail to follow proper landlord tenant laws and eviction procedures, you could very easily find yourself in all kinds of hot water. Take a step back, breathe, review the laws and regulations of your locale and talk to a real-estate attorney if needed. Then move forward with the proper steps to get rid of the problem tenants and pursue the internet/theft issues.

That's not how you do it at all. Consult with a landlord-tenant attorney in California.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhlw37

drhlzf1

As a CA landlord, you have very little power to throw someone out before their lease ends. If you get those recordings from Comcast, impersonating you is absolutely a crime, and that can be used as a basis to evict. That said, you still must go to court and secure an eviction. Just leaving that note could be enough to get you fucked in court for an illegal eviction.

That's not how you do it at all. Consult with a landlord-tenant attorney in California.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhlw37

drhlxs2

As a CA landlord, you have very little power to throw someone out before their lease ends. If you get those recordings from Comcast, impersonating you is absolutely a crime, and that can be used as a basis to evict. That said, you still must go to court and secure an eviction. Just leaving that note could be enough to get you fucked in court for an illegal eviction.

It sounds as though you may not be helping your situation much. If you do things "because you want them to move out" and fail to follow proper landlord tenant laws and eviction procedures, you could very easily find yourself in all kinds of hot water. Take a step back, breathe, review the laws and regulations of your locale and talk to a real-estate attorney if needed. Then move forward with the proper steps to get rid of the problem tenants and pursue the internet/theft issues.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhpe0r

drhz4sr

So, where to start? California distinguishes between lodgers and renters. "My home" in this case is ambiguous - is it where *you live* (making them lodgers), or simply a place you own (making them tenants)? Next up, does the rental agreement include Internet and wireless? If yes, then turning it off is a breach of contract. You cannot do this. Then, this: > I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof? You could issue a notice-to-vacate based on criminal behavior *if* you have proof. You can also make a police report. You cannot simply notice people to be gone immediately outside of some very narrow circumstances (most of which pertain to domestic violence). > my parents Who is the landlord in this situation? You or your parents? If you want these individuals gone, follow the proper California eviction process for lodgers. If you want them arrested or noticed-to-vacate based on criminal behavior, file the police report and then give them *legal* notice to depart.

Oh god. You're fucked. I just read your description of what you did to remove them from the house, and you messed up the eviction process, and then decided to turn something from bad to worse by saying they need to be gone today. California is EXTREMELY Tenant friendly, and if anyone ever wants to see how Tenant friendly, just watch the movie Pacific Heights. You need to follow the process EXACTLY, or you're in for a world of expenses. Comcast is the last thing you need to worry about, at the moment. Get a Real Estate Lawyer, stat, and pray you're not in a rent controlled area like Berkeley or East PA. Do the eviction process correctly, with a lawyer this time.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhz4sr

drhyw6g

Oh god. You're fucked. I just read your description of what you did to remove them from the house, and you messed up the eviction process, and then decided to turn something from bad to worse by saying they need to be gone today. California is EXTREMELY Tenant friendly, and if anyone ever wants to see how Tenant friendly, just watch the movie Pacific Heights. You need to follow the process EXACTLY, or you're in for a world of expenses. Comcast is the last thing you need to worry about, at the moment. Get a Real Estate Lawyer, stat, and pray you're not in a rent controlled area like Berkeley or East PA. Do the eviction process correctly, with a lawyer this time.

You should talk to a local lawyer about evicting them. This is really a much bigger issue than the comcast one. If you have guests who have lived there for months you will have to evict them through the court, and you cannot lock them out or throw them out. A lawyer is likely going to have you serve a 30 day notice and then proceed with an unlawful detainer. I would consider cash for keys to get rid of them sooner and avoid paying a lawyer. You should also call your internet provider and make sure you are setup with an account pin and that no one unexpected is on the authorized users list.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

dri46x5

drhyw6g

Oh dear god what are you doing? California is very tenant-friendly with their laws. Your tenants are going to end up suing you. Read this. Read it twice. You aren't just letting someone crash in your house for a weekend. You are in a legally binding contract with them and the state has laws that tell you how you are allowed to behave with respect to that contract. If you *mis*behave in the eyes of the state, the law says you owe your tenants money, and it can be a substantial amount of money. Go read the link above two more times. It is insane to rent to tenants without at least reading the basics of landlord/tenant law. You're better off using your money as kindling otherwise. If you truly can't afford a lawyer then you're about to be in a lot of debt if you keep trying to half-ass an eviction. P.S. your little note could be considered blackmail or attempted blackmail. Blackmail in California is a felony and could land you in prison for up to 3 years. Attempted blackmail is a "wobbler" but I still wouldn't want it on *my* record. You really couldn't have fucked this up more without threatening to kill them.

You should talk to a local lawyer about evicting them. This is really a much bigger issue than the comcast one. If you have guests who have lived there for months you will have to evict them through the court, and you cannot lock them out or throw them out. A lawyer is likely going to have you serve a 30 day notice and then proceed with an unlawful detainer. I would consider cash for keys to get rid of them sooner and avoid paying a lawyer. You should also call your internet provider and make sure you are setup with an account pin and that no one unexpected is on the authorized users list.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

dri6zwj

driuxma

I sense your wallet will be experiencing great pain after they take you to court for an illegal eviction.

What’s the point in asking for help if you’re just going to ignore everything helpful everyone says? Enjoy your lawsuit.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

driuxma

drhyw6g

What’s the point in asking for help if you’re just going to ignore everything helpful everyone says? Enjoy your lawsuit.

You should talk to a local lawyer about evicting them. This is really a much bigger issue than the comcast one. If you have guests who have lived there for months you will have to evict them through the court, and you cannot lock them out or throw them out. A lawyer is likely going to have you serve a 30 day notice and then proceed with an unlawful detainer. I would consider cash for keys to get rid of them sooner and avoid paying a lawyer. You should also call your internet provider and make sure you are setup with an account pin and that no one unexpected is on the authorized users list.

7kw1l1

legaladvice_train

[California, USA] Tenants stole two of my routers, and are using my internet, while I have no access to it. They also called my service provider and shut off my parents service at their house..(our accounts are connected). I'm a landlord, I have four tenants living in my home. Two of which are a couple, and the ones I suspect are the culprits. I have no proof, but I just don't see the other two doing it. I cut the couple off from using it to begin with, because I want them to move out, and they are making it extremely difficult. I just want to know, what legal steps can I pursue in this situation? I've been in contact with Comcast (my service provider) and they record calls, and said I could be provided with the audio.. Is them calling and messing with my wifi account illegal (i.e. turning off my parents wifi)? I think they used a mutual friend of ours phone to make the calls, I don't really have 100% proof of it to show, but I know it's them. This is so infuriating. My parents nag me about why they are even still here after messing with our accounts. I left them a note in the bathroom saying they needed to be gone today, or I was going to press charges. But what charges can I press with no hard proof?

drhyw6g

dri6zwj

You should talk to a local lawyer about evicting them. This is really a much bigger issue than the comcast one. If you have guests who have lived there for months you will have to evict them through the court, and you cannot lock them out or throw them out. A lawyer is likely going to have you serve a 30 day notice and then proceed with an unlawful detainer. I would consider cash for keys to get rid of them sooner and avoid paying a lawyer. You should also call your internet provider and make sure you are setup with an account pin and that no one unexpected is on the authorized users list.

I sense your wallet will be experiencing great pain after they take you to court for an illegal eviction.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6qepx

dh6q5ct

On the one hand, wild growth trees on a vacant lot are mostly worth about what the lumber would cost. On the other hand, dropping the biggest, heaviest rock possible on real estate developers always warms my heart. OP, go speak to a real estate lawyer tomorrow morning. Call your state bar association and ask for a referral to someone local. You and your lawyer should discuss whether it's practical to bring a suit against the flippers for: * an injunction that they stay off of your property and cease using it as an access-way and dump, * an order that they remove their debris, or that they pay for your own debris-removal, * the cost of replacing the trees they cut down, * the cost of restoring whatever other parts of the property they damaged, * anything else your lawyer can think of. Odds are good that if they're flippers, they'll want to be rid of the property ASAP. Having it tied up in a lawsuit makes that really difficult, as they may have to disclose the suit (and the risk that you place a lien on the property due to the resulting judgement) to buyers and their lenders. It also ties up a bunch of the developers' time and money in a lawyer. What I'm saying is, I think you have them by the balls on this one. You should be aiming for a settlement, here, not to win the suit: if you make them fight you on every inch, you'll spend more on your own lawyer without getting much more in return. If they're willing to settle, you likely come out ahead. If I'm right, your lawyer will likely take this on contingency. Edit: one thought - how much would the value of the neighbouring house increase if the yard were an entire acre larger?

Take pictures and don't confront them. Do talk to a lawyer. This is going to be a great thread

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6qepx

dh6q1oi

On the one hand, wild growth trees on a vacant lot are mostly worth about what the lumber would cost. On the other hand, dropping the biggest, heaviest rock possible on real estate developers always warms my heart. OP, go speak to a real estate lawyer tomorrow morning. Call your state bar association and ask for a referral to someone local. You and your lawyer should discuss whether it's practical to bring a suit against the flippers for: * an injunction that they stay off of your property and cease using it as an access-way and dump, * an order that they remove their debris, or that they pay for your own debris-removal, * the cost of replacing the trees they cut down, * the cost of restoring whatever other parts of the property they damaged, * anything else your lawyer can think of. Odds are good that if they're flippers, they'll want to be rid of the property ASAP. Having it tied up in a lawsuit makes that really difficult, as they may have to disclose the suit (and the risk that you place a lien on the property due to the resulting judgement) to buyers and their lenders. It also ties up a bunch of the developers' time and money in a lawyer. What I'm saying is, I think you have them by the balls on this one. You should be aiming for a settlement, here, not to win the suit: if you make them fight you on every inch, you'll spend more on your own lawyer without getting much more in return. If they're willing to settle, you likely come out ahead. If I'm right, your lawyer will likely take this on contingency. Edit: one thought - how much would the value of the neighbouring house increase if the yard were an entire acre larger?

I would get an arborist in ASAP to assess the damage to your trees, and the cost to replace. Mature trees are serious business. Paging tree law experts.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6qepx

dh6q2oo

On the one hand, wild growth trees on a vacant lot are mostly worth about what the lumber would cost. On the other hand, dropping the biggest, heaviest rock possible on real estate developers always warms my heart. OP, go speak to a real estate lawyer tomorrow morning. Call your state bar association and ask for a referral to someone local. You and your lawyer should discuss whether it's practical to bring a suit against the flippers for: * an injunction that they stay off of your property and cease using it as an access-way and dump, * an order that they remove their debris, or that they pay for your own debris-removal, * the cost of replacing the trees they cut down, * the cost of restoring whatever other parts of the property they damaged, * anything else your lawyer can think of. Odds are good that if they're flippers, they'll want to be rid of the property ASAP. Having it tied up in a lawsuit makes that really difficult, as they may have to disclose the suit (and the risk that you place a lien on the property due to the resulting judgement) to buyers and their lenders. It also ties up a bunch of the developers' time and money in a lawyer. What I'm saying is, I think you have them by the balls on this one. You should be aiming for a settlement, here, not to win the suit: if you make them fight you on every inch, you'll spend more on your own lawyer without getting much more in return. If they're willing to settle, you likely come out ahead. If I'm right, your lawyer will likely take this on contingency. Edit: one thought - how much would the value of the neighbouring house increase if the yard were an entire acre larger?

I'd start by reviewing your property boundaries and/or getting/reviewing a survey to ensure the trees were absolutely on your property. If you're confident that was the case, you may see if you can find an attorney to work on contingency (i.e. they take a portion of your winnings/settlement).

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6q4f9

dh6qepx

The usual advice would be something like: - make certain of property lines, perhaps by having a survey done - document all damage to your property - call a lawyer and cash in, because large trees can be quite valuable, and you break it, you bought it. Or you cut it down, you bought it. Something like that. $25K doesn't sound like the world's most valuable property, but still, that above sequence is probably right.

