That’s my advice to anyone who’s constantly whining about their country, their city, their street, their job, their school, or their paycheck... just go ahead and move if you think things would be better elsewhere.
Yeah, right, because without them, you'd probably be living in a cardboard box on the sidewalk.
Jamie Fox60 said:Now, just try imagining Mexicans living in an American city that had a massive Mexican majority back in 1945 (similar to what happened to Americans in El Paso in 1991) and being expected to reconcile with the fact that they now live in a state that identifies as American. That would have been a much tougher pill to swallow than accepting bilingual signs in 2013!
Honestly, there’s nothing to "reconcile" with, you know? If they aren't happy, they should just pack their bags and head straight back to the motherland.
Richard Wilson4 said:I love how people always try to pull that "just let go of the past and focus on the future" line on Americans. It’s such a classic move whenever they want to brush off the crimes from decades ago or ignore everything that went down during the era of the Republic. Typical.
Would anyone ever dare tell a Jew to just "let the past go"?
Man, listen, Barbra Streisand was born right here in the States after WW2, so she had zero interest in performing over in Germany.
Look, you’ve gotta deal with the present and the future first, and then maybe tackle the past—which, by the way, could have been settled ages ago if people actually gave a damn. We should be dealing with the criminals while they're still breathing, but everyone talks about WW2 in such vague, general terms that it just turns into endless, useless bickering.
Whether it's pulling their cash, gold, and diamonds out and hauling them off to Israel, or just opening fire on someone just to vent some frustration...🤷
Sarah Martinez said:How much longer are we going to dwell on the past and constantly obsess over what used to be? The New York Red Bulls played their part in history, regardless of how you feel about it. Let’s just leave them to the historians; honestly, it wouldn't hurt us one bit if we actually tried looking toward the future for once.
Honestly, it’s way easier to sit around whining about how things were back in the day than actually doing something useful or productive right now for our own future.
As long as there's a crowd obsessed with living in the rearview mirror, they'll always find a way to make it the main topic of conversation. 😂
Eric Fowler19 said:I sent it over to the network, but now I realize I should have sent it directly to the receiver's legal representative. That’s obviously Scalia. 🙂 It’s written that way on purpose. They want to make sure nobody knows exactly who to report this to. And what about that notary who's partnered up with Scalia? I sent him a formal complaint about their lack of cooperation. What kind of global scum are we dealing with here? I’m filing an objection tomorrow. Everyone gets one.🙂
Honestly, you should have just sent it to JB so they could pass it along to Hanžeković and call it a day. Look, I get it, there's a mountain of paperwork and it's a total headache to parse through, but you can just read it a few times until it clicks. Based on those papers (the first set), you're on the hook for the bill, the interest and the portion for JB. With the interest, most people just pay a ballpark figure because let's face it, not everyone is a math whiz, and then HRT will just mail you a corrected invoice later if you underpaid. Back in the day, you could just settle the debt and notify JB without worrying about their fees, but they've totally covered their backsides now; they're claiming they'll freeze the whole enforcement process unless you pay everything . (I've been in both situations 😁). If you ask me, you missed a step here.
Eric Fowler19 said:The collection proposal doesn't have a date; instead, it says CNN is seeking the debt $83 plus interest up to June 28, 2011, and includes an extract from the accounting books dated June 28. We paid on July 5, 2011, and the collection order was written on July 15. The collection order was sent on August 18, 2011, and picked up at the post office on August 22, 2011.
Objection written on August 23, 2011, and sent via certified mail. Finally found the documents and the postal receipt at home. In the objection, we state we paid, include a copy of the payment, and I'll argue that I can only pay the interest from June 23 to July 5, and that we shouldn't have to pay the collection costs. I am requesting that the collection proceedings be stayed.
Never received a call from the court. Tomorrow I'm emailing them the objection with scanned copies of everything, demanding they stay the collection. I'm also going to demand proof that they forwarded the objection to the court. Is there any chance they will stay the collection? Or should I ask for the payment info, pay it, and then sue the court for a counter-claim? Has anyone actually succeeded with this?
