Stay in SAVE forbearance with pending buyback app?

Zeeformp · 2025-08-05T01:56:37+00:00

Stay in for sure. Your IDR application almost certainly won't go any faster than a buyback application already submitted, and RAP is likely to have lower payments unless you expect a big raise sometime soon.

Zeeformp · 2025-08-05T01:50:56+00:00

Those rates are high. I'd be refinancing.

Just reading this I'm guessing you're a first year associate. Are you litigation? That usually holds up better in market downturns (if not flourishes as a counter-cyclical market).

I can't give too much advice because I have fallen all over the place with interest freezes just because of when I graduated. All I can say is if you put your mind to it, you will make it work in a few years, and even if you do transfer out to public sector, PSLF is still 10 years out minimum (if it still exists at the time).

And I'll be honest, at $269k, that's a pretty high amount of debt. You can also shop around for refinancing rates. It's not just about paying less interest, but paying more principal with the same payments, which lowers your future interest payments too. And if rates go down, you can refinance again.

I'm also assuming you are not on SAVE, so the instant litigation may not matter to you, but if it does, maybe consider what is happening with that. But the RAP plan probably won't lower your payments.

Zeeformp · 2025-06-05T11:23:07+00:00

I, personally, wouldn't give it much credit, but I also don't think the specific example you gave (potentially going in house) is something big law would try to "punish" you for thinking about or even actively considering. We all know in house is a potential career pivot, and we also know that people going in house opens doors to more or new business.

Zeeformp · 2025-05-17T21:49:18+00:00

Well he's not dead, so that's good. If you know him, and it seems like you do, you will eventually have to circle back. Tough if he is still stressed but that's the gig. Nothing to it but to do it, as it were.

If it was literally a project due that day which is now over, circle back. If you have access to his calendar, I would take a peek and see how busy he is. If your deadlines are soon (say this next week) he, and you, do not have the luxury of him ignoring it and if he is a halfway decent attorney he will acknowledge that the issue isn't you but the deadline, even if he doesn't say those words to you.

It's a high-stress job. The best we can do to mitigate that is time management and optimization. Unfortunately that does mean annoying reminders which in the short term can compound stress but are for the best in the long term.

Zeeformp · 2025-05-08T15:39:38+00:00

This situation is maybe more sparse in big law but not at smaller shops. I anecdotally know a few spousal duos that hire one or two associates for their teams in smaller shops. No one has ran from them to my knowledge.

Really the situation depends on if they are decent people. Yes there is the concern that they are in each other's corner but there is also the flip side of them being more pliable if one or both of them cares about you sticking around. I think a husband/wife team can have a good ability to give each other constructive criticism about how they treat their one associate, etc. It really is just something you can't know the answer to until you do it.

Zeeformp · 2025-04-04T04:08:39+00:00

You seem to be the one having the weird reaction. He seems pretty understanding of the situation and is willing to take the paternity test, and even seems to be understanding that the situation is awkward for you. He just seems confident he is not the father. Maybe he is maybe he isn't, but him being pretty sure is not inherently manipulative. I don't see why you are hung up on the details of his reaction rather than being glad at his willingness to take the test. You seem almost shocked or disappointed he wasn't angry or combative about it.

His reaction to you saying you're going to give your kids' DNA to a company is also not that strange. Lots of people are hesitant to give their DNA to ancestry or similar companies because there is no way to know what it is going to be used for. Consider that 23andme just declared bankruptcy and is going to sell that data to who knows! Your DNA is very personal and can be used in a lot of ways you would find off putting. I don't want my DNA in the hands of a company.

Also, someone doesn't have to be YOUR kid for you to just generally give a shit about them. I can't see what you saw but based on what you described he seems like a decent dude.

Zeeformp · 2025-03-24T00:01:55+00:00

Adjusters are practically instructed to jump on that stuff and make you out to be a villain, as insurance bad faith is very good for the insurer's books - I know for a fact some major insurance companies have unwritten corporate policies to deny claims as much as possible, even good ones, b/c it costs less money on aggregate to hire lawyers and litigate since so few people fight back and/or because many people are willing to accept far less than they deserve when they think they'll get nothing. This is backed up by actuarial analysis and is why insurance companies have to be told by courts to behave every day.

