Jim Naseum
-
Posts
2026 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Jim Naseum
-
-
In our family, most computers die around 3 years old from one cause or another. As anyone can see, they are very poorly made and absolutely not intended to last long. This is because they will be technically obsolete in a couple years, so there is no value to buidling in quality. Our defense is very simple: upon any new computer purchase, we place all user data and user accounts on a disk that is not the system disk. Never put anything of yours on a system disk. When the computer blows, plug your "data disk" into the new computer and off you go.
-
I don't think we has to worry about audiophiles around here!!! LOL!! whining about this amp is better than that!! LOL Crank it up on your monster klipsch and drown them out!! LOL once you got the power, and the massive klipsch sound, evetything else is pure BS. LOL!!! Whine: my cord is better then yours!! NOT!
Crank it up!!!
-
2
-
-
what kind of factory is it that is closing?
-
Not necessarily. If an insured CD was paying 10% you would likely have a car loan @ 15%+ and a mortgage rate of 15+ percent as well.
The question isn't the spread between saving and borrowing. That spread is always there. Again, the subject is risk, not just cost. Insured savings at 10% is one set of outcomes and uninsured stock portfolios is something entirely different. During the last meltdown,tons of people had massive shortfalls in their retirement accounts because it was all uninsured risk. That's just the facts.
-
If this was 1985, and your savings was in a 10% CD, you'd be laughing at the stock market nose dive. But the FED, in they infinite wisdom, decided that all capital must be put to work in the stock market. They lowered interest rates to zero, making insured savings pointless. Like it or not, you are shoved into big risk.
To play, or not to play? What is one supposed to do given the risks of "safety" result directly in eroding net worth and ultimately less spending power? Since that spending power is what will really matter to you and those who depend on you, the greater risk may come from sitting out the game. And if you have the time and can buy and hold forever, compounding is just a wonderful thing.
Hold forever has no practical application. People hold their savings until they need it. Suppose you need it today? You will have lost money. On any given day, whether the stocks are at highs or lows, someone needs their nest egg. That's how losers and big losses are created with a stock plan, versus savings.
Classically, "savings" is the virtue, not gambling. But today, it's been reversed and everyone is trained that saving is bad and stock risk is good. I would much rather have a 7% CD than a stock portfolio. And so would many prudent people. But that avenue has been cutoff on purpose to flood the stock market with sideline dollars.
Nothing to do with liquidity. Liquidity was accomplished through QEI through QE3. Interest rate is a different issue.
-
If this was 1985, and your savings was in a 10% CD, you'd be laughing at the stock market nose dive. But the FED, in they infinite wisdom, decided that all capital must be put to work in the stock market. They lowered interest rates to zero, making insured savings pointless. Like it or not, you are shoved into big risk.
-
Good comment. The only people surely affected are those retiring between now and 2020. Those people have lost real, actual dollars from their retirement accounts. Maybe as much as 15% right off the top. And the downslope hasn't ended yet. The economy is OK, but not great right now.So financially most people in the US are down about 10% over the last few days of trading?..............................................
Only those with skin in the game, so less than half in the US are affected, and this is really only of consequence to those who sold or are selling in a panic.
Cheaper gas, cheaper groceries, cheaper energy, so there is a bright side that will affect everyone. The markets are not the economy.
-
Build the ramp and leave Jeff alone. DO you need an attorney to wipe your ***? I hope not. Its your legal residence.
Top Knot!
-
If you built in the back would anyone even know? Maybe spend a little extra to make it mobile. That could not be construed as permanent construction on the leased land. Put the thing on wheels/rollers. Be the lizard king.
I discounted the back for safety reasons. The back exit would require first exiting to a patio, then going through the fire door for the garage. Once in the garage she had to get the large electric garage door open. If they're is a fire, quake or flood there may be no electricity to open the door. She would be unable to lift the door manually. All of that versus walking out the front door, where one would expect emergency workers to be. I see no logical reason to sacrifice her safety.
