14 posts shown.
Joseph Taylor11 said:I mean... is there even a way to head to another town or city without technically "leaving" where you live?
🤔
Am I totally out of the loop on this one? 😁
No.
You're just spinning your wheels.
Rachel Roberts6 said:Restriction vs. Ban... it’s basically the same mess. If you don't have permission, aka a pass, then you're effectively banned from traveling between different counties. It's not the restriction itself that's the problem; it's the way they actually carry it out. Like the example I mentioned earlier, law enforcement seems to be making up their own rules on the fly about who follows the rules and who doesn't. Honestly, treating the fight against this "21st-century plague" with such inconsistency is pretty unprofessional.
Sure, the actual distance someone can travel might depend on whether local mayors are playing nice with each other or not, but it's also obvious that the idiots in charge keep passing rules that make zero sense and are practically impossible to follow.
Besides, I honestly stopped caring about whether these measures were justified the second they allowed that massive parade over on Maui. And from what I heard, that whole procession wasn't even cleared by the local town council, but by some national task force.
Give me a break... you guys and your Maui procession.
If you have a hundred people crowded together on a sidewalk or in a fake version of Central Park every single day with only two feet of space between them, why on earth couldn't an outdoor event happen on Maui!?
What is wrong with you? Try letting your irritation with the church stop you from seeing things clearly.
In my opinion, they should have sat everyone down at a table to figure out which municipalities don't have their own pharmacy and then just scrap the permits for those specific areas. That’s where the real work needs to happen. Everything else is just noise; without fixing that, you aren't getting anywhere. It's like saying you can't live without a grocery store—sure, technically true, but I doubt there's a single town in this country that doesn't have one.
Grace Jones86 said:Listen, I’m going to make this simple because clearly, we aren't on the same page. You’re sitting there in your local town hall meeting acting like you own the place, but you don't even know the basics of how the modern workforce functions. It's called job hopping. It isn't some kind of failure or laziness like you're implying. It's a strategy. People move from one company to another every couple of years to secure better pay, better benefits, and actual career growth. In today's economy, if you sit in the same cubicle at some mid-sized firm in Indianapolis for twenty years waiting for a gold watch, you're just getting left behind. Get it through your head: moving up often means moving out. Stop judging what you don't understand. 😁
And why exactly is that important? Why is it considered normal or even justified to go...
That kind of horror doesn't exist anywhere else. Personally, I try to have zero contact with the American public—especially those bureaucrats and low-level civil servants—under normal circumstances. I don't want any conversation with them. I view them as nothing more than primitive, medieval bottom-feeders. Then, suddenly, some ridiculous crisis forces you to actually communicate with those shallow shells of human beings. 🐔
Your way with words is something else... that guy was right about you; since you're so incredibly modern, you should probably just stick to Skype.
Here's a weird one for you. My mom never actually received her official discharge papers. How many years do hospitals usually hold onto those files? It was regarding Peterson's case.
Thanks for getting back to me. It looks like the discussion on Multipla is picking up steam, so maybe someone from their team will chime in soon. His biggest hurdle right now is pinning down the actual indications for use; that regulatory manual they use basically limits everything to dental supplies. I’m planning to dive deep into this over the next few days and will post updates here as I find them.
Hi,
If there’s already a thread for this, please move my post to the right one. I couldn't find it.
So, I'm looking for some insight into how things work when getting medical equipment through Medicare. Specifically, I'm looking at mobility aids—wheelchairs, basically. I see electric ones listed too, so I'm wondering if anyone knows how often those actually get approved and what the wait time is for the board to make a decision. Also, do you have to wait for the green light first, or can you buy the gear upfront and then file for reimbursement once Medicare decides the need is legitimate?
My questions apply to all types of medical aids.
From what I’ve read, recent changes to the rules have made it a bit easier to get certain things, like inhalers or commode chairs.
I’m asking because of a neuromuscular condition. I'd love to hear from anyone dealing with MS; I know there are people here with that. I'm stuck deciding between a standard electric chair or a specialized one that can tilt all the way back into a flat, horizontal position.
Best,
Elizabeth Rodriguez7 said:So, here’s the situation: I signed up for high-speed internet, but the service just wouldn't work. The kicker was that I was still getting billed regularly for three or four months while having zero connection. I filed complaints, and every two weeks a technician would show up to troubleshoot, but nothing changed. It turns out the issue was actually with the building's infrastructure. Basically, the local provider had taken over the space in the junction box, and all that was needed was to reconnect a few wires to get everything running. The problem is that this specific junction box is located right outside a neighbor's window, and you can only reach it by going through their apartment. Since they're never home, and it's positioned too high to reach safely with a ladder, nobody could get to it. Neither the technicians from my ISP nor the guys from the main service provider would fix it; instead, they just kept blaming the old wiring in the building. I even had an electrician come out to inspect the lines, and he confirmed the wiring itself was fine—the fault lies entirely with that inaccessible junction box near the neighbor's unit. I ended up talking to some other techs from my provider, and they mentioned this is actually a common headache in older apartment complexes where all the telecom companies fight for space in the same boxes. They told me straight up that the fault wasn't mine. After four months of paying for internet I couldn't even use, I finally decided to just cancel the contract. Now, I'm dealing with the cancellation fees. $250 I’ve already filed two separate appeals regarding my H1 status, but they rejected me both times. Now they’re insisting on collecting the payment for the bill. To make matters worse, my wife—who actually works in an office over at H1—told me that from a legal standpoint, both she and the company are technically in the right. I guess it’s just one of those things where their attitude is a bit more blunt than what I'm used to back home in a place like Seattle.