On the one hand, wild growth trees on a vacant lot are mostly worth about what the lumber would cost. On the other hand, dropping the biggest, heaviest rock possible on real estate developers always warms my heart. OP, go speak to a real estate lawyer tomorrow morning. Call your state bar association and ask for a referral to someone local. You and your lawyer should discuss whether it's practical to bring a suit against the flippers for: * an injunction that they stay off of your property and cease using it as an access-way and dump, * an order that they remove their debris, or that they pay for your own debris-removal, * the cost of replacing the trees they cut down, * the cost of restoring whatever other parts of the property they damaged, * anything else your lawyer can think of. Odds are good that if they're flippers, they'll want to be rid of the property ASAP. Having it tied up in a lawsuit makes that really difficult, as they may have to disclose the suit (and the risk that you place a lien on the property due to the resulting judgement) to buyers and their lenders. It also ties up a bunch of the developers' time and money in a lawyer. What I'm saying is, I think you have them by the balls on this one. You should be aiming for a settlement, here, not to win the suit: if you make them fight you on every inch, you'll spend more on your own lawyer without getting much more in return. If they're willing to settle, you likely come out ahead. If I'm right, your lawyer will likely take this on contingency. Edit: one thought - how much would the value of the neighbouring house increase if the yard were an entire acre larger?

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6q1oi

dh6q5ct

I would get an arborist in ASAP to assess the damage to your trees, and the cost to replace. Mature trees are serious business. Paging tree law experts.

Take pictures and don't confront them. Do talk to a lawyer. This is going to be a great thread

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6q2oo

dh6q5ct

I'd start by reviewing your property boundaries and/or getting/reviewing a survey to ensure the trees were absolutely on your property. If you're confident that was the case, you may see if you can find an attorney to work on contingency (i.e. they take a portion of your winnings/settlement).

Take pictures and don't confront them. Do talk to a lawyer. This is going to be a great thread

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6q5ct

dh6q4f9

Take pictures and don't confront them. Do talk to a lawyer. This is going to be a great thread

The usual advice would be something like: - make certain of property lines, perhaps by having a survey done - document all damage to your property - call a lawyer and cash in, because large trees can be quite valuable, and you break it, you bought it. Or you cut it down, you bought it. Something like that. $25K doesn't sound like the world's most valuable property, but still, that above sequence is probably right.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6yjv6

dh6q2oo

It looks like North Carolina has a special statute for trespass to timber.  N.C.G.S. Sec. 1-539.1 allows for double damages of wrongfully cut trees. That's on stumpage value though, not replacement value. You're probably better off going after a common law approach with replacement value in mind but that could be a tough argument on a vacant lot.

I'd start by reviewing your property boundaries and/or getting/reviewing a survey to ensure the trees were absolutely on your property. If you're confident that was the case, you may see if you can find an attorney to work on contingency (i.e. they take a portion of your winnings/settlement).

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6yjv6

dh6q4f9

It looks like North Carolina has a special statute for trespass to timber.  N.C.G.S. Sec. 1-539.1 allows for double damages of wrongfully cut trees. That's on stumpage value though, not replacement value. You're probably better off going after a common law approach with replacement value in mind but that could be a tough argument on a vacant lot.

The usual advice would be something like: - make certain of property lines, perhaps by having a survey done - document all damage to your property - call a lawyer and cash in, because large trees can be quite valuable, and you break it, you bought it. Or you cut it down, you bought it. Something like that. $25K doesn't sound like the world's most valuable property, but still, that above sequence is probably right.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6x6xk

dh6yjv6

In cases where people incur costs on adjacent neighbors, is it always best to jump to a lawyer? Are there reasonable ways to approach the other party with a basic list of grievances without fearing a misstep?

It looks like North Carolina has a special statute for trespass to timber.  N.C.G.S. Sec. 1-539.1 allows for double damages of wrongfully cut trees. That's on stumpage value though, not replacement value. You're probably better off going after a common law approach with replacement value in mind but that could be a tough argument on a vacant lot.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh71jrd

dh6q4f9

>Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees /r/legaladvice is all like But more seriously, OP, why not just sell the property to the land developers? Dont let them buy it for less than you were originally going to sell it for, and if they bitch about dirt or trees being cut down then they admit that they did it.

The usual advice would be something like: - make certain of property lines, perhaps by having a survey done - document all damage to your property - call a lawyer and cash in, because large trees can be quite valuable, and you break it, you bought it. Or you cut it down, you bought it. Something like that. $25K doesn't sound like the world's most valuable property, but still, that above sequence is probably right.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh71jrd

dh70pow

>Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees /r/legaladvice is all like But more seriously, OP, why not just sell the property to the land developers? Dont let them buy it for less than you were originally going to sell it for, and if they bitch about dirt or trees being cut down then they admit that they did it.

Whoa - where is the shitty MS Paint drawing?

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6x6xk

dh71jrd

In cases where people incur costs on adjacent neighbors, is it always best to jump to a lawyer? Are there reasonable ways to approach the other party with a basic list of grievances without fearing a misstep?

>Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees /r/legaladvice is all like But more seriously, OP, why not just sell the property to the land developers? Dont let them buy it for less than you were originally going to sell it for, and if they bitch about dirt or trees being cut down then they admit that they did it.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh70pow

dh6x6xk

Whoa - where is the shitty MS Paint drawing?

In cases where people incur costs on adjacent neighbors, is it always best to jump to a lawyer? Are there reasonable ways to approach the other party with a basic list of grievances without fearing a misstep?

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh6x6xk

dh7cgg3

In cases where people incur costs on adjacent neighbors, is it always best to jump to a lawyer? Are there reasonable ways to approach the other party with a basic list of grievances without fearing a misstep?

There is a much simpler route if you just want your property cleaned up. Call your local police department, have them do a report for illegal dumping and criminal mischief. Take said report to flippers and inform them you will drop the case if they make things right. Much easier than hiring a lawyer

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh7cgg3

dh7bbqv

There is a much simpler route if you just want your property cleaned up. Call your local police department, have them do a report for illegal dumping and criminal mischief. Take said report to flippers and inform them you will drop the case if they make things right. Much easier than hiring a lawyer

When you confront them, let them know your plans, and make it plain that you have them by the balls. Then, suggest that they simply buy the lot off of you for your original asking price. Problem solved.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh7cgg3

dh75jup

There is a much simpler route if you just want your property cleaned up. Call your local police department, have them do a report for illegal dumping and criminal mischief. Take said report to flippers and inform them you will drop the case if they make things right. Much easier than hiring a lawyer

Don't confront. Get estimates from three companies to fix the damages in writing. Much of what they might not only be civil in nature but could be criminal, such as illegal dumping, trespassing, breaking of local tree protection ordinances, etc. Find out from experts if you can file liens against the property that might need satisfied at the time of the sale. I do advise you go speak to a lawyer. I'm not a lawyer and I'm just mentioning things you can check on with a lawyer and with local authorities.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh7cgg3

dh7b2kt

There is a much simpler route if you just want your property cleaned up. Call your local police department, have them do a report for illegal dumping and criminal mischief. Take said report to flippers and inform them you will drop the case if they make things right. Much easier than hiring a lawyer

Sometimes I'm just glad that we city folk don't actually have enough room for neighbors to do this sort of thing...

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh7cgg3

dh71yxx

There is a much simpler route if you just want your property cleaned up. Call your local police department, have them do a report for illegal dumping and criminal mischief. Take said report to flippers and inform them you will drop the case if they make things right. Much easier than hiring a lawyer

Explain like I'm five years old: Why would the "value" of OP's trees be different in an empty lot than a lot with a house? I was under the impression that if OP won a lawsuit, a payout would be determined by the cost of replacing what was destroyed, which is the same either way.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh7cgg3

dh77d5j

There is a much simpler route if you just want your property cleaned up. Call your local police department, have them do a report for illegal dumping and criminal mischief. Take said report to flippers and inform them you will drop the case if they make things right. Much easier than hiring a lawyer

flippers! ಠ_ಠ

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh7bbqv

dh71yxx

When you confront them, let them know your plans, and make it plain that you have them by the balls. Then, suggest that they simply buy the lot off of you for your original asking price. Problem solved.

Explain like I'm five years old: Why would the "value" of OP's trees be different in an empty lot than a lot with a house? I was under the impression that if OP won a lawsuit, a payout would be determined by the cost of replacing what was destroyed, which is the same either way.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh77d5j

dh7bbqv

flippers! ಠ_ಠ

When you confront them, let them know your plans, and make it plain that you have them by the balls. Then, suggest that they simply buy the lot off of you for your original asking price. Problem solved.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh75jup

dh71yxx

Don't confront. Get estimates from three companies to fix the damages in writing. Much of what they might not only be civil in nature but could be criminal, such as illegal dumping, trespassing, breaking of local tree protection ordinances, etc. Find out from experts if you can file liens against the property that might need satisfied at the time of the sale. I do advise you go speak to a lawyer. I'm not a lawyer and I'm just mentioning things you can check on with a lawyer and with local authorities.

Explain like I'm five years old: Why would the "value" of OP's trees be different in an empty lot than a lot with a house? I was under the impression that if OP won a lawsuit, a payout would be determined by the cost of replacing what was destroyed, which is the same either way.

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh71yxx

dh7b2kt

Explain like I'm five years old: Why would the "value" of OP's trees be different in an empty lot than a lot with a house? I was under the impression that if OP won a lawsuit, a payout would be determined by the cost of replacing what was destroyed, which is the same either way.

Sometimes I'm just glad that we city folk don't actually have enough room for neighbors to do this sort of thing...

69i03e

legaladvice_train

Neighbor cut down 6 of my trees and is stacking dirt oon my land without permission [NC] I own a vacant lot. It's about an acre. The house next door was bought by some flipping house company. I found out yesterday that they cut down several of my trees, stacked up an 8 foot pile of dirt, dumped trash and debris, and in general made it a mess by driving backhoes and other equipment over it. Property is worth $25k or so. I was preparing to sell it but now I feel like I can't. Don't have too much money to put into suing them. What can I do? I'm contemplating confronting them tomorrow?

dh7b2kt

dh77d5j

Sometimes I'm just glad that we city folk don't actually have enough room for neighbors to do this sort of thing...

flippers! ಠ_ಠ

73c7vi

legaladvice_train

(NC-USA) Neighbor cut down my 20 ft tree without permission The neighbor behind my house cut down a 20-25 Leyland Cypress tree that is on my property. The entire trunk of the tree is 8-12 inches over the property line (on my side). I called the police and we confronted him about it and he admitted to cutting it down. The police took no report though and he referred me to the magistrate's office to get a warrant since it's a Class 1 Misdemeanor in my state. I have security footage of the tree being cut down, but the camera is 90 feet away so it's hard to see a face. I went to the Magistrate's office and he granted the warrant. I believe the tree's value to be around $2,000-$5,000 based on calling some nurseries and they said they sell 8 ft trees for $300-400. They don't sell trees 20-25 ft tall. What's my next step? Should I pay to have a survey done? Should I start the small claims court now (max $10k lawsuit in small claims in my state), or wait until after the criminal case is resolved? (Court date is in December) Any other advice?

dnpcnps

dnpccfp

I am not a lawyer, but Nursery guy/arborist here, get a professional/certified arborist to give you a quote of the tree's value, the estimated value of the removed tree may be more important than the replacement cost for smaller specimens. If you have pictures of the tree available and not just the security footage that would be a bonus for the person doing the estimate. The reason no one tends sells trees that large is because they physically can't handle that large an operation, the root ball alone would have to be 8 to 10 feet in diameter to even give the tree a chance of surviving. I'm sure an actual lawyer can chime in to tell you if your state has triple damages for malicious tree-cuttery, I know that has come up in other tree law threads.