-
Does he own the residence or are you just leasing the site?
It's a standard mobile home park where you purchase the "mobile home" per se for cash from previous owner, but then lease the space it sits on. it's a large park with about 400 sites. The actual owners are absentee. They live 800 miles away in San Fran. I communicate with them via FAX, as none of them will take my phone calls.
-
Tell the owners / manager when if your mother is injured on the property you intend to take all there denials of building facilities to assist her with her disability to an attorney and sue them (a lawyer will take that case on contingency)
THAT'S THE TICKET! Between that, the clarity of the law, and your 35 year lease looks to me like you are in the drivers seat.
Dave
I wish. Actually, the rant point I was making in the beginning was that only the rich, or let's say only the money, is ever in the driver's seat regarding law. It's a dang shame. I just got off the phone with the local lawyer at legal aid, and I ran the idea past him that the owner had no say according to a direct reading of the law. He didn't agree. He felt that "accommodate" might be a very broad term giving them, as he put it, "lots of ways to accommodate your need, including telling you where you can build the ramp." I pressed him for the black letter interpretation of the law (as I cited up above), and he wouldn't commit that it meant anything. His answer? "That's why there are 373,000 registered lawyers in California." In other words, without a lawyer, nothing means anything, and everything is subject to opinion.
I went and talked with the City Building Code manager and he said we needed NO permits to build the ramp.
-
WOW! The short sellers are making a bloody fortune! A dream windfall for many hedge funds. LOL
-
1
-
-
Hey thanks. I asked our local MH advocate about the ombudsman office, and he said they wouldn't be much help, as stated here on their web site:
Quote
The Ombudsman does not have enforcement authority for the Mobilehome Residency Law, except for a few sections involving Manufactured Home dealers and salespersons. Requests for assistance alleging violations of Mobilehome Residency Law may be referred to the park operator for voluntary compliance. If there is no response from the park operator within 30 days, these complaints will be closed with no further action.
End
I am going to run the "Matthews interpretation" by the legal aid lawyer tomorrow. It sounds awfully good to me.
I appreciate all the suggestions here! Ams will follow up on them in more detail Monday.
-
Bigstew, they don't like the aesthetics of disability ramps.
-
No. I have the entire Mobile Residency Law and there is no other requirements about disability.Why must mom (or you or any occupant, for that matter) have to be disabled?
The law you posted states:
"The ownership or management shall not prohibit a homeowner or resident from installing accommodations for the disabled on the home or the site, lot, or space on which the mobilehome is located..."
I did not see anything which said that this law applies only to residences with an occupant who is disabled.
For example, what if my disabled friend likes to come visit? Does this law say I can build a ramp so he can get in? You didn't post anything that said I could not. However, it is possible that some other provision you did not cite requires an occupant to have a disability requiring the accommodation.
-
Understood. The bad news is that your discussion takes place in court, which means I'm out many thousands of dollars just to be right.
Not necessarily. I can't speak for your state, but here in Texas, residential eviction proceedings are brought in the Justice of the Peace courts. This is the equivalent of "Judge Judy." The rules are relaxed, and technicalities are not used as much, since it is understood that many litigants will appear without counsel. As long as you are willing to learn and do, you can usually do a fair job of handling this kind of stuff on your own.
You're a font of useful information Mr. Matthews! LOL - - -thanks (sincerely).
You're welcome. Just remember, as I said, LL doesn't have to renew the lease if he doesn't want to do so. If you spend $2k to build a ramp and your lease is up for renewal in 2 months, that entire investment could go down the drain. Also, when LL knows you sunk a lot of money into something, they can bump your rents on renewal. You have an investment in it. You can be put into the Catch-22 of leaving it all behind or paying a higher rent.
Lease is for 35 years.
-
The person giving you all this hassle…is he the park manager? He may be jerk; but, i’ll bet the owners are more sensitive to cases of discrimination--which this is.
