Why Hire a Foreclosure Defense Lawyer Garland with a similar background to yourself: Asian, Chinese, Philippine, Vietnamese, El Salvador, Guatemalan, Canadian, German, Latino, Mexican, Spanish, Italian, Japanese, Russian, Greek, Romanian, Cuban, Korean, Indian, Hispanic, American, Foreign, Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Orthodox, Mormon, or Buddhist?
If you do you will need a lawyer. The trouble is there are several thousand Attorneys out there just on the internet and the choice in finding a Foreclosure Defense Lawyer Garland appropriate for your case becomes more difficult. When you are trying to find a representative there are a few guidelines you will want to follow. Below you will find out how to choose the appropriate lawyer for your needs.
When trying to find a lawyer you first must understand the case you have. Some cases are very easy to determine, for instance those who have been in an accident often have personal injury needs. Those with problems at a hospital with a medical condition will have a malpractice suit and on and on. Once you have determined the type of representative you need, finding a lawyer becomes a little easier.
You may have a general practice representative or someone you have dealt with in Foreclosure Defense Lawyer Garland law. Most of us know someone who has had a attorney in the past. In this case you can ask the person for a referral. If you have a business lawyer you can ask them to recommend someone in the field of expertise you need. They will often have at least one name for you and a few to keep away from. Those who have worked with lawyers such as family or friends will also be able to give recommendations. They may say you don’t want this person or that their associate can help you. In either case you are better off to ask for a referral in finding a lawyer rather than other options.
The key to finding a representative that will help you out is knowing as much about them professionally as possible. You want to understand how many years they have practiced and what their specialty really is. Other wise you may find someone who is more out for the gain they will get rather than the gain you will get. When you deal with finding a lawyer, ask them their policies. Kind of interview them during the course of the conversation as well. Some will not charge unless the case is won, while others will charge a small fee during the entire process. It will depend on the case and of course your representative.
Many distorted ideas and images are associated with bankruptcy, partly because the definition varies from state to state. In the simplest terms, you are legally declaring yourself unable to pay your debts. It is a popular misconception that it invites creditors to invade your home and take everything you own, but there are pertinent factors affect the outcome. It depends on the type, or "chapter", of bankruptcy that you declare, and more importantly, where you choose to file.
In Texas, the law gives you an opportunity to choose which items you have to give up and some get away without losing a thing. Fortunately, Texas is one of the most liberal states when it comes to exemptions so filing in Texas can bring benefits to families and individuals from all over. Most individuals or families in Texas declare one of two bankruptcies: a Chapter 7 or a Chapter 13. To file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy is to ask the court to absolve all of your outstanding debt. Your background will be wiped clean of financial obligations, but this "do-over" does come with a price. All non-exempt property will be sold for the profit of your creditors such as vacation homes, extra vehicles, and collectibles.
Exemption rules also vary from state to state, but in Texas, the law generally allows you to keep almost all of your valuable assets. Texas also allows you to choose whether you want to use the federal exemptions or the state exemptions depending on which benefits the debtor the most. Cars and houses are good examples. Under the federal law, the maximum exemption for a car is a little over $3,000, but in Texas it can be up to $30,000. Lower-valued items, called personal assets, are not collectible and include things like your clothes, music, videos, and furniture. The threshold value that divides collectible from non-collectible will change according to state. But this doesn't mean you can just pick up your belongings and move to Texas to reap the benefits. There are residency requirements that must be met by the debtor. You should speak with a reputable Texas bankruptcy lawyer for more information on this.
Nobody likes the stigma that can come with filing for bankruptcy, but just the petition itself can immediately affect your current situation in so many ways. It can put a halt on threatened repossession, stop wage garnishment, and bring an end to those dreadful debt collector harassments. It can give you the time you need to adjust your budget and draw up a payment plan. It can ultimately give you a second chance. All of these things are feasible with the first step of calling a Texas bankruptcy attorney so you have the opportunity to fully review the laws specific to the state. Find out if filing for bankruptcy is the most beneficial option for you by contacting a Dallas-Fort Worth bankruptcy attorney before it's too late.
