Why Proof/Facts/Evidence Is Not Always True

[wayne1218]

In retrospect Wayne, my attorney and I prevailed and walked away with a SOLID victory ; hopefully it paved the way for others to stand up to these tyrannical jerks and show them that there is such a thing as a legal system to pursue if you are accused of something.

Unless you were walking away from a court of law, you won nothing savage. Are you fucken dillusional???

[savage1]

The fact that the Association didn't do anything doesn't mean your position was correct, it just means they didn't want to fool with it. If you would have threatened to shoot and kill everyone on the Association they probably would have left you alone as well, but that wouldn't have meant your position was right. The end doesn't always justify the means.

Do you really think that if they could have legally enforced the fine, they would have not tried to do so.
Afterall if they pursued it and won, it would have served notice to other residents that even with an attorney it would be difficult to win a case against the Almighty Association.
They flat out knew they were beat based on what my attorney and I said and thus dropped the issue, hoping that people would forget and that they could one again resume pursuing others who knew wouldn't fight back or appeal and/or if they did appeal destroy and humiliate them as was the custom.

[savage1]

1) It's safe to assume you signed paperwork where this was stipulated

2) If you go to a concert and get busted for smoking, do you say i've been to 100 concerts and nobody has ever said a word? No, that would be ignorant. What it means is that you have been getting away with it forever. Go ahead, tell them a security guard looked at you 6 years ago at a concert and turned his head. So what, it is still stipulated on the back of the ticket you purchased and at any time, it can be enforced

3) Who cares if she wants/loves power? Seriously, WHO CARES? The bigger thing is you signed a paper (Assumed) and it was written right on it. Just because some guy pretended not to fucken hear it means shit. What does mean shit is that you did see the rule and you still fucken ignored it. Spin it your way savage, no doubt you will but if you signed ANYTHING, you are totally fucken wrong. The fact that she never pursued it wasn't because you were right, it was more likely that she didn't want to fucken deal with you and spend money fighting a fucken cat!

Actually I don't remember the exact wording of what I signed;what I DO remember is making it very clear to that salesman that I wouldn't buy the condo if there was ever to be an issue about an indoor cat. He gave me the impression it would not(in any event it was an indoor cat and thus considered part of my personal property-enuf said).
The cat was in plain view for four years';they knew about it and left it alone until a dog did some damage prio to my notice.
Folks talk about the strange coincidence of Ortiz starting to hit homer runs at the same time he was accused of taking steroids.
What about this one-I was left alone for four years and then all of a sudden they come after me(of course it had nothing to do with the dog-yeah right).
As I stated, they left it alone because they couldn't fathom the thought of losing if I ever took them to court(which I would have done if really did attempt to fine me).

[wayne1218]

This is as simple a case as it gets savage. If you signed a sheet where it is stated, you lose. It is pretty clear to me that it was written in the agreement based on what you said and read. It doesn't matter what you are told. As with any agreement, it is up to you, the buyer to read all agreements. If you sign them, that means you agree to the terms. If they are enforced 7 years later, too fucken bad. You knew and it was your responsibility to know. Period!

[savage1]

Unless you were walking away from a court of law, you won nothing savage. Are you fucken dillusional???

I "won" precisely because there was no court of law-you might say I won be default;they couldn't deal with someone who REALLY stood up to them;they were used to pushing folks around like ragdolls.
You can rationalize it any way you want.
Other received and paid fines for transgressions that hey were charged with and/or lost in the "appeal"(which as stated was a joke-you had no chance).
In my case, we stormed out of there, no verdict was ever rendered, and I NEVER received any fine notices in the future-I call that a VICTORY for myself and shows that if you stand up for what you believe is right and no matter how intimidating yoru accuser is, you can WIN!

[wayne1218]

I "won" precisely because there was no court of law-you might say I won be default;they couldn't deal with someone who REALLY stood up to them;they were used to pushing folks around like ragdolls.
You can rationalize it any way you want.
Other received and paid fines for transgressions that hey were charged with and/or lost in the "appeal"(which as stated was a joke-you had no chance).
In my case, we stormed out of there, no verdict was ever rendered, and I NEVER received any fine notices in the future-I call that a VICTORY for myself and shows that if you stand up for what you believe is right and no matter how intimidating yoru accuser is, you can WIN!

You are the one trying to rationalize savage. You were awarded NOTHING and unless a judge was involved, you didn't win shit. You keep trying to "Rationalize" and say you won simply because they refused to fight over a fucken cat. Get over yourself!