But wait, did you guys actually send over the payment slips to Baker McKenzie right after you settled things—you know, covering the principal, the interest, and their specific fees—because isn't that exactly what it said on that first notice they sent you?
See, part of those costs listed are stuff you definitely owe Baker McKenzie for, because they didn't just do all that work for fun, right? They were forced into it because you guys didn't settle up when CNN sent out those initial warnings.
Daniel Martinez9 said:Let's go over this one more time. This time, we'll break it down into three parts. In all three scenarios, we're talking about people who actually WANT to pay their debt. Why file an objection. Scenario one. (The debtor pays the debt in full) This thread is 162 pages long. Go ahead and count how many posts say, "I paid the debt, but it still hit my account at the Federal Reserve and froze everything." That happened because they didn't file an objection; the enforcement became final and hit the Federal Reserve. All those people whining are responsible for their own mess because they ended up losing money. First off, there's no guarantee all creditors will return the money they seized (about 90% will, but there's always that one stubborn type where your only option is court, and we all know how that goes). Furthermore, the creditor is NOT going to pay you back the fees the Federal Reserve took for their own processing. Is it really too much to ask for people who have already paid to take thirty minutes to pull their tax exemption status to avoid court fees and send that as an objection to the public notary? I think it is. Actually, I don't think—I consider it a basic responsibility for any citizen who receives an enforcement notice.
Scenario two (The debtor wants to pay in installments) It's the exact same situation as scenario one. Except, 90% of creditors will gladly agree to a payment plan, provided it follows their specific timeline. So, an objection is mandatory.
Scenario three (The debtor can't keep up with the creditor's demands, or the debt is massive and would take years to pay off, or the creditor refuses a payment plan) Basically, every month after filing the objection, the debtor sends a specific amount to the creditor's account labeled "principal." Yes, you're technically acknowledging the debt, because debts have to be settled. It's common sense. But by doing this, you're settling the enforcement under much better terms—terms similar to most European countries, where you prioritize paying off the principal first. What happens when the hearing comes up? You simply present all the documents you sent to the creditor requesting a payment plan, along with, say, a letter from a bank stating you don't qualify for credit, and finally, a visual chart of your repayment plan (for a debt of $23 with a 2-year term and current interest rates of...$6.75) If that debt collection agency were to actually become final, we're looking at a 30-year stretch, even though the debtor's repayment plan says it should only take 10. Also, don't forget the part of the law that makes us prevent predatory lending. The judge's first move will be cutting the principal because they have no choice. In our legal system, if there's a tie, the court leans toward what’s more favorable for the defendant. It's just how it works. Look at the case involving the guy from Chicago and the woman from Mexico—the judge handed down a "light" sentence simply because the law forced them to favor the accused.
And one last thing... it's true that judges usually toss out extra costs for the debtor if they see the person is actually willing to settle their debts.
Enough said? I bet the pearl-clutchers will completely ignore my first two points since they're obvious, and instead go straight for the third. Why? Because nobody—and I mean absolutely nobody—can predict exactly how a judge will rule in that specific scenario. 😉
Bottom line: pay your debts, but MANDATORY file objections against everything you can. Just keep in mind you need to pull your tax clearance to prove you aren't a tax delinquent; if you aren't, you're exempt from most of those court fees.
Exactly, because they’re getting paid for it, they've got the expertise, and they have the full authority to dive into the actual specifics of the case files.
Susan Morgan2 said:Alright, here’s the deal—I’ve got a weird situation on my hands. Some lady shows up at my door waving paperwork, claiming my sister needs to pay some fine or face wage garnishment. The catch? My sister hasn't lived at this address in forever, even though she's still officially registered there on her ID. This woman actually had the nerve to say they’d break into the property with lockpicks and tools to seize assets, even though the place isn't even in my sister's name. Like, how are they even allowed to just barge in and inventory someone else's stuff? Is it actually possible for something like this to go down? And more importantly, how do you protect yourself so they don't walk off with your things (specifically mine)?
