I am in my late 50s and have substantial student loan debt and no assets. I am not in default, however, it is unlikely that I'll be able to pay off this debt in my lifetime. (The original loan amounts have tripled due to continuing interest and fe...
Student loan servicers generally don't seize assets or property, so you may be overestimating the risk. As to your question, yes, there are mechanism to accomplish what you want, you and your mother need to sit down with an estate planning attorney. A trust is the most likely vehicle for what you need to accomplish. However, the better approach would be to get on a path so that your student loans are not in default status.See question
I agree to pay any financial obligation which I might lawfully owe". Then request your creditor to provide 3 items. 1. validation of debt -an actual account of what they believe is owed to them. 2 Verification of their claim against you- a signed ...
Not entirely true. Actually, most of that is not true. You can request that they "validate" the debt. However, all that is required to validate a debt is for the collection agency to send you letter identifying the name and address of the original creditor and the balance owed. As for "verification," you typically need to "dispute" the debt (in some specific manner) and then the collection agency is obligated to provide information "relevant" to what you dispute (to verify the disputed item). However, the law does not specify what the collector must provide, it only says that the verification must be responsive to the debtor's disputed items. Also, you don't get to dictate how they send it and the law does not specify, so regular postage is fine.
Prior to a lawsuit, there is no "get of debt" because the collector cannot document certain things. The law does not require that they "prove" the debt to you. The law only requires that the provide you enough information so that a reasonable person can determine if they owe the debt. Once (if) you are sued, then documentation of the debt becomes important, but outside of a lawsuit, not so much. I wouldn't be surprised if that website has another section that says income tax is not constitutional ;)
The law in question is the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.See question
My landlord had a "handy man" enter my residence to do repairs, (on two separate occasions) without my knowledge, consent, or a good faith attempt to notify me. After the first incidence I was apologized to an promised that it won't happen again. ...
Probably no criminal, but as Daniel points out, that is for the police to determine (but the police are likely to say that the issue is a civil issue between you and the landlord), and I would tend to agree with the police assessment because a landlord's right of entry into a leased premises is first and foremost controlled by the lease agreement (a civil contract between you and the landlord) As for civil remedies. an attorney would have to review the lease agreement. But, the damages are relatively minor (unless the damage things were extremely costly), but if you weren't home when the repairman was there, you didn't suffer any "actual" interference with your quiet enjoyment of the property.
As far as general rules with regard to entry for repair, a landlord can enter the leased premise WITHOUT prior notice for emergencies. If you are home and the repairman knocks on your door and you let them in, you have consented at that point, no need for notice. For most other types of repair or maintance (when the tenant is not present), the landlord must give "reasonable" notice before entering. Note, unless the lease says that they "must" get your consent (which I doubt the lease says that), the landlord does NOT need your consent, they only need to give you reasonable notice. Your question comes off as a bit coy because you used jargon ("without my knowledge, consent, or a good faith attempt to notify me"). You didn't say that they DID NOT NOTIFY you. Most people would have said, my landlord never notified me that they would be going into my apartment (or something more direct). So, what is the story...what actually happened? It seems like you are saying that the landlord did give notice, but you are disputing the adequacy of that notice. When asking questions on this forum, you will get better answer if you convey the facts of what happened and not your legal conclusions.
In any event, 24 hours notice will generally be considered reasonable and the repairs should be taking place during normal business hours (8:00 am to 5:30pm is a typical window). As for"how" to provide notice, that again will be dictated by the lease agreement or what is reasonable. If they notified you by an email address on file, or left a message on the voicemail of the phone number on file, a note on the door; all those types of notice are likely to be considered reasonable attempts.
If you want to take the situation to the next step, schedule a consultation with a tenants rights attorney to review the lease agreement and discuss the situation. You may not need to hire the attorney for the case (assuming there is one), but at least sit down with an attorney to determine your options.See question
My husband wants to file for bankruptcy. When the housing market crashed in 2008, he had to return his house (that used to cost $500k back then), because he couldn't afford making mortgage payments anymore. Because of that, he also stop paying his...
More than you "want" to pay, less than you "should" pay. Hiring an attorney is still a custom service. Reason being, you are hiring that person's time. The only way to answer how much a case will cost is to interview the client, understand the potential issues so the attorney can assess how much time the case will take. Not to be too coy, but you might as well have asked, what is the average cost to paint a house. Answer: There is no average, are we talking about a 10,000 sqft house or a 2000 sqft house, what sort of paint do you want, what is the surface to be painted, what sort of prep work is needed for the surface...etc etc. Legal services are the same.
