Local Unmentionables: Notes on YOUR corner of the world

Standard homeowners insurance should have public liability (although it explicitly doesn't cover tradesmen and/or domestic workers).

I took out this additional policy - for $45 for two years, it's a bargain.

Sorry to hear, Bill. Hope everything shakes out for the best.

ddt

I don't quite understand what happened, but it sounds bad. I hope that things turn around soon.

Sorry to drop the baggage here. I was peed off last night, and confused.
I have already had a lawyer look the case over - nice being able to instantly access the court stuff, and any current dockets all via the web it seems.
I am waiting to get back with him shortly. Hopefully things are looking up.

Tony - no, there long story short, a man/company provided a service, insurance refused to cover the repair and took the service provider to court/lost and/or refused to cover most of the bill (which mom thought was or should have been paid), the amount (again for a few hours work) was more than she could pay (with other bills/debt as well) and somehow the details of which I have no idea (yet) it's ballooned up to some suit of $150,000. Best of my knowledge. Again, I'll know more later. The bill was what the insurance called unreasonable, being 5 times customary or thereabouts. But I am not sure how much of that was conjecture vs actual legal-ized shots.

Hate to hear that, but sounds better than it did yesterday. Good luck.

Hopefully the lawyer can get a handle on it and everything works out.

Man, this guy has already called everyone involved and got me the low-down. Mom (through counsel) eventually decided to declare bankruptcy in 2006. The smart/tricky creditor lawyers were able to invalidate (I know I'm butchering the legal-ese) my parents' original mortgage due to some error in the title/deed. So, instead of a discharged debt, she now owns it free and clear. As an ASSET the creditors can now go after $$, via the Trustee, which is in effect her house at this point. I am not schooled on the finer points of how the past bankruptcy creditors can go after assets today, after the fact. But there is a 'federal court ruling' she pay them $xx,xxxx. In the bankruptcy it was listed/valued at let's say $100,000. Of which the state shields those filing for bankruptcy a certain amount. Indiana is I think I heard $15,000 or so. Anyways, creditors are going for 1/4 of the original value, but in today's market it's really only worth 1/2 what the 2006 listed it as. Depending upon if you're a glass 1/2 empty/full, is how one would look at this. So, there are options. Due to health issues (ongoing) she's confused, scared, and alone. At least I have somewhat a semblance of understanding now. And all the info is pretty much in the public realm, so nothing really odd that I could get all this info without her knowledge or consent so far.

I now have many legal documents to review and come up with a plan, if I even find that I (wife and me = I/us) even want to insert myself into any legal standing in this matter. Or just use what I know now to advise her what she should do. At least I'm ahead in that matter now.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2011 02:36PM by El Jeffe.

Wow Bill, sounds complicated to me. Wishing you best of luck sorting it.

Thanks. Aside from the silly legal and/or financial wrangling, the most important side of this whole thing is that mom is very much on her final approach. I can tell that she is really in a state that she will not really come back from. She just seems so weak and has lost much of her will and fight. I find myself reflecting on my life with my parents or with parents and realize that chapter is closing in my life. I am very reflective on how much I appreciate all that they did for me. And I'll try to do what I can for her, while still providing for my family, and trying to not get sick again myself. It's a very melancholy time. I hope I can increase my kids' involvement with her as much as possible during this time.

Sorry, Jeffe. I've hit that time of life, too. All my parents' generation is leaving, one by one, leaving me a little humbled in terms of what they'd managed to accomplish in their lives.

Not trying to be insensitive here, but here's a post about KPN (our former monopoly telco) teaching our parliament very quickly what will happen if net neutrality is not written into law. A few weeks ago KPN bragged about using DPI (deep packet inspection) to see what their clients are all doing. At the same time they announced that they had to start laying off a third of their workforce to cope with the loss of revenue on text messages and calling minutes because within 9 months the usage of WhatsApp type of applications went from 0% of smart phone users to 90+%. They also announced that certain applications will be blocked, unless people are signing up for extras that will allow these applications. A Skype 'package' or an WhatsApp 'free' messaging add on if you will.

Fast forward to this week; net neutrality will now be written into law, in very clear terms. Thumbs up for our (sometimes) still functioning democracy and left wing parties!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2011 07:00PM by tliet.

The reverse of what your country did years ago was discussed on a podcast (the 5/24 show) I heard yesterday. Instead of reclaiming land from the sea, there are propositions of making floating platforms/barges into sea-based "Entrepreneurial Countries" - that is if you have a good idea for how a country should exist, float one, since all current land is spoken for. And they mention the net neutrality issues as just one way a government does what is not good for its people.

And, I am all for autonomous cars. Good discussion on those, too.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2011 12:45AM by El Jeffe.

>And, I am all for autonomous cars. Good discussion on those, too.

How do you feel about carnivorous autos?

Carnivorous Asada Gorditas, yay.

I hear there are a few areas (country is the wrong word here) in eastern Africa that the modern conservatives in the US should love. No interference of large governments, weapons for everyone and best of all; absolutely, positively no taxes!

Why net neutrality has become a conservative issue is really beyond me, or is this the gist of it? http://coloradoindependent.com/51665/bachmann-mangles-talking-points-%E2%80%98net-neutrality-is-censorship%E2%80%99

"Nobody can tell any business anywhere what to do," is a central tenet of our new conservatism.

Speaking of conservative issues, I'm sad to see the day that Rand Paul is the only guy taking a stand against the Patriot Act. This is truly one issue where the two parties all good Americans do not differ one bit. Reid says even the promised debate would be "giving terrorists the opportunity to plot against our country undetected"? He can suck it. McConnell can suck it. And Obama's robo-pen can suck it.*

* Dear Patriot Act-authorized surveillance, this is free speech, as it has been paid for by a corporation (trust me, since I don't have to report it).

It must feel weird to be on the side of the tea-party - but once in a blue moon those wacky libertarians make a coherent point.

The tea party is not libertarians.

True... but the whole "tea party" label is far from a real label with any well defined meaning. Instead of it being something that can sit on a side of an equals sign, maybe better to think in terms of Venn diagrams. There are heavy influencers (both in thought and in financial backing) of tea party activism who place some libertarian or semi-libertarian tropes: not cutting defense budgets or legalizing the wacky weed, but certainly the whole "shrink government"/"gov't should only provide defense", anti-tax, corporatism lenses. Libertarian ideas, perhaps filtered through the Goldwater nut wing.

Of course, many "tea party" groups are so avowedly independent that they are helmed by noted non-partisans such as Karl Rove, Tom Delay, and many of their closest friends. And there was that one ex-Democratic party guy in NY-26 who ran as a tea party candidate, so that means we can ignore that all the others canvas with the Republic party.

(That last graf was a snarky way of saying: there are a lot of competing, and many unsavory, threads that have been pulled into "the tea party". They can rail against govt overreach and tyranny and keelhaul anyone who doesn't want to renew the PATRIOT Act; they can claim they only care about fiscal responsibility but first thing they do in power is enact anti-abortion laws; they can cry about "personal responsibility" but demand tax cuts for those who don't need them while cutting off any resources to schools and the ill (fact: best investment over time for creating new productive and tax-paying members of society -- that is, reducing "leeches"). Do they contradict themselves? They do contain multitudes.)

ddt