The general consensus on things tree related is to get an arborist to determine the value of the tree. Make sure you get an estimate for the replacement and what value the wood would have had. Then if it is below the small claims court limit, sue him there for the combined costs. Make sure you have copies of the estimates, a statement from the officer who responded, and the information from your survey showing that it was on your land.

73c7vi

legaladvice_train

(NC-USA) Neighbor cut down my 20 ft tree without permission The neighbor behind my house cut down a 20-25 Leyland Cypress tree that is on my property. The entire trunk of the tree is 8-12 inches over the property line (on my side). I called the police and we confronted him about it and he admitted to cutting it down. The police took no report though and he referred me to the magistrate's office to get a warrant since it's a Class 1 Misdemeanor in my state. I have security footage of the tree being cut down, but the camera is 90 feet away so it's hard to see a face. I went to the Magistrate's office and he granted the warrant. I believe the tree's value to be around $2,000-$5,000 based on calling some nurseries and they said they sell 8 ft trees for $300-400. They don't sell trees 20-25 ft tall. What's my next step? Should I pay to have a survey done? Should I start the small claims court now (max $10k lawsuit in small claims in my state), or wait until after the criminal case is resolved? (Court date is in December) Any other advice?

dnp9u3u

dnpcnps

Since you're asking whether or not to get a survey, I'll take that to mean that you've never had one done. In that case, how are you certain that it was on your property? Your first step is a survey to be sure that it's your property

I am not a lawyer, but Nursery guy/arborist here, get a professional/certified arborist to give you a quote of the tree's value, the estimated value of the removed tree may be more important than the replacement cost for smaller specimens. If you have pictures of the tree available and not just the security footage that would be a bonus for the person doing the estimate. The reason no one tends sells trees that large is because they physically can't handle that large an operation, the root ball alone would have to be 8 to 10 feet in diameter to even give the tree a chance of surviving. I'm sure an actual lawyer can chime in to tell you if your state has triple damages for malicious tree-cuttery, I know that has come up in other tree law threads.

73c7vi

legaladvice_train

(NC-USA) Neighbor cut down my 20 ft tree without permission The neighbor behind my house cut down a 20-25 Leyland Cypress tree that is on my property. The entire trunk of the tree is 8-12 inches over the property line (on my side). I called the police and we confronted him about it and he admitted to cutting it down. The police took no report though and he referred me to the magistrate's office to get a warrant since it's a Class 1 Misdemeanor in my state. I have security footage of the tree being cut down, but the camera is 90 feet away so it's hard to see a face. I went to the Magistrate's office and he granted the warrant. I believe the tree's value to be around $2,000-$5,000 based on calling some nurseries and they said they sell 8 ft trees for $300-400. They don't sell trees 20-25 ft tall. What's my next step? Should I pay to have a survey done? Should I start the small claims court now (max $10k lawsuit in small claims in my state), or wait until after the criminal case is resolved? (Court date is in December) Any other advice?

dnpb334

dnpcnps

MS paint or it didn't happen

I am not a lawyer, but Nursery guy/arborist here, get a professional/certified arborist to give you a quote of the tree's value, the estimated value of the removed tree may be more important than the replacement cost for smaller specimens. If you have pictures of the tree available and not just the security footage that would be a bonus for the person doing the estimate. The reason no one tends sells trees that large is because they physically can't handle that large an operation, the root ball alone would have to be 8 to 10 feet in diameter to even give the tree a chance of surviving. I'm sure an actual lawyer can chime in to tell you if your state has triple damages for malicious tree-cuttery, I know that has come up in other tree law threads.

73c7vi

legaladvice_train

(NC-USA) Neighbor cut down my 20 ft tree without permission The neighbor behind my house cut down a 20-25 Leyland Cypress tree that is on my property. The entire trunk of the tree is 8-12 inches over the property line (on my side). I called the police and we confronted him about it and he admitted to cutting it down. The police took no report though and he referred me to the magistrate's office to get a warrant since it's a Class 1 Misdemeanor in my state. I have security footage of the tree being cut down, but the camera is 90 feet away so it's hard to see a face. I went to the Magistrate's office and he granted the warrant. I believe the tree's value to be around $2,000-$5,000 based on calling some nurseries and they said they sell 8 ft trees for $300-400. They don't sell trees 20-25 ft tall. What's my next step? Should I pay to have a survey done? Should I start the small claims court now (max $10k lawsuit in small claims in my state), or wait until after the criminal case is resolved? (Court date is in December) Any other advice?

dnpccfp

dnp9u3u

The general consensus on things tree related is to get an arborist to determine the value of the tree. Make sure you get an estimate for the replacement and what value the wood would have had. Then if it is below the small claims court limit, sue him there for the combined costs. Make sure you have copies of the estimates, a statement from the officer who responded, and the information from your survey showing that it was on your land.

Since you're asking whether or not to get a survey, I'll take that to mean that you've never had one done. In that case, how are you certain that it was on your property? Your first step is a survey to be sure that it's your property

73c7vi

legaladvice_train

(NC-USA) Neighbor cut down my 20 ft tree without permission The neighbor behind my house cut down a 20-25 Leyland Cypress tree that is on my property. The entire trunk of the tree is 8-12 inches over the property line (on my side). I called the police and we confronted him about it and he admitted to cutting it down. The police took no report though and he referred me to the magistrate's office to get a warrant since it's a Class 1 Misdemeanor in my state. I have security footage of the tree being cut down, but the camera is 90 feet away so it's hard to see a face. I went to the Magistrate's office and he granted the warrant. I believe the tree's value to be around $2,000-$5,000 based on calling some nurseries and they said they sell 8 ft trees for $300-400. They don't sell trees 20-25 ft tall. What's my next step? Should I pay to have a survey done? Should I start the small claims court now (max $10k lawsuit in small claims in my state), or wait until after the criminal case is resolved? (Court date is in December) Any other advice?

dnpccfp

dnpb334

The general consensus on things tree related is to get an arborist to determine the value of the tree. Make sure you get an estimate for the replacement and what value the wood would have had. Then if it is below the small claims court limit, sue him there for the combined costs. Make sure you have copies of the estimates, a statement from the officer who responded, and the information from your survey showing that it was on your land.

MS paint or it didn't happen

tbxoyp

legaladvice_train

My family’s new neighbor connected our fences without permission and built onto our property **TL;DR:** Neighbor built her fence onto our property. She drilled her fence into our fence to connect them to avoid paying for another wall after agreeing specifically not to do that. Do we have any right to get her to remove the part on our property? I live in California (San Bernardino County) in a town in the mountains. Recently, a woman moved in next door into a house that was recently put onto the market. My family has not been fond of her since she moved in, but yesterday she took things to the next level. She had been planning on building a fence and connected a string from her house to our fence, which my parents assumed meant she would be connecting our fences. We put up a fence a few years ago, and it doesn’t rest on the property line. When we built our fences we left about 2 feet on either side and about 6 feet off the back of the fence so we had access to the entire property for weed abatement. My parents saw the string and immediately knocked on her door to explain the situation, however, she wasn’t home and my parents left a note which the boyfriend gave to her. The situation only worsened from there, which eventually led to the woman coming over to our house with surveyors (which my parents doubt the credibility of). The conversation basically ended with the woman agreeing to not build on our property, agreeing to leave the 2-foot gap between the fences, and then they left. We didn't have any of this in writing, which I admit we should have gotten, but we took her at her word. She lied. She drilled into our fence and connected hers so she wouldn’t have to pay for the last wall, making it so we no longer have access to the back part of our property, and building ON our property. Our family is unsure how to proceed in this situation. Is there any way that we can have her remove the fence from our property and disconnect our fences?

i0aq6o6

i0a5v2w

First, I'd hire my own surveyor the mark the lot. Second, if the fence indeed does come onto my property, I'd have a lawyer sent a demand letter to have her remove it. Not squashing this now leads to her claiming possession of the land down the road.

Did she build it herself or hire a service to build her fence?

tbxoyp

legaladvice_train

My family’s new neighbor connected our fences without permission and built onto our property **TL;DR:** Neighbor built her fence onto our property. She drilled her fence into our fence to connect them to avoid paying for another wall after agreeing specifically not to do that. Do we have any right to get her to remove the part on our property? I live in California (San Bernardino County) in a town in the mountains. Recently, a woman moved in next door into a house that was recently put onto the market. My family has not been fond of her since she moved in, but yesterday she took things to the next level. She had been planning on building a fence and connected a string from her house to our fence, which my parents assumed meant she would be connecting our fences. We put up a fence a few years ago, and it doesn’t rest on the property line. When we built our fences we left about 2 feet on either side and about 6 feet off the back of the fence so we had access to the entire property for weed abatement. My parents saw the string and immediately knocked on her door to explain the situation, however, she wasn’t home and my parents left a note which the boyfriend gave to her. The situation only worsened from there, which eventually led to the woman coming over to our house with surveyors (which my parents doubt the credibility of). The conversation basically ended with the woman agreeing to not build on our property, agreeing to leave the 2-foot gap between the fences, and then they left. We didn't have any of this in writing, which I admit we should have gotten, but we took her at her word. She lied. She drilled into our fence and connected hers so she wouldn’t have to pay for the last wall, making it so we no longer have access to the back part of our property, and building ON our property. Our family is unsure how to proceed in this situation. Is there any way that we can have her remove the fence from our property and disconnect our fences?

i0a5v2w

i0b3jwn

Did she build it herself or hire a service to build her fence?

Did she pull a permit? Depending on where you are your local village/town/whatever office makes you pull a permit for the fence and they inspect the placement before you install. Worth a call there first.

vxlwlp

legaladvice_train

Neighbor sanding my car without my permission Hello r/legaladvice , recently my neighbor with which I share an apartment building decided to take a wet sander or some kind of device to my Toyota. Originally there had been some clear coat damage when I bought the vehicle, but my neighbor has become infatuated with assisting me get rid of the spots and he decided to take action without my permission despite having a conversation with him the night previous to this occurring(I believe he was drunk, as he seems to be consistently all day). Doing this resulted in not only the complete destruction of the hood finish but in spots where clear coat was an issue, the paint has been stripped to the bare metal. This is not the first time he’s attempted to do something helpful and it’s gone wrong. I am especially upset due to the fact I planned on selling the car soon, and now I will probably get half of what I would’ve for it. Co-workers have been telling me to claim it on my comprehensive insurance and file a police report. The only issue is there are no cameras in my parking lot so I don’t have physical proof besides our several interjections over the topic. I don’t want to come off too harsh but this is just absolutely uncalled for and I have not felt frustration like this in a long time lol. At the end of the day I’m looking for the money to get my paint redone due to someone else’s mistake, what course of actions should I follow to ensure something is done? I have no photos currently as I was almost late to work upon the inspection of my vehicle so I will update this post as soon as I get the chance. Thank you for your time in advance.

ifwsy7l

ifwta5g

Not a Lawyer but maybe try talking to him about it. Now what I mean is first look up recording laws in your state and see if yours is one party consent, next if it is have a recording device on your person that's not noticable and record a conversation with him (if two party have a friend along who knows about the recording device). Have a casual conversation with your neighbor and bring up the topic of the car, and see if he'll admit to it. If you have him admitting on tape he did it you could file a report to the police and your insurance for property damage.