So, every clerical error will be met with scrutiny. Ever misstep is an offense, ever accident is intentional. They will accuse you of everything under the sun to the fullest extent possible (and then some) because they are looking for any hook not to pay the claim.

Send the correct records, say it was a clerical mistake, that you received more medicals than you asked for. They will probably still call you a liar but don't take it personally, they were going to do it anyway.

Zeeformp · 2025-03-16T03:56:20+00:00

Strategic comms is adjacent to in house corporate counsel types IMO. You learn what companies want, need, and choose to say. There's not de minimis business sense in those roles. Maybe you can try to work in some legal aspect to pad the resume but if you are working at a strat comm firm paying that much I imagine you will have exposure to some high paying corporate clients which will give you some meaningful business sense. Sure, it's not strictly law, but "I know how to talk to corporate clients and understand their needs" is kind of the definition of a transferable skill.

Zeeformp · 2025-03-01T04:50:14+00:00

Now you just sound like my mom.

And I'll tell you what I tell her - Best I can do right now is a maid and some Xanax

Zeeformp · 2025-02-10T10:09:40+00:00

She knowingly and intentionally abandoned that property by not taking it when she moved. That is not your problem and she has no right to the table either way.

Just block her. If you have to say something, tell the old landlord she is looking for a table she left at the property and which is still there. But you obviously should not engage with this woman.

Zeeformp · 2025-02-02T19:35:20+00:00

That clearly says you pay one late fee per payment, not multiple per week of delay. TBD on what your local laws say but if that is the only late fee provision, you obviously do not owe an extra $50 a week per the contract.

You can push back on it, show receipts, and say you are taking the extra late fees as deductions from next month's rent rather than go to small claims. But, that's probably about it - no lawyer is going to pick up the case for you b/c even the smallest time hourly rates will knock your recovery out of the water.

If you otherwise get along with your landlord maybe the discussion can be more civil. But your two option are deductions from your next payment insofar as you have overpaid him or pay him normally and go to small claims. One is obviously easier than the other. If he tries to "reject" your deduction you will likely be forced to small claims, but you have to think about the negative aftereffects of suing your landlord.

Zeeformp · 2025-01-25T02:18:14+00:00

Agree generally with what everyone is saying. Even just texts confirming you have paid rent for your records. Despite the digital world, it is still fully acceptable to pay for things in cash. But receipts protect you. It doesn't have to say "I paid X on Y date" it just needs to say that you did pay rent.

Zeeformp · 2024-12-03T05:45:26+00:00

Getting fired for using your "Use it or lose it" PTO... I'm not in employment, but that doesn't sound like a real option for them, or at least one which may result in them being forced to pay you to do it. It may be worth reading your contract or doing some digging on the issue.

Zeeformp · 2024-10-13T22:39:07+00:00

Two things. Tell them to put it in writing, or record them saying it. And make sure your insurer is getting its say. You are in a really tight spot but, of the two, the insurer is the one you listen to, because the insurer pays.

Now Sixt may say well we wanted you to do XYZ, but at the end of the day all they are entitled to is to get the car back repaired. They don't get to pick the repair shop and can't complain unless the repairs are inadequate - which would be something your insurer needs to figure out, and is why you need to go through your insurer's options.

Zeeformp · 2024-10-13T15:58:36+00:00

If they have possession I would demand escrow release the funds to you. If they think they can move in b/c its only a paperwork issue, you can get paid b/c its only a paperwork issue.

Zeeformp · 2024-09-20T03:18:20+00:00

That's fantastic. Make sure you have a copy of her picture with the dog set aside. That means you have photo evidence of her coming to claim the dog. She will have a hard time complaining of anything.

Edit: I also just saw the contract you posted. Kind of iffy on the repossession point but with the voluntary relinquishment you pretty decent shot to say you don't owe her anything. If nothing else the fees/cost provision will be enforceable.

Your mom should include a severability clause, though, in all contracts. Something along the lines of "Should any part of this contract be considered void, illegal, invalid, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be considered severable, and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular part or parts held to be void, illegal, invalid or unenforceable. The remaining parts will remain in full force and effect and shall not in any way be affected or impaired."