Just schedule consultations with local bankruptcy attorneys. The consultations are typically free and one the primary purposes of a consultation is to assess the situation and quote a fee to handle your bankruptcy.See question
A Tow Away sign in Hollywood is mostly hidden by dense branches. Only the 8AM-8PM parking sign is clear. I parked directly next to it and have photos showing that the Tow Away sign is fully obscured from the driver's side (in or out of the car) & ...
You are not going to win that one (if you do, come back and let us know). The fact that sign was obscured doesn't change the law (ordinance) that parking in that area is only allowed for "x" time. If there was no sign, you have an argument, because there was no notice about the parking restrictions. But an obscured sign by natural causes, that is not enough. Hopefully, for your sake, I am wrong. All you can do is request a hearing, present your case, and see what happens.See question
The homestead property has been homesteaded by a married couple for 6 years. Only one recipient of homestead exemption is filing BK. When couple purchased property there was an existing tenant with an existing business(on same parcel but not in h...
Is this a hypothetical question, are you preparing for what you believe might be an issue, or is this fact pattern actually playing out and the trustee has filed an objection to the exemption? As Kevin points out, the situation that exists at the time the bankruptcy is filed is what it is. So long as the debtor (and the property) satisfy the provisions of what is considered a homestead at the time the case is filed, I don't see any basis for the trustee to undue that because the property was used in the past for a business.
On thing you may need to watch out for is whether there is equity in the property. If there is no equity, what some unscrupulous (but creative) trustees have done is argue that if a property has no equity, then the homestead provision doesn't apply (because there is no equity to protect), so the trustee takes the home, holds it hostage from the mortgage lender, and does a short sale to collect a fee. I don't know if that is still going on in FL, but you should be aware.See question
my car was parked in the last spot of a row of parking spots. There was a 2 feet of space between the last line of the spot and the curb. The wheels were in the 2 feet of space between the last line and curb. The second space did not exist .
You didn't really ask a question and your description does not make it at all clear what it is you are hoping to learn from this forum. About all I can divine from your text is that your car was towed and you don't believe it should have been. Basically, you pay to get your car and then sue the landowner and parking/towing company in small claims for a refund.See question
I consulted with an attorney for over 2 1/2 hours regarding an estate matter involving my father's estate. I was taken to his office by my sister who was an employee of his at the time. That was the second time I had been introduced to him. Lat...
I agree with Clifford and Jay and defer to PA counsel as far as what you might be able to do and possible courses of action. I am pointing out some issues with your story. First, you say this attorney "made my life hell for years." If this issue has been going on for a while or is now several years old, you may have a statute of limitations problem (meaning, you may have waited to long to sue) in bringing a civil claim (assuming there is a civil claim, I am not sure you have a direct claim upon which to sue the attorney, you may only have an ethics complaint). Second, you mention that you raised the issue of conflict of interest in the court proceeding. What that indicates is that the issue of the existence of a conflict may have (or was) adjudicated by a court, by a judge. If you filed a motion to have the attorney recused and had a hearing, that was your opportunity to prove that a conflict existed. If the judge denied your motion (which seems to be the case), not sure the ethics board will entertain another bite apple on the issue because there is already a court ruling that there was no conflict.
In any event, all you can do is meet with a local attorney and discuss your situation and hopefully the above points you to some issues to help you think through and clarify your story when you meet with the attorney.. You would probably want to consult with an attorney malpractice attorney. Even though you case is not really attorney malpractice, malpractice attorneys are the most up to speed on attorney regulation, ethical issues, and civil claims you can bring against attorneys.See question
Student enrolled into University . she was denied federal student load because mom income does not fall into requirements. Student took "Discover" loan.
That is a bit of a loaded question. It would be more helpful to both you and us if you described your underlying concern or what you are hoping or angling for. The answer is both yes and no. The answer is yes in the sense the loan is a "student loan." What she has is a private student loan. Fedral and private student loans are alike in name and legal status only (insofar as both are considered "qualified student loans" under IRS code 221-d). However, the terms, conditions, repayment, etc are NOT tthe same.
Personally, I think it is immoral that we allow private student loans to share in the same legal status and protections afforded to federal student loans but without having those private lenders be responsible or provide assistance to the borrower in the way federal loans do.See question
My daughter got drunk and slept with a friend and his wife is threatening to sue. Is this possible?
Unfortunately, there is a difference between the ability to sue (filing a complaint and initiating a law suit) and winning the lawsuit. However, given the facts, I am not sure upon what legal theory the wife would sue. Colorado, along with most, if not all states, no longer recognize adultery as a criminal or civil wrong. Meaning, if she did sue, the odds of winnnng are slim and the case would likely be resolved with a motion to dismiss. I doubt the wife will sue, that is the hurt and betrayal talking.See question