>Co-workers have been telling me to claim it on my comprehensive insurance and file a police report. Co-workers are right. Even if you can't end up proving he did it, if you have coverage for the damage to your vehicle, your insurance should handle the damages AND handle the attempt to hold your neighbor responsible. They will also try to recover your deductible against the neighbor. If you don't have comprehensive coverage, then your only option is to go after your neighbor directly. Ask him if he did it, if you can get it in a text or email even better. Depending on your state, look up if your state is a two-party or one-party consent state. If it's one party, then record the conversation (two party means he has to give permission to record). Then take whatever you can to court to prove it.

jrlp2l

legaladvice_train

I'm being harassed by the family of the man who shot up my workplace. 19 years ago there was a shooting at my workplace. A coworker shot up the shop and killed two people and injured two more, then killed himself. I was hit by three bullets and suffered very serious injuries. The shooting had a devastating impact on my life and that of my coworkers. Now I'm doing better and try to consider the whole event to be part of the past, however since about two months ago there have been posts circulating on local FB pages about the shooting. And some of my family and friends, and family and friends of coworkers that were shot that day have received weird messages through FB from some of the shooter's relatives. I'm not on FB so I received nothing directly. The posts/messages are about the shooter being wrongly accused. It says he was bullied at work and took a gun to protect himself. Other posts downright say we attacked him and he acted in self defense, or even that someone else did the crime and we conspired to have him accused and other nonsense. The truth is he was never bullied or attacked or anything. He didn't get along with the boss but that's it. Now there are posts on (at least) two of his relatives pages about what a great guy he was and so on, and how he was unjustly accused. Some posts seem to acknowledge that he was the shooter but find him excuses, and others pretend he's innocent. Some posts even accuse us of faking our injuries. Some posts could be seen as threatening, things like truth will soon be known and we're going to face consequences and so on. They're rewriting history completely. I think this is the work of a deranged person/deranged people in the shooter's family. There was scarce notice of the shooting in local media when it happened because it was just after 9/11 so obviously there was bigger news at the time. It means that people in town are rather ignorant of the facts. Because of this there are now rumors across town that maybe things are not as clear as they seem and just a few days ago someone asked me about "what happened exactly", which hadn't happened in years. This is very upsetting and traumatizing. I don't understand what they're trying to achieve 19 years later. I hate that the whole story is being brought back from the past and lies are being spread, and my and my co-workers honor is being questioned. Is there any way to make this stop? Could it be considered a case of defamation or slander or anything like that? Thanks for your help.

gbtult3

gbupfw2

It doesn’t sound like you’ve described defamation, but there’s never any harm in consulting with an attorney. People are entitled to their perceptions and their opinions. That your assailant was bullied or pressed into his actions is an opinion. That you attacked him is equally subject to interpretation and opinion.

Not a lawyer this could potentially fall under harassment; I would definitely consult a lawyer to see if there's a case. Also, please save and back up any evidence of communication, whether directed at you or other survivors of the shooting. If these people escalate their threats to explicit threats of violence it will be better to have a paper trail. Best of luck OP

jrlp2l

legaladvice_train

I'm being harassed by the family of the man who shot up my workplace. 19 years ago there was a shooting at my workplace. A coworker shot up the shop and killed two people and injured two more, then killed himself. I was hit by three bullets and suffered very serious injuries. The shooting had a devastating impact on my life and that of my coworkers. Now I'm doing better and try to consider the whole event to be part of the past, however since about two months ago there have been posts circulating on local FB pages about the shooting. And some of my family and friends, and family and friends of coworkers that were shot that day have received weird messages through FB from some of the shooter's relatives. I'm not on FB so I received nothing directly. The posts/messages are about the shooter being wrongly accused. It says he was bullied at work and took a gun to protect himself. Other posts downright say we attacked him and he acted in self defense, or even that someone else did the crime and we conspired to have him accused and other nonsense. The truth is he was never bullied or attacked or anything. He didn't get along with the boss but that's it. Now there are posts on (at least) two of his relatives pages about what a great guy he was and so on, and how he was unjustly accused. Some posts seem to acknowledge that he was the shooter but find him excuses, and others pretend he's innocent. Some posts even accuse us of faking our injuries. Some posts could be seen as threatening, things like truth will soon be known and we're going to face consequences and so on. They're rewriting history completely. I think this is the work of a deranged person/deranged people in the shooter's family. There was scarce notice of the shooting in local media when it happened because it was just after 9/11 so obviously there was bigger news at the time. It means that people in town are rather ignorant of the facts. Because of this there are now rumors across town that maybe things are not as clear as they seem and just a few days ago someone asked me about "what happened exactly", which hadn't happened in years. This is very upsetting and traumatizing. I don't understand what they're trying to achieve 19 years later. I hate that the whole story is being brought back from the past and lies are being spread, and my and my co-workers honor is being questioned. Is there any way to make this stop? Could it be considered a case of defamation or slander or anything like that? Thanks for your help.

gbvzld0

gby0plr

This sounds more like a matter for the police to be informed about than a lawyer. You can't sue on grounds of harassment because they haven't directly contacted you, but you may be able to go with defamation as this new narrative is harming your image, but you would have to prove that the damages are affecting your livelihood (ex your job prospects or how people treat you). You may be able to get a cease and desist letter sent telling them to stop or else facing a court case, but as things stand now, I don't think there is too much you could do. Still, consult a lawyer and hear what they have to say. The laws in your area may work better in your favor than they do in mine

> Some posts could be seen as threatening, things like truth will soon be known and we're going to face consequences and so on. Not a lawyer. Other posts have given very good advice. I just want to emphasize that they are already threatening you and these kinds of things sometimes escalate very quickly to a dangerous level. If the situation escalates to the point where you decide to go to a lawyer, judge or the Police, they are going to want to see evidence. The more evidence you have, and the more well-documented it is, the better chances you will have of getting the protection you would need. So start collecting all of the evidence you can, about these current harassments, and keep it in a safe, but readily accessible place so you can get to it in a hurry. Remember - there is a big difference between "facts" (what happened) and "evidence" (what you can prove). You need evidence. So gather as much as you can, and add to your pile of evidence as necessary. It would also be a good idea for you to contact other victims & witnesses to this shooting and ask them whether they are getting these same kinds of harassments about the shooting. If so, they also need to gather evidence. The evidence & testimony of 2 or more people carries more weight than just one person.

jrlp2l

legaladvice_train

I'm being harassed by the family of the man who shot up my workplace. 19 years ago there was a shooting at my workplace. A coworker shot up the shop and killed two people and injured two more, then killed himself. I was hit by three bullets and suffered very serious injuries. The shooting had a devastating impact on my life and that of my coworkers. Now I'm doing better and try to consider the whole event to be part of the past, however since about two months ago there have been posts circulating on local FB pages about the shooting. And some of my family and friends, and family and friends of coworkers that were shot that day have received weird messages through FB from some of the shooter's relatives. I'm not on FB so I received nothing directly. The posts/messages are about the shooter being wrongly accused. It says he was bullied at work and took a gun to protect himself. Other posts downright say we attacked him and he acted in self defense, or even that someone else did the crime and we conspired to have him accused and other nonsense. The truth is he was never bullied or attacked or anything. He didn't get along with the boss but that's it. Now there are posts on (at least) two of his relatives pages about what a great guy he was and so on, and how he was unjustly accused. Some posts seem to acknowledge that he was the shooter but find him excuses, and others pretend he's innocent. Some posts even accuse us of faking our injuries. Some posts could be seen as threatening, things like truth will soon be known and we're going to face consequences and so on. They're rewriting history completely. I think this is the work of a deranged person/deranged people in the shooter's family. There was scarce notice of the shooting in local media when it happened because it was just after 9/11 so obviously there was bigger news at the time. It means that people in town are rather ignorant of the facts. Because of this there are now rumors across town that maybe things are not as clear as they seem and just a few days ago someone asked me about "what happened exactly", which hadn't happened in years. This is very upsetting and traumatizing. I don't understand what they're trying to achieve 19 years later. I hate that the whole story is being brought back from the past and lies are being spread, and my and my co-workers honor is being questioned. Is there any way to make this stop? Could it be considered a case of defamation or slander or anything like that? Thanks for your help.

gbwsrdd

gby0plr

Not a lawyer. My uncle hit a man and his son in an 18 wheeler and killed them both. The man had drifted into my uncles lane on a motorcycle and there was no way to avoid it as it happened coming over a mountain. His family tormented and threatened my uncle for years. He did speak to a lawyer and pursue a harassment case, but he had to have tons of evidence of the harassment. You should speak to a lawyer and bring plenty of evidence of these posts. If there’s a possibility of a harassment claim, having everything documented will put you miles ahead of their baseless claims.

> Some posts could be seen as threatening, things like truth will soon be known and we're going to face consequences and so on. Not a lawyer. Other posts have given very good advice. I just want to emphasize that they are already threatening you and these kinds of things sometimes escalate very quickly to a dangerous level. If the situation escalates to the point where you decide to go to a lawyer, judge or the Police, they are going to want to see evidence. The more evidence you have, and the more well-documented it is, the better chances you will have of getting the protection you would need. So start collecting all of the evidence you can, about these current harassments, and keep it in a safe, but readily accessible place so you can get to it in a hurry. Remember - there is a big difference between "facts" (what happened) and "evidence" (what you can prove). You need evidence. So gather as much as you can, and add to your pile of evidence as necessary. It would also be a good idea for you to contact other victims & witnesses to this shooting and ask them whether they are getting these same kinds of harassments about the shooting. If so, they also need to gather evidence. The evidence & testimony of 2 or more people carries more weight than just one person.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdz4nhm

hdz4ato

A common way for a retirement plan to be handled in divorce is for the court to split it into two separate accounts altogether with what is called a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). To the extent possible under the plan, both spouses would be able to designate their own beneficiaries who would receive whatever the plan provides after their death. There are a number of possible reasons why that didn't happen here. But really, the simple matter is that it didn't. Your father's pension is his, and your sister has no legal claim to it. Engaging with her on this is not helpful for anyone. If she sues, hire an attorney and respond to the suit.

Maybe you and your dad should consider putting a restraining order on her. I had to do that to my brother who was heavily on hard drugs because he would harass me for money too and it stopped pretty quickly. She obviously doesn’t see your dad as family but an ATM and that must really hurt him. When your dad does pass you will be the next one she will be after about inheritance. Maybe your dad should consider removing her from his will all together if she’s treating him like that. It sucks but sometimes you need to give them tough love for them to look at their actions and change their priorities. My brother also has some mental health issues too and nothing is ever his fault.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdz4ato

hdz5tlv

Maybe you and your dad should consider putting a restraining order on her. I had to do that to my brother who was heavily on hard drugs because he would harass me for money too and it stopped pretty quickly. She obviously doesn’t see your dad as family but an ATM and that must really hurt him. When your dad does pass you will be the next one she will be after about inheritance. Maybe your dad should consider removing her from his will all together if she’s treating him like that. It sucks but sometimes you need to give them tough love for them to look at their actions and change their priorities. My brother also has some mental health issues too and nothing is ever his fault.

Others have commented with good advice, but nobody so far has mentioned the statute of limitations. Even if she has an ironclad legal position... The fact that her complaint is based upon something that happened / started 15 years ago means she is almost certainly barred by time. She could start an action (any one can, for anything) but the statute of limitations could be raised as defense.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdz5dpt

hdz5tlv

Sounds like the chances of you or another relative convincing your sister of this are between slim and none. Just ignore contact. If for some reason it's impossible to ignore her then tell her to ask her own lawyer to explain it to her.

Others have commented with good advice, but nobody so far has mentioned the statute of limitations. Even if she has an ironclad legal position... The fact that her complaint is based upon something that happened / started 15 years ago means she is almost certainly barred by time. She could start an action (any one can, for anything) but the statute of limitations could be raised as defense.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdz4ato

he0drrw

Maybe you and your dad should consider putting a restraining order on her. I had to do that to my brother who was heavily on hard drugs because he would harass me for money too and it stopped pretty quickly. She obviously doesn’t see your dad as family but an ATM and that must really hurt him. When your dad does pass you will be the next one she will be after about inheritance. Maybe your dad should consider removing her from his will all together if she’s treating him like that. It sucks but sometimes you need to give them tough love for them to look at their actions and change their priorities. My brother also has some mental health issues too and nothing is ever his fault.

Do what my grandmother did, if anyone contest the will after fathers said death, they get $1. My aunt did this with my mother and siblings, and she got a $1. Still trying to contest it, but nope.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

he048ya

he0drrw

Your sister is not legally entitled to anything. A judge would not even hear this case as it has zero legal basis. Since a parent does not have any legal responsibility to a child once the child is an adult, this is the same thing as an absolute stranger demanding money.

