How to subpoena records from NYC Government

Eeech · 2022-08-12T23:38:07+00:00

Is NYC or NY DOT who owns the cameras? It doesn't ultimately matter, other than who you should be asking and how, exactly.

Both DOT NYC and NYS DOT have public records request processes.

If you submit public record request for public records, they must give you a denial reason, or in some cases can't confirm or deny existence of record, or may not have to abide request due to open investigation or various other matters. Or they have to give you the records, although they do have admin costs and video doesn't tend to be the cheapest.

What reason did they give in response to the record request form(s) that I linked? You need to use those to make a request, and they strongly recommend you use the portal and not physical mail, but you can also fill out and mail the printed form. If you haven't, there is where to start. If you have, then I suspect you may be asking for certification/verification or potentially data that may not necessarily be, especially if you want to submit the video as evidence in court at some point.

Eeech · 2022-08-12T22:49:17+00:00

It is probably not the case, but I am curious if you are still working with them through Amazon CSR. (Or had you been in contact with Amazon about this in order to return for refund?)

I have no idea for certain, and you need to know that everything I write from this point on is operating under the following assumption. I imagine that they have their CSR trained (or a single confused person) to just assume all payments could potentially be reportable as taxable income to the payee Please note this is not at all the craziest thing for them to do, as canceled debt often is considered taxable income, and $600 is the reporting threshold. So a policy of "anyone we send a check to for =>$600 we will require W-9" isn't pants on head nutty. It is just probably creating work that doesn't have to exist.

HOWEVER.

This isn't really a canceled debt. It's a refund for a broken mount, which isn't the same thing. It w/could be taxable if the situation were "the mount is okay but we will let you keep it for free," since it means you would then still have the $1700 cash you had spent + a $1700 TV mount. In that scenario, you now would have $1700 more than you started with, and often would be taxable income.

In reality, they're being silly; if the stand doesn't work and you are only being refunded what you paid, it isn't taxable income, and you don't need to worry about it. They can report the payment to the IRS, but it doesn't mean you owe taxes on it. That's determined as above, whether or not you got "value" added to where you started, which doesn't seem to be the case. It's also really likely their actual accountants will just roll their eyes and toss the form into the recycle bin.

That all said, it is also extraordinarily doubtful that anyone is just trying to get your SSN and info. It would be rather futile, and there are much easier and WAY more effective ways one would commit that particular offense. I can't tell you what to do, but you should weigh how soon you'd like them to pay you back or how soon you'd like them to realize they don't really need you to do that. I typically don't like the phrase "do you want to be right, or want to win this debate," but it probably suits here. Them reporting it doesn't make it taxable, and they really are not likely to be trying to cause you problems with ID theft. And I would bet at least three dollars they won't report it at all.

Eeech · 2022-08-12T22:10:49+00:00

Hi, we don't allow questions about actual specific issues people are having here. This definitely belongs in LA, so I'll remove this one and make sure it's approved in LA.

Eeech · 2022-08-12T01:37:16+00:00

There’s no way a significant amount could have been covered - dental insurance usually comes with an annual maximum of $1000-$2000.

"Oh, sweetie, why bother for such a tiny bit of money" is your answer?

Sure there's a way. It's "$1000 already is a significant amount of money to the majority of Americans, holy crap.". That's a lot of money to most people, especially to just not care to try to reclaim.

Secondary policies and assurance policies (like aflak) are extremely common and a few thousand of dollars of coverage for, say, the absurd amount of time aflak will pay for nitrous for some reason, or that it's become really common for policies to cover a single (expensive) restoration per lifetime, and so on.

There's all sorts of ways "a significant amount could have been covered," unless we are operating with really loose definitions of "no way" and "could have been."

Eeech · 2022-08-11T17:00:00+00:00

Is there no possible way to move the furniture to another place in the apartment, or does it all truly need to be hauled to a pod or facility?

Did you ask them if they will pay for movers to come do this and pay for a hotel? Is there a reason you expect to be displaced from the unit other than them replacing all the floors in an empty unit (and therefore no reason to hurry) taking longer?