[mavskidd02]

Why is this thread in ASD? Is it just me or is it about court case involving the issue of a house cat? Just saying....

[harold_bush]

Savage, I don't know you, but the logic sounds like the logic my 8 year old would come up with. I got my way so I must be right????

I'm on our neighborhood HOA. We have rules in place that don't get followed quite often. As a board we have to decide when to enforce. Take for example a homeowner whose has some siding rotting off the side of his chimney. Rotting siding is a clear violation of the covenants. We sent a certified letter to the homeowner explaining that he is in violation and had 90 days to repair. 90 days go by, no repairs. We follow up and said he isn't going to fix the siding. Our options are 1. Ignore the rotting siding and leave him alone (which your mind means he was wins and was right) 2. Take him to court on the issue (spending money we don't have), we win, but spend $7500 to get there. 3. We have the right to pay a contractor to do the repairs and assert a lien on his house. Again, spending money we don't have just to have a lien that we may never recover on. Take this same issue and say there are five houses with the same problem and we are out of money and can't use hte money for its intended purpose, the upkeep of the neighborhood......meaning everyone suffers.

As far as your attorney, you sound like people I deal w/ everyday threatening attorneys. I work in the legal side of the insurance industry dealing w/ people that are trying to sue the corporation I work for. It is usually the people that are the most full of shit that are the quickest to threaten their atty.

When I get a case in my goal is to make the best economic decision for my company. Sometimes that means settling a case that is bullshit, sometimes that means settling a valid case, and sometimes that means taking a case to trial. Each case is independant, and unfortunately there are times when I have to settle a case that is bullshit b/c it is the best economic decision. I've settled bullshit cases that we would have ultimately won at trial, but it would cost us $100k to "win". If that same case can be settled for $10k...even though it is bullshit....it is something we have to strongly consider. Since I owe a fiduciary duty to my company, spending $10k to "lose" sometimes makes more sense than spending $100k to "win." Yes, we could litigate the matter, win, and the plaintiff not get a penny, but when it takes $100k to get there, not so much a victory is it? Would you rather be right and win with a $100k price tag or would you rather "lose" with a $10k price tag?

In your simplistic mind you won b/c you got to keep your cat, but you were still wrong. As Wayne stated, the only thing that matters is what you signed, and it sounds like it was clear no pets were allowed.

As far as not liking the main lady, who gives a shit? Again, are you 5 years old? I don't like that person so I'm not going to listen to them? Really? Look, Obama is the chief law enforcement officer in this country.....I can't fucking stand the guy and think he is the biggest danger this country faces, but I can't just disobey the law and say I hate Obama so I don't have to follow the laws of the land.....retarded logic.

[savage1]

This is as simple a case as it gets savage. If you signed a sheet where it is stated, you lose. It is pretty clear to me that it was written in the agreement based on what you said and read. It doesn't matter what you are told. As with any agreement, it is up to you, the buyer to read all agreements. If you sign them, that means you agree to the terms. If they are enforced 7 years later, too fucken bad. You knew and it was your responsibility to know. Period!

Because of the circumstances surrounding this matter with the salesman who REPRESENTEDF THEM, I respectfully disagree.
It was up to HIM to ask the owners whether they would allow an indoor cat or not if he wasn't sure-not just wink his eye and laugh.
The personal property part about an indoor cat argued by my attorney IS also HUGE as well as the fact (as I stated in second post) that they allowed a woman with two indoor cats to "buy" herself in-is that fair???
The fact that these nasty and vindicative people walked away from it without pursuing their threat to fine me is telling to me at least.

[wayne1218]

Because of the circumstances surrounding this matter with the salesman who REPRESENTEDF THEM, I respectfully disagree.
It was up to HIM to ask the owners whether they would allow an indoor cat or not if he wasn't sure-not just wink his eye and laugh.
The personal property part about an indoor cat argued by my attorney IS also HUGE as well as the fact (as I stated in second post) that they allowed a woman with two indoor cats to "buy" herself in-is that fair???
The fact that these nasty and vindicative people walked away from it without pursuing their threat to fine me is telling to me at least.

Disagree all you want savage, you are still wrong.

A paper trail with your signature and you are done. It doesn't take law school to figure that out. Good Morning, Good Afternoon and Good Night!

There is Disneyland, Disneyworld and Planet savage.

[savage1]

Savage, I don't know you, but the logic sounds like the logic my 8 year old would come up with. I got my way so I must be right????

