- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How to respond to Insufficient Debt Validation?
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:23 pm to NameWithheld
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:23 pm to NameWithheld
quote:
Just because a city has an ordinance doesn't mean that it can't be appealed or challenged
Did you really miss his sarcasm?
1
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:27 pm to NameWithheld
We're on the same side here.
Bottom line as far as Lafayette goes: if there's no judicial enforcement ordinance under Joey Durel, there never will be one. Nobody in the city/parish government or Redflex want the details of the money grab to be discovered in a civil proceeding. The cash flow is too good as it is with the number of people who are frightened into paying or are intimidated into paying because they believe they have a moral obligation to do so. As soon as a real judge has a case like this, they will kill the cash cow.
Bottom line as far as Lafayette goes: if there's no judicial enforcement ordinance under Joey Durel, there never will be one. Nobody in the city/parish government or Redflex want the details of the money grab to be discovered in a civil proceeding. The cash flow is too good as it is with the number of people who are frightened into paying or are intimidated into paying because they believe they have a moral obligation to do so. As soon as a real judge has a case like this, they will kill the cash cow.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:32 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Did you really miss his sarcasm?
No, not at all... That was just my transition to providing the example of the Farmers Branch ordinance!
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:34 pm to LegalTiger
Realistically, the state legislature should act to either kill or clarify this on a statewide basis. I am not sure what Louisiana has on the books for these devices, but it certainly doesn't appear to be nearly as authoritative as it should be if Lafayette is having these sort of questions linger out there.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:40 pm to NameWithheld
When Jefferson parish just pulled the plug on the program I figured the whole system was BS.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:41 pm to LegalTiger
quote:
Judgment against a vehicle? I'm being serious.
At this point I'm doubting you're an actual lawyer.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:44 pm to NameWithheld
It's gotten killed every time it's been brought up there. Charlie Buckles, who is an influential LAGOP party apparatchik douchebag, is or was on the Redflex payroll now or at one time and no doubt lobbies or causes to be lobbied the Republicans in the legislature on the issue. The Democrats, well, don't need to say much about them being all in favor of government revenue increases and constitutional indifference.
I think you only really have Lafayette, Baker and NOLA with them, with BR pulling the plug some time ago, so as with most "local bills", the legislators that don't have any skin in the game just vote green, if you know what I mean. Easy lobbying strategy for this one issue. Let more municipalities start doing this and I think the state will step in and kill it.
I think you only really have Lafayette, Baker and NOLA with them, with BR pulling the plug some time ago, so as with most "local bills", the legislators that don't have any skin in the game just vote green, if you know what I mean. Easy lobbying strategy for this one issue. Let more municipalities start doing this and I think the state will step in and kill it.
This post was edited on 3/10/14 at 3:50 pm
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:46 pm to Pennymoney
quote:
At this point I'm doubting you're an actual lawyer.
Regardless of whether I am or not, you definitely aren't.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 4:11 pm to Brightside Bengal
Send a letter requesting they prove it was you driving the vehicle.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 4:11 pm to Pennymoney
quote:
At this point I'm doubting you're an actual lawyer.
And you are?
Posted on 3/10/14 at 4:13 pm to weadjust
quote:
Posted by weadjust
Apply for food stamps and section 8 housing. If your going to work the system go all in.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 4:14 pm to Brightside Bengal
quote:
Well they eventually turn it over to a debt collector.
who is it? i don't buy this at all
they'd have to have your social security #
Posted on 3/10/14 at 4:17 pm to SaintEB
quote:
A girl that I used to work with, saw it hit her Transunion
gotta call bullshite on that
Posted on 3/10/14 at 6:15 pm to LegalTiger
quote:
Regardless of whether I am or not, you definitely aren't.
One just F.Y.I. you can get an adjudication against just property.
Two this isn't even that scenario so your whole suggestion that's what it is is absurd. They are getting a judgment against you, not against "property".
Now tell me Professor how this is any different than you being forced to pay a parking ticket if your wife or a friend parks your vehicle illegally.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 6:47 pm to TheDoc
I'm not sure why. It happened.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 10:07 am to Pennymoney
quote:
Now tell me Professor how this is any different than you being forced to pay a parking ticket if your wife or a friend parks your vehicle illegally.
Crickets chirping...
Posted on 3/11/14 at 1:02 pm to Pennymoney
quote:
Crickets chirping...
Shut up, bitch.
Parking tickets are legitimate. They are issued by police officers or city employees, are criminally adjudicated, the fines belong wholly to the issuing authority and are a proper function of police power.
Photo enforcement of criminal laws by a foreign corporation on a for-profit basis under color of civil penalty and in kangaroo administrative courts is constitutionally repugnant and patently unAmerican.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 1:06 pm to Brightside Bengal
Posted on 3/11/14 at 1:09 pm to Pennymoney
quote:
They are getting a judgment against you, not against "property".
Who's getting a judgment? Certainly not your employer. The crap sent by your company has zero legal effect, much less is a "judgment". To get a judgment, you need to go to court.
Redflex and the municipalities they have hooked on this cash cow have not and will not ever let the racket that is photo-enforcement on a for-profit basis by a private entity ever be subject to judicial scrutiny, so there will be no judgment, ever.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 2:13 pm to LegalTiger
quote:
Who's getting a judgment? Certainly not your employer. The crap sent by your company has zero legal effect, much less is a "judgment". To get a judgment, you need to go to court.
WTF are you talking about company?
First you were blabbering about getting a judgment against a vehicle. Now you're blabbering incoherently about an employer? And you still haven't discerned any difference between you getting a parking ticket and your wife or friend getting it for you if they're driving your car.
You're still responsible for paying it are you not? Amercuh , gotta love it....
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News