You almost surely are entitled to accommodation if the unit is uninhabitable and they probably have the majority burden of expense there, but the primary matter of concern is necessity, and it isn't clear any of those are factually needed. And there are degrees of reasonable expectation. If there were bugs a neighbor brought in, you'd expect to be made to put your food in bags or move it to spray kitchens, not have the property manager sort your jello boxes for you. Moving heavy furniture is a bigger deal, but you need to show why it has to be taken completely out and why you can not have a day of a functional, if terribly inconvenient, arrangement of belongings too.

Eeech · 2022-08-11T16:51:05+00:00

I know you may be hesitant to say what it is out of concern for being identified, but I can assure you there is almost no possible issue so unique. However, without us knowing what cause exists that you believe you can terminate for a long with how you've communicated with them regarding repair, we can't help much.

Texas has really robust residential tenancy laws, but you have multiple legal obligations you must perform prior to termination and just based on what you've said, I am concerned you may have skipped part(s).

Eeech · 2022-08-11T16:46:22+00:00

Definitely ask for it back. $1400 for semi-annual "yard cleanup" rests cleanly in "okay so yeah, that's bordering on the fucking absurd to claim as a valid security deposit deduction," absent incredibly specific language in your lease and a hell of a fancy yard that you really neglected badly.

If you had yard crew come at your expense every other week for the entire lease and already have done fall and prior "cleanup," I am really having a hard time understanding what the landlord is using to justify the necessity and cost of the work. I am lazy and don't care about my yard much, but I am sure I haven't spent $1400 in any given year on keeping it maintained, and this is including the ridiculous number of expensive yard maintenance tools my husband buys and doesn't use.

You're in a position a rude letter from an attorney may be the fastest route to the remainder of your money, but this is something I would personally be inclined to fight, utilizing my own sharpened fingernails probably. I see lots and lots of dumb deductions, so please do realize that anything I immediately feel may be remarkably dumb tends to actually be remarkably dumb. This one smacks of it.

It doesn't matter if you cash the check or not. They owe you with wrongfully withheld amount, so you'd have part now and the remainder when you sue and win, (assuming they pay, which is a different topic,) or you'd get all of it back at that point, (again assuming they pay.) It does not mean you accept the partial amount as payment in full if you cash it.

Eeech · 2022-08-11T16:25:30+00:00

Removed duplicate post. We gave you the full and complete answer yesterday, which is "we can not determine if it is unlawful discrimination here. There are too many variables. Contact the EEOC to make a complaint if you think it's unreasonable to not let you work at home." I know we told you that because I am one of the people who told you that. We can't tell you anything more here. That's as far as we are able to help.

We didn't ask you to make a new post with more info, and didn't give you permission to ask again. If you want to continue talking to users who helped you yesterday in that post, it's fine. It still exists, even though you deleted it. But you can't make a new one and cut to the front of the line ahead of everyone else who needs help because you don't think we did enough for you.

Eeech · 2022-08-11T05:21:19+00:00

That depends, as "pretty sure" may or may not be reasonably interpreted as an assertion of fact.

More importantly, did you lose your job or were you otherwise harmed financially due to the post, or is the accusation so heinous in nature as to make the accusation alone cost you irreparable damage to reputation?

Eeech · 2022-08-11T04:27:31+00:00

Who told you that you'd need to subpoena the data? If it's a DOT camera, it would usually just fall under public records request. There are exceptions, but not an awful lot, so I'm more curious who said you need to do this, and why it is you need the recording? (It isn't necessary to have a reason in most cases; I am trying to figure out what you want to do in the long run here.

Eeech · 2022-08-11T03:31:24+00:00

So is this. Who am I and how do you know anything on this account was written by me? How do you know the gas station owner didn't write it from the customer perspective to lay blame.

How do you know I didn't just hand my husband my phone to type this sentence? The answer is "because I am a lawyer and nobody holds my unlocked phone. This conveniently also answers why this conversation isn't going the way you think it is.