Do what my grandmother did, if anyone contest the will after fathers said death, they get $1. My aunt did this with my mother and siblings, and she got a $1. Still trying to contest it, but nope.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

he0drrw

hdz5dpt

Do what my grandmother did, if anyone contest the will after fathers said death, they get $1. My aunt did this with my mother and siblings, and she got a $1. Still trying to contest it, but nope.

Sounds like the chances of you or another relative convincing your sister of this are between slim and none. Just ignore contact. If for some reason it's impossible to ignore her then tell her to ask her own lawyer to explain it to her.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdz8xhu

he0drrw

Tell her to put her money where her mouth is and hire an attorney. Let her take it to court, find out she's in the wrong, AND have to pay for it. That's IF she can find an attorney willing to take it to court. Most of them will just explain that she has no legal standing, and refuse to take the case. Your dad needs to hire a competent elder law attorney and get his affairs in order. If he will allow it, you or another family member should go with him and explain the mentally ill sibling situation.

Do what my grandmother did, if anyone contest the will after fathers said death, they get $1. My aunt did this with my mother and siblings, and she got a $1. Still trying to contest it, but nope.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdzacxn

he0drrw

Do you know where her sense of entitlement comes from? Did she take care of your Mom before she died? If you think mental health is involved, I'd protect yourself with an attorney first and look into factors not related to money that would cause her to be this way.

Do what my grandmother did, if anyone contest the will after fathers said death, they get $1. My aunt did this with my mother and siblings, and she got a $1. Still trying to contest it, but nope.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

he0drrw

hdzg2zn

Do what my grandmother did, if anyone contest the will after fathers said death, they get $1. My aunt did this with my mother and siblings, and she got a $1. Still trying to contest it, but nope.

What jurisdiction are you in? What type of pension does your Dad receive, government or private company pension?

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdz8xhu

he048ya

Tell her to put her money where her mouth is and hire an attorney. Let her take it to court, find out she's in the wrong, AND have to pay for it. That's IF she can find an attorney willing to take it to court. Most of them will just explain that she has no legal standing, and refuse to take the case. Your dad needs to hire a competent elder law attorney and get his affairs in order. If he will allow it, you or another family member should go with him and explain the mentally ill sibling situation.

Your sister is not legally entitled to anything. A judge would not even hear this case as it has zero legal basis. Since a parent does not have any legal responsibility to a child once the child is an adult, this is the same thing as an absolute stranger demanding money.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

he048ya

hdzacxn

Your sister is not legally entitled to anything. A judge would not even hear this case as it has zero legal basis. Since a parent does not have any legal responsibility to a child once the child is an adult, this is the same thing as an absolute stranger demanding money.

Do you know where her sense of entitlement comes from? Did she take care of your Mom before she died? If you think mental health is involved, I'd protect yourself with an attorney first and look into factors not related to money that would cause her to be this way.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdzg2zn

he048ya

What jurisdiction are you in? What type of pension does your Dad receive, government or private company pension?

Your sister is not legally entitled to anything. A judge would not even hear this case as it has zero legal basis. Since a parent does not have any legal responsibility to a child once the child is an adult, this is the same thing as an absolute stranger demanding money.

ptv798

legaladvice_train

My sister has harassed our family since the passing of our mother, insisting that she is owed the portion of our living father's pension that was being paid to my mother while she was alive. My mother passed away 15 years ago. It was traumatic for my whole family, but especially for my sister who has suffered from untreated (she is treatment adverse) mental and emotional illness. One of the symptoms of my sister's illness is an obsession with money, often believing she is owed it from people in her life (boyfriend, aunts and uncles, my father). My mother and father divorced about 6 years before my mother passed away and my father retired 2 or 3 years after that. In the divorce agreement, my mother got some meaningful portion of my father's pension. The story goes that my mother tried to put a clause in the divorce contract stating that if anything were to happen to her, that benefit would pass along to her children. My father and his lawyer challenged this and the clause was removed. So, my mother was receiving a portion of my father's pension payments until she passed. After she passed, my father received the entirety of his pension payments. My sisters and I did not receive anything. My sister has verbally and emotionally abused my father and our entire immediate and extended family about this. She has tried to build alliances against my father, played others off each other, been extremely manipulative, demanded agreement that she is right, and demanded mediation (despite no legal challenge to mediate). It has been terrible, especially for her, as she has wasted years being angry and enraged that she has not received what she is "owed." Her obsession with this has come at the cost of her health, education, career, and life as well as the health and happiness of our family. At this point she is estranged from most everyone in the family, and those she is not estranged from seem to either absorb her diatribes and verbal assaults as an act of love and familial duty, or pay her the ransom of the moment (rent, medical bill, new computer, etc.) Today, she is not only demanding the portion of my father's pension moving forward, but also back payments for the last 15 years since my mothers death. These demands come of family members, but never once through the courts. It doesn't make any sense to me that children of divorce and subsequent death of a parent would receive a portion of their living parent's pension. Am I off base here? Does she have a case to be made? If that divorce contract clause would have stayed, would it have even been legitimate? I would appreciate any advice you can offer. Thank you!

hdzg2zn

he14t6y

What jurisdiction are you in? What type of pension does your Dad receive, government or private company pension?

Christ, I and my family are dealing with something similar with my sister at the moment too. Our dad passed away last year and she seems to have just cracked. It began before he died, she even fell out with him repeatedly in the couple of years before his death in quite nasty fashion. She has since said it's her biggest regret, but she's now repeating the pattern with my brother and I, as well as our mum...it's become frankly overwhelming to handle. We all love her, and she's clearly not well at the moment, but the sheer level of paranoia, anger, aggression, and accusatory remarks has meant that none of us can remain on speaking terms with her longer than a few weeks at a time. Feel for you OP, 15 years of that behaviour must have been absolutely miserable, sincerely hope it comes to an end eventually.

ywq5xx

legaladvice_train

Lost my home to a fire, then had my belongings stolen due to the property management leaving my unit unlocked. What action can I take? Last month around the end of October I woke up to my fire alarms going off. I noticed smoke in my unit and went to go open my door only to see that the hallway of my complex was pitch black from the smoke. I got dressed as quickly as I could, got my cat in his carrier, grabbed my laptop and hopped out of my window. The fire was eventually put out and luckily no one was hurt besides some injuries form jumping out windows and some minor smoke inhalation. Me and the other tenants were also very lucky that the fire didn't spread passed the hallway into any of the units. I showed up later the day of the fire to pick up some spare clothes and hygiene products to hold me over until I figured out what the outcome would be. Sadly due to the nature and intensity of the fire and smoke the apartment was condemned later on that week and we were all given until the end of the month to retrieve our property. When I arrived at my unit a few days later I found my door had been unlocked with no signs of forced entry. Many of my belongings had been stolen. My television, ps4, miscellaneous cords, a tablet, some spare gun parts, and some sentimental items that I won't be able to get back. When I called the property management they gave me no answers as to why my unit had been unlocked, how this could have happened, etc. I was simply told to file a police report and that was the end of it for them. I later found out that I was not the only tenant who had had their apartment looted by talking to some other tenants who were also picking up property. I have witnesses that saw me lock my unit when I left on the day of the fire, and in order for the apartment to be condemned the fire inspector must have been let into the units. It's pretty obvious that someone from the property management had unlocked the door to let the fire inspector look over my unit, but left it unlocked for whatever reason. What action if any can I take against my property management to at least be reimbursed for the property I lost due to their negligence? Losing my apartment due to a fire and looking for a new place to live was stressful enough, but then losing much of my property was really the icing on the cake.

iwmlch9

iwl9de6

Not a lawyer an old friend was on restoration crew. Like they come in and board up windows and asses cleanup cost. They would take people's things all the time and resell of marketplace. They justify it by saying insurance covers it

How did a witness see you lock your unit if you left via the window?

x7ox1p

legaladvice_train

My mother’s personal details were stolen from her work and posted on Facebook Hi all, I’ll try to keep this short. My mom works for a state department in the state she lives in. My dad died in November. Suddenly in June, dozens of hand written letters arrive in my mothers home mailbox of people saying they were sorry for her loss and knowing about her likes, dislikes, and information about her family. My mom did some digging and discovered that her office manager accessed my mothers employee file and posted her name, birth date, home address, that she is a widow who now lives alone, and details about her personal life on a Facebook group for strangers to write letters to lonely old people. She isn’t even friends with my mom, my mom would have never given permission for this, and my mom feels totally violated. She contacted the HR people and they have closed the investigation, but the woman who stole her information is still in the office as my mothers manager. My mom feels totally uncomfortable. What can she do? She has received nearly 100 different cards, letters, and packages from these strangers.

ingqq3p

inh209b

Not a lawyer, but work for a state agency. My states agencies have a local HR dept and then have a Department of Administration. If local HR hasn't done anything to support your mom, make sure the information was taken down, and has dropped the investigation, reach out to the DOA and to her union rep to help advocate. My job also allows me to participate in a group lawyer insurance type plan for like $2 a month, and I have a lawyer I can call and ask questions. Your mom might have this benefit, so check and see if you have a lawyer available to her that she's already paid for. The lawyer insurance is 3rd party and isn't paid directly by the employer, so there won't be any conflict.

In addition to the data breach and violation, the fact that your mother's home address and so much of her personal information is/was intentionally put out into the public puts her safety at risk. If possible, can your mother move? At the very least, get a security system installed, and make HR pay for it. Find an employment lawyer to help you. The malicious intent is there, and that makes it a hostile environment for your mother as an employee.

xbrkej

legaladvice_train

Im being forced to move today due to a major plumbing issue the home owner won’t fix; he expects me to continue paying the utilities until he sells the house. The home owner is unable to afford to fix the plumbing issue and has decided to sell the house. The issue is so severe the home is unliveable until it is fixed. He expects me to continue to pay utilities until he sells. I am not on a lease. I don’t have any ownership of the home other than the utilities are in my name. I thought about asking him to pay me back for the utilities for the weeks/months until he sells, but he is behind on EVERY bill (the mortgage, his car payment, the internet bill, his ps5 rental, his guitar payments, thousands owed to friends and family that he’s never paid them back for after borrowing…..) and I know he would NEVER pay me back for the utilities. I already paid rent for the entire month of September even though I haven’t been able to live here at all since 8/31 because of the plumbing issue (feces water backs up and floods the downstairs bathroom anytime any toilet is flushed, shower or sink or washer used….). I am paying thousands to board my dogs until I can move in with my mom. I REALLY cannot afford utilities for a house I’m not living in. Is it wrong of me to turn off the utilities when he takes my key tomorrow? Can I legally do that? What are my rights here? Any advice is appreciated.

io1w928

io259bf

That is not a reasonable request. Don’t even keep them in your name. You should also get your September rent back and your full security deposit if there is one. If he is behind on every other bill he owes you are unlikely to get your rent and deposit back. Why give him more money for nothing?

Where I am you can call the utility companies and tell them you're vacating the property and they should be transferred to the homeowner. They may have information on file already, or they may ask for it, but be very clear that you are terminating your responsibility. Then put in a google doc the date & time of the call (hell, take a screenshot of your call log to prove you were talking to them & didn't just call and hang up). That google doc is something you should be using to document everything happening with this shit show so that if you end up in court you'll have undeniable documentation.

xbrkej

legaladvice_train

Im being forced to move today due to a major plumbing issue the home owner won’t fix; he expects me to continue paying the utilities until he sells the house. The home owner is unable to afford to fix the plumbing issue and has decided to sell the house. The issue is so severe the home is unliveable until it is fixed. He expects me to continue to pay utilities until he sells. I am not on a lease. I don’t have any ownership of the home other than the utilities are in my name. I thought about asking him to pay me back for the utilities for the weeks/months until he sells, but he is behind on EVERY bill (the mortgage, his car payment, the internet bill, his ps5 rental, his guitar payments, thousands owed to friends and family that he’s never paid them back for after borrowing…..) and I know he would NEVER pay me back for the utilities. I already paid rent for the entire month of September even though I haven’t been able to live here at all since 8/31 because of the plumbing issue (feces water backs up and floods the downstairs bathroom anytime any toilet is flushed, shower or sink or washer used….). I am paying thousands to board my dogs until I can move in with my mom. I REALLY cannot afford utilities for a house I’m not living in. Is it wrong of me to turn off the utilities when he takes my key tomorrow? Can I legally do that? What are my rights here? Any advice is appreciated.

io259bf

io1n8c4

Where I am you can call the utility companies and tell them you're vacating the property and they should be transferred to the homeowner. They may have information on file already, or they may ask for it, but be very clear that you are terminating your responsibility. Then put in a google doc the date & time of the call (hell, take a screenshot of your call log to prove you were talking to them & didn't just call and hang up). That google doc is something you should be using to document everything happening with this shit show so that if you end up in court you'll have undeniable documentation.