I'm on our neighborhood HOA. We have rules in place that don't get followed quite often. As a board we have to decide when to enforce. Take for example a homeowner whose has some siding rotting off the side of his chimney. Rotting siding is a clear violation of the covenants. We sent a certified letter to the homeowner explaining that he is in violation and had 90 days to repair. 90 days go by, no repairs. We follow up and said he isn't going to fix the siding. Our options are 1. Ignore the rotting siding and leave him alone (which your mind means he was wins and was right) 2. Take him to court on the issue (spending money we don't have), we win, but spend $7500 to get there. 3. We have the right to pay a contractor to do the repairs and assert a lien on his house. Again, spending money we don't have just to have a lien that we may never recover on. Take this same issue and say there are five houses with the same problem and we are out of money and can't use hte money for its intended purpose, the upkeep of the neighborhood......meaning everyone suffers.

As far as your attorney, you sound like people I deal w/ everyday threatening attorneys. I work in the legal side of the insurance industry dealing w/ people that are trying to sue the corporation I work for. When I get a case in my goal is to make the best economic decision for my company. Sometimes that means settling a case that is bullshit, sometimes that means settling a legite case, and sometimes that means taking a case to trial. Each case is independant, and unfortunately there are times when I have to settle a case that is bullshit b/c it is the best economic decision. I've settled bullshit cases that we would have ultimately won at trial, but it can cost $100k to take a case through trial. I that same case can be settled for $10k...even though it is bullshit....it is something we have to strongly consider. Since I owe a fiduciary duty to my company, spending $10k to "lose" sometimes makes more sense than spending $100k to "win." Yes, we could litigate the matter, win, and the plaintiff not get a penny, but when it takes $100k to get there, not so much a victory is it? Would you rather be right and win with a $100k price tag or would you rather "lose" with a $10k price tag?

In your simplistic mind you won b/c you got to keep your cat, but you were still wrong. As Wayne stated, the only thing that matters is what you signed, and it sounds like it was clear no pets were allowed.

As far as not liking the main lady, who gives a shit? Again, are you 5 years old? I don't like that person so I'm not going to listen to them? Really? Look, Obama is the chief law enforcement officer in this country.....I can't fucking stand the guy and think he is the biggest danger this country faces, but I can't just disobey the law and say I hate Obama so I don't have to follow the laws of the land.

Be careful when you use the words "simplistic mind," when you refer to me;I will put up my intelligence, thought processes and intelligence against anyone in this forum including you.
Without being present to the initial negotiations regarding my purchase of the house, what transpired over the four years durign which nothing was said or done about the cat, knowing the mindset of those who were in charge of the makign and enforcing rules and exactly what my attorney said(then personal property thing is the thing which probably subdued them), you my friend are not in a very good position to say anything.
ps How does the "buy in" for the other lady with the cats fit into your legality of things?

[savage1]

Disagree all you want savage, you are still wrong.

A paper trail with your signature and you are done. It doesn't take law school to figure that out. Good Morning, Good Afternoon and Good Night!

There is Disneyland, Disneyworld and Planet savage.

AND Planet Wayne, who selectively picks and chooses what he wants to -that is that which fits in with his arguments while omitting anything which doesn't fit in-this sounds like what some Sports Service do in recounting their records.lol

[savage1]

As far as not liking the main lady, who gives a shit? Again, are you 5 years old? I don't like that person so I'm not going to listen to them? Really? Look, Obama is the chief law enforcement officer in this country.....I can't fucking stand the guy and think he is the biggest danger this country faces, but I can't just disobey the law and say I hate Obama so I don't have to follow the laws of the land.....retarded logic.

For the record, the biggest danger and frauds of all time were George Bush and Dick Cheney.

[wayne1218]

AND Planet Wayne, who selectively picks and chooses what he wants to -that is that which fits in with his arguments while omitting anything which doesn't fit in-this sounds like what some Sports Service do in recounting their records.lol

Paper trails and signatures will stand up in every court in this country savage. That's fact. Your theories are just that, theories. You wouldn't even have time to sit down before you lost your case in a court of law. It doesn't matter what the salesman does/doesn't say. It is still your responsibilty to read it before you sign it. Unless you had that part re-written, you are obligated to do as says and you didn't. There is zero picking and choosing there. Cut and dry. It sucks that you are wrong but you are.

[BettorsChat]

I can't believe I just read all of this shit about a cat......lmao I love animals, but 2 pages about a cat. You guys on here will argue about anything...lol