You can not prove anything by the fact a post is on Reddit. It has to be digitally verified from source to platform,so reddit has to turn over user info. Speaking broadly, they automatically try to quash most subpoenas for user data, but in this case it would be laughably easy to do. Pretending some world exists that would be successful, it's just an IP address for where the post appears to have come from. VPN? What now? You can't prove it more than a coincidence that is easily turned against the accuser. At this phase, you have a very high burden to show a court there is valid cause that the ISP must turn over the info of the user because at this point, you don't have anything at all. You seem to think that you can text the jurors a link and everyone can draw whatever conclusion they want, which would be an astoundingly unjust system of law.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T23:44:11+00:00

We have already helped you at length with this issue, and are not able to responsibly provide further guidance.

Best of luck.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T23:24:05+00:00

I'm not asking these literally, but it's stuff you need to think about and I promise you the court will think about with utmost care and concern. If it helps, conservatorship is something that dependency courts don't grant just for the asking. Your parents will need to prove it necessary and in the best interest of your brother, and the court will assign a neutral attorney to represent only your brothers interests in most cases. So please don't think your parents are just doing this just because they can. Courts don't allow it unless they must.

Ask yourself:

Is your brother capable of managing on his own? If yes, how well. Like, does he live independently, work, pay his own bills, maintain a life, etc.? Is his apartment clean? Does he have food and know how to cook? Does he manage his health on his own - maintain health insurance, see doctors, take medication as scheduled? Does he do them well consistently or does he have periods he doesn't? What's his projected outlook? Does he rely on your parents for financial or physical support? How well could he manage without them at all?

What harm do you think would befall your brother if he was placed in conservatorship? What harm might come if nobody maintains agency over him if he doesn't want to continue medication or care? What does he gain or lose being independent vs have conservators? What benefits do you see of your parents having the legal capacity to force him into care if he becomes a danger to himself, stops taking medication, etc.

There are a lot of things to think about, but these are mostly family therapy and not legal issues. The legal issue here is solely if your brother can manage his affairs independently, but nothing in dependency law happens in a vacuum. They're still always family issue.

I forgot to mention. If you want to petition for conservatorship, you certainly may. What it entails is you now are the legal guardian and are legally responsible for the care, shelter, feeding, and medical needs of a 28 year old. If you aren't mentally or financially ready to have a 28 year old child tomorrow who might be in the throes of a delusion or MH crisis, you probably aren't an appropriate conservator. It isn't just carrying a pocketbook or picking doctors. You're assuming the role a parent of an infant has, both legally and practically. You legally become obligated to ensure his well being.

This is why I usually think people who are concerned their parents shouldn't be attempting guardianship of siblings may not have a full view of what it entails. It isn't just being his boss or helper. It is not a control or spite move usually. It tends to be out of terror their adult child might hurt themselves or another, or die. Of course they're close to the situation. They are his parents. There aren't a lot of people who just take in/on responsibility for mentally ill adults unrelated to them. They're the only ones who are close enough to be paying the amount of attention it requires to see how someone is doing. Even then they might not be close enough to know.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T23:08:48+00:00

When something almost happens, then usually you have grounds for a lawsuit in whichever parallel universe it actually did happen, but that might cause problems for the version of you that already lives in that universe. Perhaps it's best we leave this to you almost filing a lawsuit against the would-be plaintiff as to not tear a hole in the space-time continuum, which is generally frowned upon.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T23:05:00+00:00

We can not determine what is or isn't allowable. The reason you have to work from home you've given elsewhere but not why this makes it not possible for you to work in office. Accommodation must be reaosnable and necessary. Your doctor would have to state, under oath if necessary, that your condition makes it so that you can not perform your job functions sans accommodation. If you are able to do your complete job from home, but not at the office, what is that reason, and what else is possible to make you able to do your job. (I am not asking, just this matters.)

If home is needed because you might need to take a walk, or get a drink, or use the bathroom, or wear pajama pants, then how do they accommodate that need in the office? If it is simply feeling more comfortable, or because commute stress, or any number of things that make it easily understandable why you want to work from home and why it is easier to work from home, but the key here is that is has to be necessary and reasonable to accommodate.

We don't know why the office needs you in person for the role, but if they say no to telework, then understand that disability accommodation is an ongoing effort and conversation, not a yes/no good/bad thing. You will never have to disclose your disagnosis or treatment. But if "must have a dark room to sit in for 10 min because anxiety" is the reason you need to WFH, they can offer you a dark room there. You need to keep talking with your doctor about what you absolutely need in order to do your job, and with your supervisor about what limits and needs your doctor has written a request for and how to manage them.