You need to shut them off immediately!

xbrkej

legaladvice_train

Im being forced to move today due to a major plumbing issue the home owner won’t fix; he expects me to continue paying the utilities until he sells the house. The home owner is unable to afford to fix the plumbing issue and has decided to sell the house. The issue is so severe the home is unliveable until it is fixed. He expects me to continue to pay utilities until he sells. I am not on a lease. I don’t have any ownership of the home other than the utilities are in my name. I thought about asking him to pay me back for the utilities for the weeks/months until he sells, but he is behind on EVERY bill (the mortgage, his car payment, the internet bill, his ps5 rental, his guitar payments, thousands owed to friends and family that he’s never paid them back for after borrowing…..) and I know he would NEVER pay me back for the utilities. I already paid rent for the entire month of September even though I haven’t been able to live here at all since 8/31 because of the plumbing issue (feces water backs up and floods the downstairs bathroom anytime any toilet is flushed, shower or sink or washer used….). I am paying thousands to board my dogs until I can move in with my mom. I REALLY cannot afford utilities for a house I’m not living in. Is it wrong of me to turn off the utilities when he takes my key tomorrow? Can I legally do that? What are my rights here? Any advice is appreciated.

io259bf

io1tb8j

Where I am you can call the utility companies and tell them you're vacating the property and they should be transferred to the homeowner. They may have information on file already, or they may ask for it, but be very clear that you are terminating your responsibility. Then put in a google doc the date & time of the call (hell, take a screenshot of your call log to prove you were talking to them & didn't just call and hang up). That google doc is something you should be using to document everything happening with this shit show so that if you end up in court you'll have undeniable documentation.

You paid rent for September, you have rights to the property until September unless he refunds you, you are not legally obligated to turn over the keys until the end of september. Maybe contact a lawyer because this man would owe you for any fees associated with this including the cost to board your dogs. Be wary tho because he probably won't have the money to pay for it, so weigh your options on that. Maybe offer cash for keys, as in he can have the keys back in exchange for a refund or partial refund of September's rent in order to lower your financial loss due to this situation. Just know that legally, you do not have to turn over the keys until the end of September and i wouldnt because they are one of the few leverages you have in this situation. A verbal lease is still a lease, just month to month by default according to the law. I would cut off the utilities ASAP, as well as print out any record of you paying for utilities and rent and keep them in a safe spot in case you might need them for any type of court if you do pursue damages or they attempt a small claims suit (they have ZERO standing but anyone can sue for anything) By record I mean, bank statements, texts, emails, letters, bills and so on. Images you have of the problems are also good to keep on hand and available as well and should be put somewhere safe in a cloud as well. From now on, if you can, only contact your landlord via text or email and save every conversation. Look up the recording laws in your state, if it is legal, record ALL interactions with the landlord. This will help you in case they attempt to come at you for damages even though it is not your liability. Be firm and DO NOT continue paying for utilities of a place that you do not live in, that could hurt your credit immensely if they rack the bills up so high you can't pay.

xbrkej

legaladvice_train

Im being forced to move today due to a major plumbing issue the home owner won’t fix; he expects me to continue paying the utilities until he sells the house. The home owner is unable to afford to fix the plumbing issue and has decided to sell the house. The issue is so severe the home is unliveable until it is fixed. He expects me to continue to pay utilities until he sells. I am not on a lease. I don’t have any ownership of the home other than the utilities are in my name. I thought about asking him to pay me back for the utilities for the weeks/months until he sells, but he is behind on EVERY bill (the mortgage, his car payment, the internet bill, his ps5 rental, his guitar payments, thousands owed to friends and family that he’s never paid them back for after borrowing…..) and I know he would NEVER pay me back for the utilities. I already paid rent for the entire month of September even though I haven’t been able to live here at all since 8/31 because of the plumbing issue (feces water backs up and floods the downstairs bathroom anytime any toilet is flushed, shower or sink or washer used….). I am paying thousands to board my dogs until I can move in with my mom. I REALLY cannot afford utilities for a house I’m not living in. Is it wrong of me to turn off the utilities when he takes my key tomorrow? Can I legally do that? What are my rights here? Any advice is appreciated.

io1n8c4

io1w928

You need to shut them off immediately!

That is not a reasonable request. Don’t even keep them in your name. You should also get your September rent back and your full security deposit if there is one. If he is behind on every other bill he owes you are unlikely to get your rent and deposit back. Why give him more money for nothing?

xbrkej

legaladvice_train

Im being forced to move today due to a major plumbing issue the home owner won’t fix; he expects me to continue paying the utilities until he sells the house. The home owner is unable to afford to fix the plumbing issue and has decided to sell the house. The issue is so severe the home is unliveable until it is fixed. He expects me to continue to pay utilities until he sells. I am not on a lease. I don’t have any ownership of the home other than the utilities are in my name. I thought about asking him to pay me back for the utilities for the weeks/months until he sells, but he is behind on EVERY bill (the mortgage, his car payment, the internet bill, his ps5 rental, his guitar payments, thousands owed to friends and family that he’s never paid them back for after borrowing…..) and I know he would NEVER pay me back for the utilities. I already paid rent for the entire month of September even though I haven’t been able to live here at all since 8/31 because of the plumbing issue (feces water backs up and floods the downstairs bathroom anytime any toilet is flushed, shower or sink or washer used….). I am paying thousands to board my dogs until I can move in with my mom. I REALLY cannot afford utilities for a house I’m not living in. Is it wrong of me to turn off the utilities when he takes my key tomorrow? Can I legally do that? What are my rights here? Any advice is appreciated.

io1tb8j

io1w928

You paid rent for September, you have rights to the property until September unless he refunds you, you are not legally obligated to turn over the keys until the end of september. Maybe contact a lawyer because this man would owe you for any fees associated with this including the cost to board your dogs. Be wary tho because he probably won't have the money to pay for it, so weigh your options on that. Maybe offer cash for keys, as in he can have the keys back in exchange for a refund or partial refund of September's rent in order to lower your financial loss due to this situation. Just know that legally, you do not have to turn over the keys until the end of September and i wouldnt because they are one of the few leverages you have in this situation. A verbal lease is still a lease, just month to month by default according to the law. I would cut off the utilities ASAP, as well as print out any record of you paying for utilities and rent and keep them in a safe spot in case you might need them for any type of court if you do pursue damages or they attempt a small claims suit (they have ZERO standing but anyone can sue for anything) By record I mean, bank statements, texts, emails, letters, bills and so on. Images you have of the problems are also good to keep on hand and available as well and should be put somewhere safe in a cloud as well. From now on, if you can, only contact your landlord via text or email and save every conversation. Look up the recording laws in your state, if it is legal, record ALL interactions with the landlord. This will help you in case they attempt to come at you for damages even though it is not your liability. Be firm and DO NOT continue paying for utilities of a place that you do not live in, that could hurt your credit immensely if they rack the bills up so high you can't pay.

That is not a reasonable request. Don’t even keep them in your name. You should also get your September rent back and your full security deposit if there is one. If he is behind on every other bill he owes you are unlikely to get your rent and deposit back. Why give him more money for nothing?

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df20964

df26hz3

Economic pressure doesn't constitute duress, and no, you can't make a document to challenge a contract ahead of time, because generally, the parole evidence rule makes anything like that inadmissible anyway. However, if the contract is so unfair to you, and you have to sign because you are under economic pressure, then it may make the contract unconscionable, but that would be up to a court. You haven't really made your situation clear, but I'm going to guess, from what you've said, that you're in a situation where you've created some potentially valuable IP with some partners, and they are going to create a corporation without you. The upside of that situation is that they get to take all the risk, and you get to sue if it works out. Provided you don't miss a statute of limitation period, you have some time to sue, and if they make a boat-load of cash, you can probably get a lawyer to represent you on contingency. Document everything, and don't sign anything you don't agree with, because down the road, your lawyer will thank you for not signing a contract with a bunch of waivers of liability in it, because they won't have to spend days in court pouring over a contract.

Your concept of duress is likely no where near what the law actually requires...

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df1zx7k

df26hz3

Notarizing a document only works to prove that it's you who signed it. There is no magic in notarizing a document that makes it "more legally binding" than anything else. Unless you think that there is a chance that the other side will argue that you didn't sign it, or that you didn't sign it on that day, then this will be no more effective than anything else you write down to that effect. You can choose not to sign the contract with unfavorable terms, or to negotiate better terms if you want. But you can't sign the contract, and then later say get out of it because you didn't really like the terms when you signed it.

Your concept of duress is likely no where near what the law actually requires...

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df26hz3

df20ak7

Your concept of duress is likely no where near what the law actually requires...

So why not let them form the company without you?

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df24r06

df26hz3

It sounds to me like these people don't know what they are doing from a legal perspective, and that they have probably written all of the agreements that you have signed thus far, and that they have written the one that they want you to sign now. It sounds like nothing between any of you has ever been reviewed by an actual attorney. If that's the case, then nobody can say what might or might not hold up in court. Do you think that these people owe you anything right now, or that they may owe you something in the future? For instance, you claim to own some % of some businesses with them. Do you hope to get paid for that somehow, someday? If so, then when and how? Why do you need to sign anything with them? Why not just beat the rush and sue them for whatever you believe you have cause to sue them for.

Your concept of duress is likely no where near what the law actually requires...

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df26hz3

df21cfh

Your concept of duress is likely no where near what the law actually requires...

>Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit? Not likely. You can't write a document saying that you will soon sign a different document but your signature on the different document shouldn't "count". Of course, it's POSSIBLE that your signature on the different document shouldn't count (for instance, if the person asking you to sign that document was actually holding a real gun to your head at the time). But all you are saying is that for some unstated reasons you think that you are "under duress". Well, that would be up to the court to determine - and your prior document saying that you are "under duress", in and of itself, doesn't prove that you were "under duress".

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df20964

df1zx7k

Economic pressure doesn't constitute duress, and no, you can't make a document to challenge a contract ahead of time, because generally, the parole evidence rule makes anything like that inadmissible anyway. However, if the contract is so unfair to you, and you have to sign because you are under economic pressure, then it may make the contract unconscionable, but that would be up to a court. You haven't really made your situation clear, but I'm going to guess, from what you've said, that you're in a situation where you've created some potentially valuable IP with some partners, and they are going to create a corporation without you. The upside of that situation is that they get to take all the risk, and you get to sue if it works out. Provided you don't miss a statute of limitation period, you have some time to sue, and if they make a boat-load of cash, you can probably get a lawyer to represent you on contingency. Document everything, and don't sign anything you don't agree with, because down the road, your lawyer will thank you for not signing a contract with a bunch of waivers of liability in it, because they won't have to spend days in court pouring over a contract.

Notarizing a document only works to prove that it's you who signed it. There is no magic in notarizing a document that makes it "more legally binding" than anything else. Unless you think that there is a chance that the other side will argue that you didn't sign it, or that you didn't sign it on that day, then this will be no more effective than anything else you write down to that effect. You can choose not to sign the contract with unfavorable terms, or to negotiate better terms if you want. But you can't sign the contract, and then later say get out of it because you didn't really like the terms when you signed it.