When you first sprain an ankle, the injury will swell a lot. It will also bruise within the first few hours and most likely become very stiff and immobile. Depending on how bad you sprain it, you may not be able to put any pressure on it at all, or you may be able to walk with a limp. Either way, you will need to something to improve your chance for a quick and full recovery. If you do nothing, your sprained ankle could take months to heal and you may continue to have pain for a very long time.
So, what should you do first? Well, there are two sprained ankle treatment options available to you. The first is called R.I.C.E. It suggests you should rest and ice your ankle, keep some compression like a wrap on it and keep it elevated. It suggests you should continue to do this until you are healed. The second option is known as H.E.M. This ankle treatment suggests you should ice your ankle for the first 2 days, but also use more active rehab techniques including some very specific exercises, stretches and a few other healing methods. In short, one is non-active and the other is active. Which one works better? Let's take a closer look...
According to H.E.M., you should ice the ankle just as in R.I.C.E., but with one big difference. H.E.M. suggests you only ice the ankle for the first 36-48 hours. (R.I.C.E. suggests you ice the ankle indefinitely until healed or until the swelling is gone, which can take weeks or months). What is the ice for anyway? Ice is used to help contain and reduce swelling. So, which way is better?
Well, a good indicator is which treatment heals ankles faster? According to people who have used HEM, they are walking normally again and without pain in about a week or less. And according to people who use RICE, the average healing time is about 4-8 weeks. This would suggest that the body does react much better to the active rehab treatment versus the non-active one.
But, what we feel is even more significant is the following: the number of future sprained ankles fell sharply with the people who used HEM versus the people who use RICE. In other words, by strengthening the ankles and improving range of motion with HEM, people's ankles were at a far lower risk of future ankle injury. We feel this is even more important than healing time, because it suggests that without a good, rehab program, the ankle is still at great risk of continually being injured and getting weaker and weaker over time.
So, in our opinion, HEM is a better and much more comprehensive treatment option than RICE. It seems to achieve better and longer lasting healing benefits than rest and ice alone.
Need advice: Foreclosure Defense Lawyer Garland ?
If you are in real estate marketing and sales, you have probably heard the term Real Estate CRM. Do you know what a CRM is and how to use one to make your business more profitable?
A CRM is simply a piece of software that is designed specifically for Customer Relationship Management. CRM software made for realty professionals usually includes a heavy reliance on email autoresponder marketing techniques to keep in touch and nurture your relationship with leads, clients, and potential return clients.
Using a CRM package usually starts with a lead capture website. While there is an art and science to lead capture, the basic process consists of offering a website visitor something of value in return for their contact information. The item of value may be a free report such as a digital download, a book, or access to an MLS home search tool so buyers can search for properties.
For example, studies have shown that a phone call during the process (perhaps one that comes after an automated email message that tells a lead to expect a call the next day) greatly enhance the lead conversion rates. The bottom line is that the success rate of marketing using a CRM always comes from blend of sales automations technology, human-written content, and well-placed follow-ups and calls to action during the sales process. A well-designed real estate CRM can boost the conversion rates and sales numbers for real estate agents dramatically.
You could save hundreds of dollars by incorporating yourself without a lawyer. How? Is it advisable to do so?
1. This is Not Legal Advice!
The only ones who should be giving legal advice are those licensed to practise law (in other words, only lawyers). This article is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a lawyer.
This article is being written simply to inform you that it is possible to form a corporation or limited liability company without a lawyer.
2. Why Use a Lawyer?
First of all, if you make a mistake incorporating yourself, who do you sue? You only have yourself to blame. On the other hand, a lawyer has insurance to cover errors and omissions.
Secondly, you could benefit from the expertise of your lawyer. Perhaps a corporation isn`t the right vehicle for you under your circumstances. Be aware that there can be disadvantages as well as advantages to incorporating. Your lawyer can consider commercial law, securities legislation, limited liability, tax factors, estate planning, share structure, and a myriad of other business considerations. Sometimes the advice of a good lawyer can save you thousands of dollars.
In the United States, there are likewise many manuals available for incorporating yourself in various states. "How To Form Your Own Corporation Without a Lawyer for Under $75.00" by Ted Nicholas is one such book.