Both. Naturally, I worked with the mgr first. He proved useless and uncooperative, so I went direct to the owners and have only been dealing with the owners for the last 2 weeks. As an aside, Mr. Mgr. refused to give me the owner information and insisted it was not his duty to do so, even after I presented him with this in writing:
Mobile Residency Law
California Civil Code Div. 2 Part 2
Chapter 2.5
Section
798.28. Disclosure of mobilehome park owner The management of a mobilehome park shall disclose, in writing, the name, business address, and business telephone number of the mobilehome park owner upon the request of a homeowner. (Added by Ch. 505, Stats. of 1981, eff. 1/1/82) (Amended by Ch. 1397, Stats. of 1982, eff. 1/1/83) (Amended by Ch. 62, Stats. of 1991, eff. 1/1/92)After I gave a written request, and cited this law, he still refused. So, I went to the city and county public records and got the information. The owners then tried to tell me the managers weren't allowed to give out the info. I presented him with the same law citation, and he said, "Well, I'll give you the contacts." Which was already moot, because I had it all.
Then, he waited a week, and sent me a letter saying he needed my mom's written authorization for me to speak to them on her behalf (ramp is for mom). I them furnished my durable power of attorney as agent for my mom. He then wrote and told me my mother would have to appear in the managers office so they could verify her disability. I called the office and asked if they were doctors, or licensed medical pros. Of course they said no. So, I informed the owner she would not be submitting her for their examination since they had no medical bona fides, but that I would provide doctors statement of her disability. And on and on it has gone.
-
Understood. The bad news is that your discussion takes place in court, which means I'm out many thousands of dollars just to be right.
Not necessarily. I can't speak for your state, but here in Texas, residential eviction proceedings are brought in the Justice of the Peace courts. This is the equivalent of "Judge Judy." The rules are relaxed, and technicalities are not used as much, since it is understood that many litigants will appear without counsel. As long as you are willing to learn and do, you can usually do a fair job of handling this kind of stuff on your own.
You're a font of useful information Mr. Matthews! LOL - - -thanks (sincerely).
-
Ideally.....
I imagined in my mind's eye that the "Mobile Residency Law" had some enforcement agency behind it, and one simply pointed to the infraction, and the enforcing agency wrote a nasty to the owner, and all was good. I think many people assume laws work that way. But millions of laws have no direct enforcement. Everyone here in my area would say to me stuff like, "Just call the city!" or "Just tell the state office of corporations!" stuff like that. Everyone assumes there is a path of agency enforcement.
-
In addition, you must construct the accommodations in compliance with any codes and permitting requirements. If you don't, you are in breach.
I already have the city building inspector coming tomorrow to explain the permits to me.
-
Understood. The bad news is that your discussion takes place in court, which means I'm out many thousands of dollars just to be right.
-
BTW - - you just gave away some expensive free lawyer advice! LOL!
-
2
-
-
What bothered me is there I could find no law enforcement agency which could simply tell this guy he MUST comply. Everything is on the bet. the risk never goes away for the guy with no lawyer. See?
-
But, there is more. The lease agreement says that no construction of any kind is permitted "without written approval of the management in advance." So, I submitted the construction form as required, and they won't approve it.
I see. This is my take, and I would be willing to wager I am right:
The landowner, by law, cannot deny the accommodations in issue. The accommodations need only comply with the code and be permitted, it a permit is required for such types of things. Therefore, no provision in a lease can alter this rule. Therefore, you cannot be held in breach of your lease for constructing accommodations which the law says the landlord cannot prohibit.
This is my take. Proceed at your own risk or get additional opinions if you want.
Well, that's certainly a hopeful opinion AFAIC. The risks are that the guys gets some sort of order for me to tear down my $2000 ramp, at which time I am forced into the "get a lawyer and spend $10K mode." I wanted to avoid that risk.
Does anyone like audiophiles?
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
Yeah, they don't get it. Once you have big efficient speakers, that's all that matters. LOL!