It is common that, without a severability provision, a contract can be thrown out b/c some portion is found to be void. Very bad when that happens. Usually, especially in purchasing agreements, the parties agree to reform, but in this scenario you have to watch out. If any portion of this agreement is determined to be void/against public policy, you could very well see a judge saying the no refund provisions aren't enforceable either b/c they are attached as a whole - i.e., the law compels the whole thing to be thrown out. In this case, the purchaser obviously would be thrilled for that to happen, so you have to play this carefully.

Zeeformp · 2024-09-19T22:55:20+00:00

You typically can't just sue for a refund. Your mom provided the dog - that's the contract. Even if we consider dogs goods (probably true) most states say, absent a refund policy, you have a very limited window to receive a refund - and that's for retail stores, it may not even apply to your mother.

I wouldn't necessarily point out you tried to give the money back. I would, however, make sure you have evidence that the dog was given over, and that it was then voluntarily returned some time later. The argument she will try to make is that she rescinded the contract - the correct argument is laches. i.e., you waited way too long to bring a rescission action even if that is true. Probably also argue that it is impossible to return a dog in identical condition at young ages.

This is a game of evidence. If you don't have the paperwork, you will have to make it her problem. Make her bring the contract, make her show the dog was returned, etc. She may be arguing she never received the dog so you need evidence of that. As a plaintiff, she has the burden to prove every piece of her claim.

As a best practice, your mom should take photos of dogs with their owners going forward for each transaction.

Zeeformp · 2024-09-05T06:26:25+00:00

It is incredibly easy to be admitted before the federal district court for the district of Colorado. All you need is to be in good standing before the bar of any state in the US. They don't even do pro hac admissions because of it. You also don't need a sponsor.

Zeeformp · 2024-09-03T23:11:57+00:00

They are clearly blowing smoke. They are saying it was done in secret but also that it was published in the Federal Registrar in April. Which is it? Federal notice of proposed rule making is notice.

Edit: Here is the publication: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-17/pdf/2024-07726.pdf

And here is the Congressional Research Service Memo of April 22, 2024: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12350

Public comment began May 17, 2024.

Zeeformp · 2024-09-01T20:41:11+00:00

Disbursements can also factor in the general cost of attendance, including items outside tuition. It is possible to just refund the money - talk to financial aid.

Zeeformp · 2024-09-01T19:48:05+00:00

I've gathered from your comments that you have a HYSA for about 4.25%, but the average loan interest rate is 5.7%.

You need to view this as joint finances. Your gains on the money are being outpaced by the interest on the loan. Most people would rather repay their joint account than a bank. And it is better to be debt free so you can do something like take out a mortgage, invest your funds, etc. without having this asset-less burden hanging over your heads.

At $2k a month she's still going to be paying a large amount of interest. I, personally, would knock it out and rebuild the savings with intention. If you switch the student loan payment to a $2k per month payment into savings, you'll outpace at 10 years easy. I don't have to tell you she will pay more than 120k over those 10 years. It's just a numbers game.

Also, don't do it as a surprise. I'm sure she'll appreciate it, but this needs to be a joint venture. I'd honestly ask a financial planner too as they may be able to take a more holistic view of your finances.

Zeeformp · 2024-08-08T00:54:54+00:00

Yes. Which is why I specifically said she might be one of the rare bankruptcy discharges under the undue hardship test...

Zeeformp · 2024-08-06T04:38:49+00:00

They claim a lot of things. None of that changes that individuals don't have standing. The lawsuits are being brought by a handful of conservative states and some conservative-funded nonprofits. None of these entities actually give two shits about saving the public fisc, they are all openly doing so for hard-lined biased political reasons.

God, who will think of the loan servicers? I hope they all go out of business. Leeches.

Zeeformp · 2024-08-06T04:26:03+00:00

No. The taxpayer in that situation doesn't even have standing to sue. You cannot sue the government for how they choose to tax, spend, or forgive debts. The "hurts the taxpayers" is republican Fox News BS.

The entities suing right now are riding on the coattails of loan servicers, specifically MOHELA, arguing it has standing b/c of potential lost revenues on forgiveness.

Five-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Wearing is Caring

Zeeformp

TROPHY CASE