Look, there’s definitely enough here to build a case, but you really need to hire an attorney. Find someone you trust—maybe a friend in the business if you have one—and work out a deal on their fees. Trying to navigate this legal mess on your own is a suicide mission. From what I can see, you’ve got all the documentation needed to make this stick. They signed a service agreement with you without doing their due diligence to see if their infrastructure could actually handle the job. That’s on them, not you. Good luck! 👍
Brian Morgan25 said:An interesting little situation here?
So, after I filed an objection regarding the statute of limitations on the account, I got a summons from the court for a civil lawsuit.
I also received a filing from the prosecutor—which they’ve since amended—where they actually concede the statute of limitations, but now they're trying to claw back their own legal fees!
My question is—can I actually demand that the plaintiff covers my legal costs during the pretrial hearing, just because they're the ones who dragged this whole mess into court in the first place?
No. You can't claim representation costs because you don't have a lawyer. You aren't represented. You might be able to get the filing fee for your objection back, maybe postage if you sent everything via certified mail, or potentially travel expenses if you had to drive to the courthouse—but you'll need receipts. Go look up the definition of "litigation costs" under the Civil Procedure Code. Good luck.👍
quietpuma21 said:Greetings
I assume many of you were hit by an enforcement notice for some forgotten parking ticket from 2010. Usually, these things should have expired after five years, but I am curious about something. I actually called our dear friends at Berkshire Hathaway because the notary's paperwork doesn't even list an address, a license plate, or a timestamp. They told me the last warning was sent back in 2012 and nothing happened since. Between the interest, the daily fine which was $67 in that zone at the time, and the service fees, the total is roughly $200. Has anyone actually managed to win against this robbery through an appeal or a formal objection? Even the guy at Berkshire Hathaway just shrugged and said, "It's probably best to just pay the 😵
." Thanks
The key is when the case was handed over to the notary. You need to see if five years have passed since the violation occurred. While you might be able to argue it under three years, five is the standard statute of limitations in the US.
Look, lawyers don't get this, so don't sweat it. There are endless possibilities here, literally,
meaning anything can happen...
Take today, for example: the county assessor is trying to sync everything up with the official property deeds, and the whole goal is to make sure the parcel maps match what’s actually written in the land registry records.
But it wasn't always like this. After WWII, things got messy, and the biggest headache was all that communal property legislation—that's largely what caused this entire clusterfuck. Plus, you have the old-school way of doing things where people gave their word on land deals and didn't bother hiring an attorney for every little thing.
Now, you have some people who rushed to fix their titles right after the turn of the century, and then you have others living in houses that belonged to their great-great-grandparents. That becomes a nightmare if the ancestor had five kids, and those kids had three more, and they had two more... suddenly you're looking at 25 different heirs you have to sue just to prove you own the house you've "lived in forever"—which is what people always say in disbelief once they realize how many people they have to take to court, like an eighth cousin living in Australia for forty years.
In your case, though, the situation is different because you're actually listed as the owner. It’s possible you inherited it through a probate ruling from a grandmother or mother, but you don't actually "possess" the true interest. For instance, imagine 100 years ago, a grandmother and her sister agreed to sell the place to their neighbor, Joe. The grandmother passed away, leaving only your mother (let's call her Mary 🙂), while the aunt had no kids. Even though there was a deal, neighbor Joe never officially recorded the deed because he was too busy. Eventually, your mother was listed on the title, and she passed it down to you, so now you're the one on paper. But the reality? The actual land is being enjoyed by Joe's grandson—Steve! Now Steve and his wife are growing tomatoes or whatever out there, and they've been there since they can remember, ever since Grandpa Joe skipped over his son, Blaze, as the heir because Blaze drank too much and Joe just handed everything to his grandson Steve via a will—it's called unrecorded ownership. Basically, he has a piece of paper showing he got it from your grandmother and her sister, but since it was never filed with the county, he was never "on title." That doesn't mean he isn't the de facto owner.
I hope I've cleared up some of the terminology. Since I don't know the specifics of your exact situation, I can't give a more precise comment.
So, how did everything turn out? 🙂
Make sure you touch base with the neighbors, double-check all the details, and get out there to walk through the property—that’s essential if you want to prep it for future buyers.
Hannah Brown12 said:My lawyer totally dropped the ball while drafting our appeal to the Superior Court. He completely missed mentioning two final rulings from that same court that are directly tied to this case and the Bureau of Land Management’s decision—rulings that are totally on our side! Those precedents prove that the District Court’s ruling was straight-up wrong. To make matters worse, the appeal was filed late and it's honestly a mess. The deadlines have already passed, and the case just hit the docket at the Superior Court a few days ago. I need to know if there's any way I can step in as the client to fix this. It’s not even a massive amount of money, so we won't be looking at a Supreme Court review, and I'm terrified the Superior Court is going to rule against us just because of these omissions. Is there any kind of extraordinary legal remedy that would let me get these crucial pieces of evidence in front of the higher court? We need them to actually reach a fair decision.
I really need an answer on this ASAP---Thanks
When you say it's "poorly written," is that your own assessment, or did some low-level clerk or official in the US system tell you that? Look, I'm not out here defending lawyers by default, but nowadays everyone thinks they're an expert because they have access to a mountain of information. It's like waiting for people to start performing their own surgery just because their doctor did a hack job on their appendix. They'll think they can just DIY it.
Besides, the US legal system doesn't run on precedent. Even if he had attached a hundred rulings in your favor to that Appellate Court appeal, it wouldn't change much. Maybe in a review, but that's about it.
I have to speak up about this absolute nonsense from FIFA regarding freezing entire accounts! They just lock everything down for 30 days because of some specific amount being withdrawn or moved.
Imagine taking, say, $333 right out of an account that actually has $5000 in it! And they don't say a word while the customer is stuck unable to touch any of those $4667 during that whole month. It’s disgraceful.
My advice: get a protected account set up as soon as possible!!