Sometimes helpful information on this subject is available from federal, provincial and state governments for free or nominal cost.
You can sometimes locate incorporation manuals at your local library for free. Be careful. Legal manuals become outdated very rapidly. You might consider very seriously purchasing the most up-to-date manual available; it might also include helpful reference material on maintaining corporate minutes and other helpful suggestions on operating your corporation.
Buy the appropriate manual and supplies and then follow the instructions. With a little effort, you could save hundreds of dollars incorporating yourself without a lawyer.
For further resources on incorporation, please visit: http://www.yenommarketinginc.com/incorporation.html
Negotiations with creditors have failed. Repossession is imminent and foreclosure proceedings have begun. Your income is simply not sufficient to pay your bills, no matter how low the payments are. It may be time to consider bankruptcy.
Bankruptcy law evolved as a reaction to the abuses surrounding debtors prison. Before the nineteenth century a prison system existed for those who didn't pay their bills. If a merchant filed a claim, the debtor was incarcerated until his debts were paid. (Women were not found in debtor's prison, not because of chivalry but because they did riot have the ability to borrow). The lender was legally responsible for the expenses of the prison stay, including food, but seldom paid. After all, a debtor would have to sue in order to enforce this law, and it was rather difficult to sue when in prison. As a result, many borrowers languished in prison for years, surviving on what their family could bring to them or, in many cases, simply starving to death. Although some lenders would doubtless not object to the renewal of debtor's prison, fortunately we live in more enlightened times. Bankruptcy was created to provide a second chance (or third, or fourth) to those hopelessly in debt It provides a mechanism to wipe the slate clean and begin anew. As times have changed, though, so has the bankruptcy code. Not all debts can be wiped out. The proceedings can be easily disqualified in the event of improper procedures. There are many things a debtor should know before resorting to bankruptcy.
The Bankruptcy Decision
There are two kinds of individual bankruptcy: Chapter 7 and Chapter 13. Chapter 7 bankruptcy, named for the chapter number in the bankruptcy code, requires a full liquidation of all debts and cancels all no-exempt debts. Chapter 13 bankruptcy is essentially a court-mandated payment plan that sets up affordable monthly payments to your creditors,
The decision to declare bankruptcy is not an easy one. Unfortunately, many bankruptcy attorneys recommend bankruptcy to just about anyone they consult with. All too often frightened consumers are advised to declare bankruptcy just to avoid a few debts. This is a mistake. Bankruptcy should truly be a last resort as the legal system meant it to be. A bankruptcy appears on your credit for ten years, and although lending criteria are slowly changing, many lenders will not even consider an applicant who has had a bankruptcy. What's more, a Chapter 7 bankruptcy can cost you most of your property. Before making a decision to declare bankruptcy, estimate how bad your situation really is. On a piece of paper, make a list of all your assets and the approximate value they could be sold for. On the other side, add up all of your debts. If the debts exceed the assets by a large percentage, you may wish to consider bankruptcy. On the other hand, if it seems that your situation may improve (you may get a new job or a second income), or if your assets are of greater value or close in value to your debts, a different approach may be appropriate.
Negotiate with your creditors
Explain your situation and ask for more time to pay. If the creditors refuse and continue to threaten garnishment tell them such action would force you into bankruptcy. No creditor wants to hear the "B" word. Using bankruptcy as a threat is a very powerful negotiating tool, confronting creditors with a choice between getting a little each month or probably getting nothing through bankruptcy. Don't try this tactic on secured creditors. They may decide to repossess your property to avoid having to go through court.
Contact Consumer Credit Counseling
As mentioned earlier in the book, Consumer Credit Counseling is a non-profit group funded by creditors to help consumers negotiate repayment plans. It is often able to negotiate payment arrangements better than the individual because of its constant contact with a variety of creditors. If you can't negotiate a satisfactory arrangement, give these people a try. Remember, the fact that you are using credit counseling may appear on your credit record.