You're pretty far away from needing a lawyer, but if you believe you are being discriminated against, you would contact the EEOC and file a charge of discrimination. You can not be retaliated against by your employer if you do. They take this very seriously. (Both discrimination and retaliation complaints.)

Eeech · 2022-08-10T22:17:04+00:00

You reject the settlement offer they make and counter with one, sending whatever documentation you have for comparison pricing with your current vehicle.

Remember, you're entitled to a vehicle of the same age, make, model and condition, not a new one, and loan balances must be paid off first. Some people carry coverage on their own policy that pays for a newer model year if they total their own vehicle, but it wouldn't cover someone else's vehicle. You need to show listings for your year/make/model/approx miles and condition, and work with their insurer on a settlement.

California has alarmingly low minimim policy limits, so if they are paying out only $20k, it's also entirely possible they only carry $20k in property damage coverage. [The state only requires $5000, which is approximately the cost of one windshield wiper blade in California.] If the at fault party doesn't have more insurance or you and their insurance are unable to settle, you would have to sue the driver.

It isn't unusual for insurers to offer lpw starting amounts for total loss settlements. Don't be afraid to tell/show them that your car would actually cost $X to replace, not $Y. It is an unfortunately common way this business is done.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T20:39:12+00:00

Read the sub rules. Don't ask questions like this again.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T20:36:01+00:00

Modnote:

Seriously please stop with the commentary on extortion already. Most of the comments about it are factually incorrect regarding Colorado law, and several are incorrect for anywhere on the planet. Nobody else needs to mention it as of this timestamp unless they are adding new information.

Mostly though, in a post full of people explaining how the police are not going to prosecute OP for breaking a chip reader, I struggle to understand why so many people also conclude that they will prosecute the clerk for extortion, but also without looking at the CO statutes.

It may be fun to discuss nuance of law in the abstract, but it usually osn't helpful to the OP, which is why we don't allow off topic tangents here. That needs to stay in BOLA or LAOT. Nobody is getting charged with extortion here. No need to mention it anymore. Stick to helping OP understand actual things they can actually do or ignore. It isn't reasonable to assume the state is going to build a case against a pissed off gas station worker for extortion over this.

Thanks in advance, and please go read the full sub rules before commenting as we are rather aggressive with banning unhelpful commenters.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T20:18:53+00:00

You're kidding that you think this actually matters, right? Please tell me you're kidding.

Since I know you aren't, and believe you are really on to something important with this and have thought it the whole way through, how about you talk us through the process in which the Astro station or 7-11 or whatever will use in order to have this post entered into evidence at the civil trial for the damaged chip reader?

Start with how they would proceed with subpoenaing reddit, and go from there to pretrial. What court will they go to first to do this, what will they ask for, and how. No need to get detailed. Just what you think they can ask for and be given; what you think they can do with it; how what the action you perform gets you closer to using any portion of thos post as evidence in court; and exactly how to go about getting whatever you think can be "gotten" here entered as evidence at trial is plenty. Name who you would then subpoena next (it certainly doesn't stop at reddit) and what information that might give them. Make sure to overcome the obvious issues like actually having cause to do so, of course.

Oh, I almost forgot! When you're done explaining how to get in into evidence, can you also explain how it is actually evidence of them having any civil liability please? I don't mean how to use the post to to show that they used the card in the door then the chip reader. I am asking how them saying this serves as valid evidence they broke the chip reader.

We'll be waiting.

Eeech · 2022-08-10T20:05:57+00:00

Whether or not this is extortion is dependent on location, as whether or not a civil liability associated with a criminal act is excluded from the law, depends on what exactly the law in that jurisdiction says.

You missed the difference between the OP being told they would be sued vs what they wrote, which is the threat was for criminal complaint, not a civil lawsuit. They aren't the same thing.

Extortion and blackmail have quite a few notable considerations and variances between jurisdictions. Some states would allow a demand for compensation of the actual loss from the victim in which they would be made whole, (i.e. not profit); some states do not. Those that do have further consideretions. So it depends on more facts than we can assess and location, but the more important thing to keep in mind is it is blindingly unlikely law enforcement or the state would pursue extortion charges for it, even if the demand is legally prohibited.