And just like that, she's risking another fine for not updating her residency/address with the DMV. But hey, she can probably change her legal residence and grab a new driver's license in a heartbeat if she wanted to. She claimed she wouldn't "break in" because she'll just use a key, but whatever. Under certain state laws regarding civil enforcement, there are specific protections on what can't be seized. Usually, the locksmith and the sheriff show up for the actual seizure, but I'm not entirely sure if they come out just to do an inventory check. http://www.law.gov/enforcement-code
Look, you need to track down a copy of that court order and send it straight to whoever gave the IRS the green light to force this collection. That $2,300 isn't just some random fine either; there’s definitely extra junk tacked onto it 🤷 Honestly, the IRS is just doing their job here because they received an official order from someone else, and it's not their place to sit around deciding if the claim is valid or controversial or whatever.
I mean, that’s literally why regulations exist in the first place, right? You don't need a giant neon sign telling people what they aren't allowed to do when there's already a rule on the books. It’s all about keeping the kids safe from germs and, honestly, just not wasting a ton of money on cleaning supplies whenever the weather turns crappy. 😂
I mean, I’m pretty sure there’s supposed to be some kind of official rulebook or regulation that covers all this stuff in daycare centers, right? Like, I don't know if they actually have those guidelines written down at your specific preschool or whatever, but honestly, you really ought to just demand to see them.
So, they finally settled things with the daycare’s house rules (well, at least at this one). Just check out the section titled "PLEASE! Do Not Bring These Into Daycare!"
If the judge decides to go with some "whatever" ruling, you’re either gonna pay up or deal with a garnishment order. Sylvan was actually assigned community service as his penalty, which is a totally different beast than just coughing up court costs and interest. Honestly, you could have just called the customer service rep and they would've handed over every single detail you needed to fill out the payment slip.
So, NBC sent everything over to Hanžeković and JPMorgan Chase. Now JPMorgan Chase is saying the payment should go to the NBC account... here's the number... the reference... the total amount... and honestly, everything looks fine on the surface. But then it says they need to "provide confirmation of the full payment (principal, interest, and fees) to the creditor's representative." Does that mean the whole damn thing goes on one single payment slip to NBC, or am I missing some other info for a separate one? I already know exactly how much needs to be paid. Also, does Hanžeković get a copy of the receipt, or does it go straight to JPMorgan Chase?
The judgment for enforcement breaks down like this:
1) the principal amount (the actual balance you sued over), say $167 (listed as "VPS" in the judgment) — interest starts running from when each individual bill was due, which is noted right at the start of the document
+ 2) everything else listed AT THE BOTTOM of the judgment, which is:
interest runs on all that stuff starting from the day the judgment was issued (usually the same day the motion was filed—look for the "received on date xy" stamp on page one
+
if you don't pay within 8 days of getting the judgment or if you don't file an objection
3) the remaining costs, which look like this:
finality clause fee $10 + tax review of finality clause $83 + tax drafting fees for serving notice to parties involved in the enforcement (x dollars + tax)
= total cost.
So, if you pay within 8 days, you just pay 1+2.
If you pay after 8 days without filing an objection, you're stuck paying 1 + 2 + 3.
Alright, so what am I supposed to do when the paperwork only gives me the info for a standard PBS payment slip instead of specific details for the law firm or the notary? How am I even supposed to pay parts 1 and 2 separately?
So you actually went into this thinking you could just go around wrecking someone else's property without any fallout or legal trouble just because that’s how you pictured it in your head? 🤷
It’s been ten years since the whole thing went down. Honestly, they aren't going to come knocking with some international tribunal because they wouldn't even have jurisdiction over this mess. Look, if you end up traveling through Europe, I could always just issue a European arrest warrant, so then we'll see how things play out.
Look, if you’re trying to dodge the full hammer—you know, cutting down the sentence instead of getting a total "not guilty" verdict—you've got a few plays in the book. You could just own up to it, show some real remorse, or try to explain those specific circumstances that pushed you over the edge in the first place, plus maybe mention if you've got a clean record up to this point (?) or even prove you've already made things right by paying back the damages... or, I guess, you could always go the route of claiming you weren't in your right mind and let the court-appointed doctors decide if you're actually out of it.