|
|
What gives the post office the right to charge me for mail that has
been sent to me, because the sender did not pay sufficient postage?
This seems to be occurring quite a bit lately. I recall several times
in the past where I would mail something usin
|
|
|
Fri, 07 Dec 2007 07:46:43 -0500 from Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.*com>:
>
> In article <uf6gl311dv3u0v8gc4m4tnfrtssji7hva8@4ax.com>,
> the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm (Stan Brown) writes:
> | Every state, as far as I know, requires that if a vehicle is garag
|
|
|
I own 100% stock in several corporations. Those corporations have
state-issued privildeged licenses for their various business
activities. The licenses are in the corporation's name (Abc, Inc.) NOT
my personal name.
Recently I applied for a state-is
|
|
|
On Dec 6, 10:51 am, grendal <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Company A hires telemarking company B. Company A provides the t's&c's
> along with a script.
> Regardless of the contract between company A and company B, Company A
> holds the liability.
>
|
|
|
On Dec 6, 10:51 am, Paul Cassel <pcasselremo...@comremovecast.net>
wrote:
> What A may say is that the terms of the deal were that you had to comply
> with the terms of the deal which were later revealed to you in detail.
They may say that, but that
|
|
|
tdm,
You ask what the difference is between a "road permit" and an easement
is a forest (rural?) context.
The primary difference is that, 1) a permit is for a period of time
(temporary) and an easement is permanent; 2) a permit is usually not
rec
|
|
|
In article <64gil394evp63bb0d7ee7c8341a7hroc23@4ax.com>,
ddl@danlan.*com (Dan Lanciani) wrote:
> In article <uf6gl311dv3u0v8gc4m4tnfrtssji7hva8@4ax.com>,
> the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm (Stan Brown) writes:
>
> | Every state, as far as I know, requi
|
|
|
On Dec 4, 7:42 am, tobe <ybotka...@cinci.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Rather than following his first impulse of sending them a letter
> indicating that it is none of their damn business, he has quietly thrown
> these two letters in the trash.
>
> 1. Can t
|
|
|
On Dec 7, 7:47 am, Stan Brown <the_stan_br...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:51:06 -0500 from A Michigan Attorney
> <miattor...@gmail.com>:
>
> > All interests junior to the foreclosing mortgagee
> > will be extinguished by the foreclosu
|
|
|
kastnna wrote:
> TC <golemdan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> However, we now have one unit which is forcing us to consider
>> foreclosure. At our last board meeting, we discussed the option
>> and we discovered that none of us knew the answer to a
>> fu
|
|
|
Mike Jacobs wrote:
> "Stuart A. Bronstein" <spamt...@lexregia.com> wrote:
>
>> Technically it is unlikely that the homeowners would have the
>> right to "foreclose." Instead you have a different kind of lien,
>> and can, under some circumstances, h
|
|
|
Mike Jacobs wrote:
> Um, David, by definition a mortgage _is_ a lien. That's what makes
> it a mortgage, and differentiates it from an ordinary, unsecured
> personal loan to the homeowner. The lender has recorded the mortgage
> documents (in some
|
|
|
tdm,
You are interested in a piece of property that is not accessible. Your
realtor has suggested a "road permit" rather than an easement. You indicate
that a road permit may be renewed every few years or not renewed..
You should walk away f
|
|
|
Stan Brown wrote:
> Michigan Attorney <miattorney@gmail.com>:
>> All interests junior to the foreclosing mortgagee
>> will be extinguished by the foreclosure; all senior interests
>> will be unaffected.
>
> Isn't that statement overbroad?
>
>
|
|
