Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Not just "someone." The person who actually injured you. Don't hyperbole and 
> it'll make more sense.

  You make it sound like that person did it on purpose and hence is guilty
of a crime.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> In the Netherlands the heirs inherit everything a person owns including 
> his debts.

  Imagine someone is living his life just minding his own business,
doing his work, paying his taxes and contributing to society as a good
citizen. Then some official comes to him and says "hey, your uncle,
which you have never even heard of, just died and you are his only
heir, so you inherit everything." This guy is like "cool! How much do
I get?" "Nothing. Your uncle had ten millions in debt, and now it's
yours. I'm here to collect or put you in jail if you can't pay."

  Nice.

  (And no, I don't know how it's in Finland.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> So tell us, what should this woman have done?  Just lived with the injury 
> because the healthcare system is broken and she's not in a personal 
> position to fix it?

  What exactly are you suggesting?

  Imagine that she had a pure accident where no other person was involved.
Maybe she was walking in the wild and a tree branch fell over her. What
should she do? Sue somebody until someone pays her bills?

  If you live in a country where an accident can leave you crippled for
the rest of your life because you don't have money to fix yourself, then
perhaps it would be better to move to some other country. It's not like
you would have to move very far. I hear the public health care system in
Canada is pretty ok.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> That woman has no way of repairing the 
> healthcare system, so what else would you expect her to do than sue someone?

  Move to Canada? (No, that was not a joke.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 20/02/2012 03:08 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 20.02.2012 15:06, schrieb Invisible:
>> I know a lady called Sue. She seldom seems happy...
>
> Neither was the Boy Named Sue...

Haha! Oh man... that was damned funny.

Post a reply to this message

Am 20.02.2012 16:35, schrieb Warp:
> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
>> In the Netherlands the heirs inherit everything a person owns including
>> his debts.
>
>    Imagine someone is living his life just minding his own business,
> doing his work, paying his taxes and contributing to society as a good
> citizen. Then some official comes to him and says "hey, your uncle,
> which you have never even heard of, just died and you are his only
> heir, so you inherit everything." This guy is like "cool! How much do
> I get?" "Nothing. Your uncle had ten millions in debt, and now it's
> yours. I'm here to collect or put you in jail if you can't pay."
>
>    Nice.
>
>    (And no, I don't know how it's in Finland.)

In Germany, as an heir you can choose to decline the inheritance, in 
which case the other heirs get a bigger share; if there are no other 
heirs (or they decline as well), the government gets everything 
(including the debts).

Post a reply to this message

On 20-2-2012 16:56, clipka wrote:
> Am 20.02.2012 16:35, schrieb Warp:
>> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>> In the Netherlands the heirs inherit everything a person owns including
>>> his debts.
>>
>> Imagine someone is living his life just minding his own business,
>> doing his work, paying his taxes and contributing to society as a good
>> citizen. Then some official comes to him and says "hey, your uncle,
>> which you have never even heard of, just died and you are his only
>> heir, so you inherit everything." This guy is like "cool! How much do
>> I get?" "Nothing. Your uncle had ten millions in debt, and now it's
>> yours. I'm here to collect or put you in jail if you can't pay."
>>
>> Nice.
>>
>> (And no, I don't know how it's in Finland.)
>
> In Germany, as an heir you can choose to decline the inheritance, in
> which case the other heirs get a bigger share; if there are no other
> heirs (or they decline as well), the government gets everything
> (including the debts).

Same here. I should have mentioned that. I am not sure if declining an 
inheritance means that you can not even keep purely personal things like 
photographs and clothes.

In a case like this you will have to wait till you know the verdict 
before accepting or rejecting. I think you have half a year to decide, 
but think of not being able to do anything with somebody's belongings 
and then after that period opening all the boxes.



-- 
tip: do not run in an unknown place when it is too dark to see the 
floor, unless you prefer to not use uppercase.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/19/2012 23:24, andrel wrote:
> Why would you beat on the relatives that recently suffered a great loss and
> are is no way responsible for what occurred?

It's not the relatives getting sued. It's the estate of the dead person, 
which means basically she's petitioning a judge to sign a check on behalf of 
the dead person to pay her back for her medical expenses. There's no need 
for the relatives to even hear about the lawsuit, technically. It's just a 
thing that goes through probate along with the rest of the inheritance 
process. It's really no more discombobulating than having the people 
inheriting some real-estate property going to the judge saying "please sign 
a deed that gives the heirs the ownership of the house."

Remember that a "lawsuit" doesn't necessarily even mean someone is 
contesting something. It just means you're asking the judge to apply some law.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/20/2012 0:09, andrel wrote:
> In the Netherlands the heirs inherit everything a person owns including his
> debts.

That sounds like an awful system. I certainly don't want to be responsible 
for the debts of whatever random person might have named me as an heir. I 
think you're likely oversimplifying, tho.

> If otoh the system works in such a way that the medical and other costs must
> come from his personal belongings, you might argue that he does not need it
> anymore anyway.

It comes from his estate, which is his possessions left over after he's dead.

> Still this wasn't a case of suicide and in the eyes of a simple European not
> even a case of negligence,

Right. If you read, the court already decided it's a case of negilgence on 
the part of the dead kid, and not on the part of amtrack.

> *) she might as well be hit by the remains of a deer crossing the line. Oh
> no, that wouldn't work as just bad luck. She could sue Amtrak for not
> preventing the deer from going on the track...

She tried that. And indeed, that's how the system works here. For unlikely 
stuff like this, the business is supposed to have insurance.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/20/2012 7:30, Warp wrote:
> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom>  wrote:
>> Not just "someone." The person who actually injured you. Don't hyperbole and
>> it'll make more sense.
>
>    You make it sound like that person did it on purpose and hence is guilty
> of a crime.

No, but you don't have to be guilty of a crime to be responsible for your 
actions. If I accidentally crash my car into your parked car, who pays the 
repair bills? Does your insurance rate go up because you parked in my way?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message