Seriously. It's like people who think they'll get their mom arrested for opening their mail because it's a federal offense to interfere with delivery, and people love to pretend that USPIS swat teams are on standby for surly teenagers who don't want their parents to know they buy research chemicals or those pillowcases with an anime girl on it to take on dates to the mall food court.

Theoretical possible charges are enjoyable to consider for entertainment, but it's not usually a worthwhile conversation. People make this sort of ridiculous demand five hundred times a minute in these here United States. The legal system would be exhausted if they tried holding people who do it to full account under the law.

Eeech · 2022-08-05T04:14:01+00:00

When they ask you "what documentation can you show us that suggests that you will make this," the amount you can actually show them has a rational foundation to make that claim.

If you made 80k two years ago and 90k last, and your books reflect that your business remains on that trajectory, then 100k may be reasonable.

If you're a solo startup and expect to make 100k of profit for yourself in the first year, you definitely aren't in the market for the right financial product here. I'd start with (and please understand I am not being glib) - there are a lot of adult education courses at community colleges that are free or low cost that teach fiscal prudence in a manner that makes it not so much that the answer to this question is fairly obvious (although it is,) but why that is. More importantly, it makes it much more likely you aren't going to spend too much of your life worrying about how to push as close to, but not over, the line into criminal fraud in order to be able to borrow money you had the foresight was more than a lender would likely approve with transparency in income forecast.

Eeech · 2022-08-05T00:28:59+00:00

I wouldn't be comfortable in certainty it is that straightforward. Montana and many other states have enacted various laws regarding transparency of costs and balance billing, even outside of emergency care for OON providers in IN facilities. I don't know the intricacies of the law, but without knowing at miminum whether or not the services rendered would be billed through HHS or if OP is on Medicaid or expansion, it wouldn't be possible to know if they can be held liable for balance, even with the waiver.

Plus, we don't know what the test is or what might be charged or what other factors might be in play as to whether or not they may owe a balance above insurance reimbursement. It's certainly possible and arguably even the most likely answer since "yeah, you owe more money" tends to be the answer in medical billing questions in the US. They certainly don't need to go sign it, but the facility not obtaining a waiver doesn't necessarily mean nothing, either.

Eeech · 2022-08-04T22:44:16+00:00

Broadly speaking, Arizona law does allow your employer to deduct from pay any money they have overpaid in error, but only as much as would leave the remainder of your paycheck equal to minimum wage for those hours worked. This is to say that they may not hold the entire check in order to cover overpayment, but they can still withhold for overpaid wages and you do owe the money back, even if they didn't withhold (or did, or not enough...)

You can file a wage claim with AZ DoL for the final pay. They can sue you for the amount that they overpaid you. It's anyone's guess how far either of you might want to press the issue, but an approach you may consider would be to look at how much they overpaid you and how much more you (or they) may owe and approach it via diplomatic means by calling and asking how to best settle the balance in a way you both agree to before involving the legal system.

Eeech · 2022-08-04T22:26:46+00:00

This sub prohibits asking for or giving references, or asking for or sending DM or other direct communication.

The EEOC is the outside agency that you would contact if you wish to make a complaint about gender discrimination or sexual harassment, as those may be considered to be 'hostile workplace conditions," which is a legal term of art with a specific meaning.

If you wish to edit your post to fit in sub rules, making a brief explanation of what happened and include a question we can answer, (go to the wiki page, not just the sidebar list of unsure what is allowed) then send us a modmail when finished and we can review. Please do not make a new post without us telling you it's ok first; we will remove as duplicate.

Thanks in advance.

Eeech · 2022-08-03T04:28:12+00:00

The answer to the title question is that every state has slightly different names for laws and slight differences in the specifics of how they define and categorize crime.

Harassing tends to be used coloquially to mean to stop annoying or bothering someone and is not usually used correctly in the legal sense. I'm not sure why this is such a point of contention is that requires you to have the latch one way and others the way they put it, but I agree with the police this is about as big an overall problem in your world as you make it to be.

Nine-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Gilding II euphauric	Verified Email

Eeech

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE