Recent content by LdiJ

That is why you ask the attorney what to do to fix the problem instead of coming up with ideas on your own. It may be that any kind of POA is not the way to go at this point. The attorney will know the best way to fix the problem.

That does not appear to be a conflict of interest since the lawyer did not previously represent your current wife.

I think that is unlikely. You should know whether or not you are on a calendar year (ending 12/31) or a fiscal year, (ending some other date). Did you file tax returns based on a year ending 12/31 or some other ending date?

I am familiar enough with law in general to make that statement, since it is basic law 101. A person has no opportunity to challenge the paternity of a child that they do not know exists. However, it doesn't matter one bit what either one of us think on the subject, since it is far too...

That is actually a critical factor, but an attorney will confirm it one way or another.

It depends in great part on when he discovered that the child existed. He needs to consult with an attorney rather than assuming that it will be impossible based on what someone on an internet forum said.

I wonder if this is one of those Guam divorce deals or something similar to that.

You would have to disestablish your paternity as part of the divorce process. Has it been two years since you discovered that the child existed? I suspect that you need an attorney on board.

Just as an FYI, the typical reasons that a company pays for option agreements on property is because the whole deal hinges on all of the parts falling into place. So, they need a certain number of properties in the area in order to make it work, so they pay for options on properties until they...

It makes sense to me that they are willing to reimburse 3000.00 for her attorney fees if she signs an agreement. I could certainly see why they would have no interest in paying part of her attorney fees if she does not. There is definitely nothing nefarious about that.

I would normally agree with you, but the housing market is really high right now and is overdue for a correction. Therefore, it might be the buyer, rather than the owner, who is taking the bigger risk in this particular instance.

I agree, but if there is no other option, then the grandson has to do what he has to do. If that means breaking the lease to take care of grandpa, then that is what it means. If grandpa is still competent perhaps he could help with the financial fallout.

You didn't get my point. Just because you believe that for you it's better to go ahead and pay if it takes you more than 1/2 hour to deal with it does not mean that everyone else should automatically have the same opinion. It is perfectly fine for you to feel that way for you. It is just not...

And that is absolutely a decision that you have every right to make, for you. It is a bit arrogant however, to assume that it is a decision that is right for everyone else, particularly those whose incomes might be more limited than yours.

I tend to agree with you on this one Bali. There are quite a few people though who are of the mindset that it is better to pay smaller bills than deal with the hassle, which is what a lot of creditors count on.