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df21cfh

df27n1h

>Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit? Not likely. You can't write a document saying that you will soon sign a different document but your signature on the different document shouldn't "count". Of course, it's POSSIBLE that your signature on the different document shouldn't count (for instance, if the person asking you to sign that document was actually holding a real gun to your head at the time). But all you are saying is that for some unstated reasons you think that you are "under duress". Well, that would be up to the court to determine - and your prior document saying that you are "under duress", in and of itself, doesn't prove that you were "under duress".

Absolutely refuse to sign the contract. Since this is based on software/it/IP that you created, did you do so while being compensated as an employee of the other companies or were you paid via profit-share/partner-draw/dividends or was this done "after hours"? This is very important, because it would decide where the ownership of the IP exists. If you did this as an employee for another company, it could be construed as "work for hire", if you did it on your own you would own 100% of it until you assign the interest in the invention over to a legal entity. I don't know what would happen if it were done as a partnership, an attorney would know. You absolutely must hire an attorney ASAP. You want someone with experience in Employment Law and "Assignment of Inventions", corporate formations, and general business. Hopefully you can claim the IP as your own, issue a Cease & Desist on them using it at all, and insist on 100% of assets of any new company, letting them bargain down from there.

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df27vka

df21cfh

> The problem is, it's this contract as it is **or nothing.** Are you familiar with BATNA? "Best alternative to negotiated agreement." Any time you're in negotiations - whether you're the strong party or the weak one - this is worth holding in mind. If we don't agree to this contract, what's the best alternative? In other words, in light of everything you say you're losing in this contract, what are you *getting* that makes it worth it? It doesn't sound like anything. So why would you sign this? I'm asking you to see the *value* in nothing - currently, the BATNA is that you keep everything you've done in the past 17 years and in the future, the value of any labor you perform for the company, the option to work anywhere you like, the right to sue them for disparagement if they pass along false information to your future prospective employers, your own power of attorney, and the right to sue them for breach of any future contracts you may make with them. Like, nothing sounds *pretty fucking good* here. What's wrong with nothing? > so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. No, it's "sign it or get a huge amount of your rights and future income" kind of deal. They've offered you a "contract" that is substantially worse than BATNA, which is, to wit, "telling them to pound sand and not signing it" and then getting everything I just outlined above. They're terrible negotiators, who are winning only in this situation because *you're* even worse (since you're considering a deal that is worse than BATNA.) People act like the art of negotiating is some kind of double-poker-face reverse-psychology mental head-fake, but that's the furthest from the truth. The art of negotiating is not accepting bad deals. That's it. What's a bad deal? A bad deal is the one that leaves you worse off than no deal, that is it say, the deal that is worse than BATNA, and that is certainly this contract.

>Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit? Not likely. You can't write a document saying that you will soon sign a different document but your signature on the different document shouldn't "count". Of course, it's POSSIBLE that your signature on the different document shouldn't count (for instance, if the person asking you to sign that document was actually holding a real gun to your head at the time). But all you are saying is that for some unstated reasons you think that you are "under duress". Well, that would be up to the court to determine - and your prior document saying that you are "under duress", in and of itself, doesn't prove that you were "under duress".

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df21cfh

df24r06

>Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit? Not likely. You can't write a document saying that you will soon sign a different document but your signature on the different document shouldn't "count". Of course, it's POSSIBLE that your signature on the different document shouldn't count (for instance, if the person asking you to sign that document was actually holding a real gun to your head at the time). But all you are saying is that for some unstated reasons you think that you are "under duress". Well, that would be up to the court to determine - and your prior document saying that you are "under duress", in and of itself, doesn't prove that you were "under duress".

It sounds to me like these people don't know what they are doing from a legal perspective, and that they have probably written all of the agreements that you have signed thus far, and that they have written the one that they want you to sign now. It sounds like nothing between any of you has ever been reviewed by an actual attorney. If that's the case, then nobody can say what might or might not hold up in court. Do you think that these people owe you anything right now, or that they may owe you something in the future? For instance, you claim to own some % of some businesses with them. Do you hope to get paid for that somehow, someday? If so, then when and how? Why do you need to sign anything with them? Why not just beat the rush and sue them for whatever you believe you have cause to sue them for.

5zycf8

legaladvice_train

Generally speaking, would a notarized document have any effect in court against a signed contract I'm being forced into? I know I need a lawyer, but right now I'm just looking for a general legal point of view. TL;DR; Can signing a protest document and having it notarized challenge a contract in the future that I'm being forced into? Details: Due to circumstances, I'm being forced to sign a contract that does not have favorable terms for me. In fact, it could fuck me pretty bad in the future in the event the other two people involved decided to. The problem is, it's this contract as it is or nothing. And I can't afford to sue them at the moment. And they know all this. They know they have me between a rock and a hard place. Sign the contract they presented as is or nothing. We all did the same amount of work up to this point. The thing is, the terms of the agreement are so egregious, I'm hoping the court looks at this and allows me to challenge it. A few things in it that are ridiculous: * they own everything I've done in the past 17 years * they have some kind of claim over anything I do in the future bc it derives from the past * I have to do work for this company whenever they want without pay * I'm not allowed to work in my current position or any other position I have before bc I have 'proprietary information' * they can contact any employer I have in the future and prevent me from working in my profession bc of the terms of the contract * they have power of attorney to sign any document in my place, even if I refuse * they can use dilute my stock at any time and not their own (They are only giving me 10 and they are taking 45 each) * I agree that I can never sue them for any reason. And it goes on. This is the most aggressive contract I've ever read. And they can fuck me any time they want. **The kicker is it has a half page in all capital letters with a disclaimer said in about 10 different ways that I'm agreeing that I'm not 'under duress'. But I am under duress. And they know it. They know I have to sign it or I have no recourse to stop them and they can include whatever they want and I can't negotiate it.** But I have to sign it as is. And they know I can't afford to sue them if they form this company without me, so it's a sign it or get nothing kind of deal. So my question is, since the terms are so egregious, and they know I have no choice and no recourse right now and I am being forced to sign whatever they want, can I go get a document signed that says (in general) > 'I am under duress. They know I have no option or recourse and I have been informed that I either sign the contract the way it is or get nothing and there is nothing I can do about it.' and go get it notarized and dated at the bank before signing the contract. Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit?

df21cfh

df2a84b

>Would this help at all in the future in case of a dispute/lawsuit? Not likely. You can't write a document saying that you will soon sign a different document but your signature on the different document shouldn't "count". Of course, it's POSSIBLE that your signature on the different document shouldn't count (for instance, if the person asking you to sign that document was actually holding a real gun to your head at the time). But all you are saying is that for some unstated reasons you think that you are "under duress". Well, that would be up to the court to determine - and your prior document saying that you are "under duress", in and of itself, doesn't prove that you were "under duress".

As an engineer who has dealt with IP through out my career - you don't have to sign it as it is. Just take a blue pen and start striking out everything you don't like (actually just right null and void across the entire thing). Actually, this is so egregious - I would NEVER even consider signing it. Just run it through a shredder, put the remains in a small baggie and return it to them. I would never sign anything from them. Start looking for another job ASAP.

x3cu7n

legaladvice_train

How do I press charges for child abuse & sexual abuse of a minor? What legal options do I have, if any? I am the mother of just one of his victims. We had a child together and separated by the time the child was 5. We live in the same state but different counties so it was easy to coparent while also having our personal space. When our child turned 16 I got very ill & diagnosed with a chronic illness. I truly believed letting child live with their father full time during this period was in the best interest of my child. A year and a half later I was in remission. I didn’t want to have them switch schools again and put them through any more stress. They turned 18 halfway through her senior year and decided on their own that they wanted to come home with me. I just was so happy to have my baby back home with me that I didn’t question anything. Then graduation rolls around. We have our tickets, a whole party planned after, family coming in from around the country to be there. That’s when my child tells me they do not want the father there. I was shocked. I respected their wishes but did try to question why? The graduation ceremony went off without a hitch. Everything was going great until the father showed up to the celebration later that night. My child ran, hid, & dialed 911. Something is very wrong. They refuse to talk to police. All they will say is that they don’t want him there. I’ve never seen my child so afraid. He’s trespassed from the property. Party is over. The next day my child begins to tell me what their father did. They have video of him brutally beating them and all sorts of abuse. Then the bombshell of sexual abuse. And they aren’t the only victim. My child refuses to even get e restraining order out of fear of threats made if they ever spoke out. The only underage victim I know doesn’t have anyone to press charges for them and they are also terrified. Unfortunately in that case, the victim’s mother says she doesn’t believe her. She has moved away from my ex, gotten her children out of the same house as him but she has completely changed. She can’t even get out of bed to work anymore. She abuses drugs to cope with the pain. Please tell me this isn’t legal? Just because we all have rights doesn’t actually mean that he can get away with these crimes, does it? I called police. The victim has to press charges because they have since turned 18 is all I’m told. Is that legal? I’ve called police, the sheriff, the abuse hotline & CPS for our state. I’m getting nowhere and I don’t know what legal rights I have. Aren’t you supposed to say something if you see something? Wouldn’t I being risking criminal charges if kept silent and allowed him to keep committing these crimes & more? Please don’t remove my post because I don’t know the legal system well enough to know exactly what the legal definition is of the help that we desperately need. There is a statue of limitations for reporting. Do I just have to pray that my child turns their father in before that? It’s cruel to make a victim have to tell their story over and over again just for a semblance of justice. It’s unimaginable to put your own child through that. Is it legal to force an 18 year old to press charges? Couldn’t they just testify?

imomz71

imol4uo

She is the victim, and if she does not want the investigation to proceed, then it almost certainly will not proceed- there is nothing you can do to change that.

>. My child refuses to even get e restraining order out of fear of threats made if they ever spoke out. Then dont try to force her to do something she doesnt want to do. She is an adult and makes her own choices You cannot do anything as this isnt your issue anymore. CPS cannot do anything, she isnt a child. You need to back off and let her control her life. She is already dealing with a lot and having another parent betray her and control her is not going to help. Get some therapy to work through this

x3cu7n

legaladvice_train

How do I press charges for child abuse & sexual abuse of a minor? What legal options do I have, if any? I am the mother of just one of his victims. We had a child together and separated by the time the child was 5. We live in the same state but different counties so it was easy to coparent while also having our personal space. When our child turned 16 I got very ill & diagnosed with a chronic illness. I truly believed letting child live with their father full time during this period was in the best interest of my child. A year and a half later I was in remission. I didn’t want to have them switch schools again and put them through any more stress. They turned 18 halfway through her senior year and decided on their own that they wanted to come home with me. I just was so happy to have my baby back home with me that I didn’t question anything. Then graduation rolls around. We have our tickets, a whole party planned after, family coming in from around the country to be there. That’s when my child tells me they do not want the father there. I was shocked. I respected their wishes but did try to question why? The graduation ceremony went off without a hitch. Everything was going great until the father showed up to the celebration later that night. My child ran, hid, & dialed 911. Something is very wrong. They refuse to talk to police. All they will say is that they don’t want him there. I’ve never seen my child so afraid. He’s trespassed from the property. Party is over. The next day my child begins to tell me what their father did. They have video of him brutally beating them and all sorts of abuse. Then the bombshell of sexual abuse. And they aren’t the only victim. My child refuses to even get e restraining order out of fear of threats made if they ever spoke out. The only underage victim I know doesn’t have anyone to press charges for them and they are also terrified. Unfortunately in that case, the victim’s mother says she doesn’t believe her. She has moved away from my ex, gotten her children out of the same house as him but she has completely changed. She can’t even get out of bed to work anymore. She abuses drugs to cope with the pain. Please tell me this isn’t legal? Just because we all have rights doesn’t actually mean that he can get away with these crimes, does it? I called police. The victim has to press charges because they have since turned 18 is all I’m told. Is that legal? I’ve called police, the sheriff, the abuse hotline & CPS for our state. I’m getting nowhere and I don’t know what legal rights I have. Aren’t you supposed to say something if you see something? Wouldn’t I being risking criminal charges if kept silent and allowed him to keep committing these crimes & more? Please don’t remove my post because I don’t know the legal system well enough to know exactly what the legal definition is of the help that we desperately need. There is a statue of limitations for reporting. Do I just have to pray that my child turns their father in before that? It’s cruel to make a victim have to tell their story over and over again just for a semblance of justice. It’s unimaginable to put your own child through that. Is it legal to force an 18 year old to press charges? Couldn’t they just testify?

imrehta

imrn5ey

I think a lot of people have commented on the legality of this, which is of course the point of the sub. Since that has been converted, I’d urge you to seek counseling for both your child and yourself. This is a lot of trauma, and regardless of how you and your child do or do not proceed with legal action, both of you should see a therapist to help you deal with the implications here. Best of luck.

It sounds like you would benefit from consulting an attorney or advocate. Here's a link from the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence. The purpose of your lawyer wouldn't be to press charges; that's the DA's job. But as other comments have explained, the DA is unlikely to press charges and the police are unlikely to consider investigating worth their time if they do not believe the victim will cooperate. A lawyer would serve to: 1. Guide you and your kid through the process 2. Work with the DA to make the process of supporting the investigation as painless as possible, and minimize how often your child has to testify etc 3. Make sure you understand all your legal options, including options to make your kid feel safe from your ex's threats. Obviously, you need to prioritize making your child feel safe. You can't force them to cooperate. But talking to a professional might be the reassurance they need, or might point you in the right direction.

9369mj

legaladvice_train

[OR] Put in my final 30 days notice at an apartment complex. Before I gave them my keys their maintenance crew went through my stuff, drank my alcohol and took some of my electronics. As the title says, before I told them I was gone for good and give them my keys, their maintenance crew scattered all my clothes that were in bags through out the apartment, they consumed my food, used my dryer and left their clothes in it, and stole some of my electronics and cleaning supplies. What do I do next?

e3b8r3k

e3bfhq9

Did you tell them you were going to be gone by a certain date, but did not turn in the keys on that date? Even so they should have reached out to you to see why keys were not turned in and billed you for any extra days past your move out date. We never enter an apartment unless we have keys or we have made contact with the tenant and they give up PTE. Even then if there is abandon property we call them to come pick it up or let us know it is trash. Talk to the manager and find out where you stuff is.

Breaking and Entering, along with theft. Police time, this is a criminal matter.

9369mj

legaladvice_train

[OR] Put in my final 30 days notice at an apartment complex. Before I gave them my keys their maintenance crew went through my stuff, drank my alcohol and took some of my electronics. As the title says, before I told them I was gone for good and give them my keys, their maintenance crew scattered all my clothes that were in bags through out the apartment, they consumed my food, used my dryer and left their clothes in it, and stole some of my electronics and cleaning supplies. What do I do next?

e3bm26l

e3b8r3k

Yeah that's clear theft. Call the police. I can't imagine the look on the face of their as you explain that but if my experiences are anything to go off of, it's usually the same poker face year-round; even for the strangest offenses.

Did you tell them you were going to be gone by a certain date, but did not turn in the keys on that date? Even so they should have reached out to you to see why keys were not turned in and billed you for any extra days past your move out date. We never enter an apartment unless we have keys or we have made contact with the tenant and they give up PTE. Even then if there is abandon property we call them to come pick it up or let us know it is trash. Talk to the manager and find out where you stuff is.

51b2h5

legaladvice_train

Apartment Complex charging me for cleaning my apt and moving out furniture. I gave my 60-day notice only 11 days ago! I live in Texas. I recently got married and moved in with my wife. I procrastinated on moving out of my old apartment. I moved out 75% of my stuff in early August. I basically just had to clean (a lot) and left a table, TV stand, entertainment center/bookshelf and just a bunch of random stuff. I finally got it worked out with management and turned in my 60-day notice on August, 25th. I then sent an email asking if there was a way to adjust the 60-day notice so I didn't have to pay an extra month's month rent. They very clearly declined to say my 60-day notice would start that day (august 25th). A 60-day notice was policy when canceling a lease early. My plan was then to eventually, within the 60 days, finish cleaning/moving out and turn in my keys. Today, September 5th, I get an email titled "final account statement". They billed me ~2,800 dollars. Charged me for things like "4 keys not returned and lock change" for 150. "trash out bags(16) and furniture out (5 pieces)" for 650. And a notice fee of 850. I don't even know what that is. Lots of other random charges adding up. So they threw away all my stuff and charged me a lot for doing it? Didn't I have 60 days? I can't contact them today because it's Labor Day but I plan on calling them tomorrow. I've never been involved in anything legal at all, but it seems to me that I have some grounds here? What should I do?

d7al3gk

d7al2xv

You have a right to possession of the premises the entire 60 days. Were your discussions with them in writing? Locate that documentation. If they cannot retrieve your possessions, they may be legally obligated to compensate you for them.

When was the end of your lease term? were you a month to month tenant? That's the important question here, because if the end of your lease term was at the end of the 60 days after August 25th then you were illegally evicted. If your lease ended Sept. 1st, for example, then they did nothing wrong.

51b2h5

legaladvice_train

Apartment Complex charging me for cleaning my apt and moving out furniture. I gave my 60-day notice only 11 days ago! I live in Texas. I recently got married and moved in with my wife. I procrastinated on moving out of my old apartment. I moved out 75% of my stuff in early August. I basically just had to clean (a lot) and left a table, TV stand, entertainment center/bookshelf and just a bunch of random stuff. I finally got it worked out with management and turned in my 60-day notice on August, 25th. I then sent an email asking if there was a way to adjust the 60-day notice so I didn't have to pay an extra month's month rent. They very clearly declined to say my 60-day notice would start that day (august 25th). A 60-day notice was policy when canceling a lease early. My plan was then to eventually, within the 60 days, finish cleaning/moving out and turn in my keys. Today, September 5th, I get an email titled "final account statement". They billed me ~2,800 dollars. Charged me for things like "4 keys not returned and lock change" for 150. "trash out bags(16) and furniture out (5 pieces)" for 650. And a notice fee of 850. I don't even know what that is. Lots of other random charges adding up. So they threw away all my stuff and charged me a lot for doing it? Didn't I have 60 days? I can't contact them today because it's Labor Day but I plan on calling them tomorrow. I've never been involved in anything legal at all, but it seems to me that I have some grounds here? What should I do?

d7al6no

d7aptub

Did you pay September rent? The only way I'd imagine this was ok for management to do was if you told them you abandoned the unit and they followed procedure to declare it as such.

> I finally got it worked out with management and turned in my 60-day notice on August, 25th. I then sent an email asking if there was a way to adjust the 60-day notice so I didn't have to pay an extra month's month rent. They very clearly declined to say my 60-day notice would start that day (august 25th). A 60-day notice was policy when canceling a lease early. I think you'll be okay so long as you have documentation of an agreed upon date of vacating the apartment. When I've terminated a lease, I turn in a signed letter saying "I will be out of the apartment by *date*" and they either accept that or have me write a new letter. This sounds to me like an employee at the property office processed your move-out way too early and made a work order for maintenance people to stop over at your place and check it/clean/move out leftover stuff. This person wasn't on the same page as the manager who probably made the call to deny your request to move out early. None of this is your fault, but it is a major mis-understanding on the part of the property management office. I'd be willing to bet if you call them and speak to the head manager they'll reimburse you for your property and waive all fees just to avoid getting into legal hot water. Best case scenario, but if the property manager is smart, they'll eat the cost rather than the embarrassment of having a cop coming in to their office to serve charges.

51b2h5

legaladvice_train

Apartment Complex charging me for cleaning my apt and moving out furniture. I gave my 60-day notice only 11 days ago! I live in Texas. I recently got married and moved in with my wife. I procrastinated on moving out of my old apartment. I moved out 75% of my stuff in early August. I basically just had to clean (a lot) and left a table, TV stand, entertainment center/bookshelf and just a bunch of random stuff. I finally got it worked out with management and turned in my 60-day notice on August, 25th. I then sent an email asking if there was a way to adjust the 60-day notice so I didn't have to pay an extra month's month rent. They very clearly declined to say my 60-day notice would start that day (august 25th). A 60-day notice was policy when canceling a lease early. My plan was then to eventually, within the 60 days, finish cleaning/moving out and turn in my keys. Today, September 5th, I get an email titled "final account statement". They billed me ~2,800 dollars. Charged me for things like "4 keys not returned and lock change" for 150. "trash out bags(16) and furniture out (5 pieces)" for 650. And a notice fee of 850. I don't even know what that is. Lots of other random charges adding up. So they threw away all my stuff and charged me a lot for doing it? Didn't I have 60 days? I can't contact them today because it's Labor Day but I plan on calling them tomorrow. I've never been involved in anything legal at all, but it seems to me that I have some grounds here? What should I do?

d7aptub

d7al2xv

> I finally got it worked out with management and turned in my 60-day notice on August, 25th. I then sent an email asking if there was a way to adjust the 60-day notice so I didn't have to pay an extra month's month rent. They very clearly declined to say my 60-day notice would start that day (august 25th). A 60-day notice was policy when canceling a lease early. I think you'll be okay so long as you have documentation of an agreed upon date of vacating the apartment. When I've terminated a lease, I turn in a signed letter saying "I will be out of the apartment by *date*" and they either accept that or have me write a new letter. This sounds to me like an employee at the property office processed your move-out way too early and made a work order for maintenance people to stop over at your place and check it/clean/move out leftover stuff. This person wasn't on the same page as the manager who probably made the call to deny your request to move out early. None of this is your fault, but it is a major mis-understanding on the part of the property management office. I'd be willing to bet if you call them and speak to the head manager they'll reimburse you for your property and waive all fees just to avoid getting into legal hot water. Best case scenario, but if the property manager is smart, they'll eat the cost rather than the embarrassment of having a cop coming in to their office to serve charges.

When was the end of your lease term? were you a month to month tenant? That's the important question here, because if the end of your lease term was at the end of the 60 days after August 25th then you were illegally evicted. If your lease ended Sept. 1st, for example, then they did nothing wrong.

51b2h5

legaladvice_train

Apartment Complex charging me for cleaning my apt and moving out furniture. I gave my 60-day notice only 11 days ago! I live in Texas. I recently got married and moved in with my wife. I procrastinated on moving out of my old apartment. I moved out 75% of my stuff in early August. I basically just had to clean (a lot) and left a table, TV stand, entertainment center/bookshelf and just a bunch of random stuff. I finally got it worked out with management and turned in my 60-day notice on August, 25th. I then sent an email asking if there was a way to adjust the 60-day notice so I didn't have to pay an extra month's month rent. They very clearly declined to say my 60-day notice would start that day (august 25th). A 60-day notice was policy when canceling a lease early. My plan was then to eventually, within the 60 days, finish cleaning/moving out and turn in my keys. Today, September 5th, I get an email titled "final account statement". They billed me ~2,800 dollars. Charged me for things like "4 keys not returned and lock change" for 150. "trash out bags(16) and furniture out (5 pieces)" for 650. And a notice fee of 850. I don't even know what that is. Lots of other random charges adding up. So they threw away all my stuff and charged me a lot for doing it? Didn't I have 60 days? I can't contact them today because it's Labor Day but I plan on calling them tomorrow. I've never been involved in anything legal at all, but it seems to me that I have some grounds here? What should I do?

d7al2xv

d7al6no

When was the end of your lease term? were you a month to month tenant? That's the important question here, because if the end of your lease term was at the end of the 60 days after August 25th then you were illegally evicted. If your lease ended Sept. 1st, for example, then they did nothing wrong.

Did you pay September rent? The only way I'd imagine this was ok for management to do was if you told them you abandoned the unit and they followed procedure to declare it as such.