Consider Chapter 13 bankruptcy
This kind of filing allows you to repay your debts in a court-mandated fashion and will appear on your credit record for only seven years, If negotiations fail or there simply isn't enough money to make ends meet Chapter 7 bankruptcy may be your only option. Bankruptcy does not necessarily discharge all debts. If your debts are exempt from bankruptcy, filing will do very little to improve your situation. If a co-signer was used, the debt would then be owed by the co-signer, unless that person also declared bankruptcy. In community property states a spouse's assets and debts would also be included in the bankruptcy, assuming they are community property. Consider all very carefully before deciding to file.
Non-Dischargable Debts - Bills You Have To Pay In Spite Of Bankruptcy
Certain kinds of debt cannot be automatically eliminated by bankruptcy filing. They must meet certain requirements before being eliminated by bankruptcy. If most of your debts are non-dischargeable, bankruptcy may not solve your financial dilemma. The only ways a non-dischargeable debt can be eliminated through bankruptcy are through an exception being granted by the court, a certain period of time transpiring since the debt was due, or because the creditor does not object to the discharging of the debt. Certain debts can only be discharged by an exception. They are:
The Filing Process
All the appropriate papers can be obtained from your local bankruptcy court. Consult the yellow pages under Government Services (usually in the beginning of the book) for an address and phone number. The court allows you fourteen days from the date of an emergency filing to complete the formal process. If Chapter 7 bankruptcy is being filed, you will need to send in the following forms after you have received them from the court:
· Statement of Financial Affairs.
· Schedule of Current Income and Current Expenditures.
· A schedule describing your debts.
· A schedule describing your property.
· A schedule listing exempt property.
· A summary of the above schedules.
· Statement of Intention in regard to your secured property and what you intend to do with it
· Statement of Executory Contracts describing contract that will need to be fulfilled, such as auto leases.
· Bankruptcy Petition cover sheet.
· Mailing addresses of all creditors.
· Any required local forms.
A fee will also be assessed, usually $90, due at the time of filing. The court will usually accept installments of a four-month period. An application for installments must accompany the petition.
After your petition is filed, a meeting of the creditors will be arranged. The court appoints a trustee to preside over the meeting and to be responsible for the liquidation of assets. With most smaller bankruptcies, only the person filing and the trustee will attend. The trustee, who is usually a local attorney, will ask several questions about the information on the bankruptcy documents. Call and ask the court clerk what papers you will need to bring (usually financial statements or sometimes even tax returns). If a lot of property is involved, especially if it is nonexempt, property, your creditors may show up to protest any exemptions. They may also attempt to grill you about your intent to pay the bill or about lying on your application. Answer truthfully and there shouldn't be a problem.
If the creditors' attorneys become abusive, demand a hearing before the bankruptcy judge before the proceeding goes any further. If the creditors object to any of your exemptions, they have 30 days after the creditor's meeting to file an objection with the court. The court will schedule a hearing and you will be given the opportunity to respond, although you don't have to. A creditor may also try to claim a debt as non-dischargeable because of fraudulent acts, a @ or malicious act, or embezzlement or theft. He can only accomplish this if he successfully raises the objection within sixty days of the creditors' meeting. To defend yourself, you or your attorney will have to file a written response and be prepared to argue your case in court.
Once all the requirements have been met and your intentions have been made clear, the court can declare the bankruptcy discharged. No formal hearing will be held unless you have chosen to reaffirm your debt in which case the judge will want to be sure that you understand what you are doing. After this time, provided the creditors do not raise any objections, the dischargeable debts are erased.
Picking Up The Pieces
Bankruptcy was once the lowest disgrace that could befall someone. Today, however, it is commonplace. Corporations declare bankruptcy to get out of contracts or avoid legal judgments. Individuals rely on it to protect them from a society that extends credit too quickly.
Bankruptcy does not mean that you will automatically be denied all credit for ten years. In fact, many firms look at bankruptcy as a responsible way of discharging debts when there is no other way out. Creditors fear bankruptcy, but they also realize that if they lend to someone who has declared bankruptcy, they need not worry about another bankruptcy for seven more years (you can only file once every seven years). If you happen to have a good explanation for the bankruptcy, such as medical bills, divorce, or some other catastrophic event, a creditor may be willing to overlook it and extend credit. Ask potential creditors about their policy toward bankruptcies. Their responses may be surprising.
The process for mediation will be dependent upon how mediation is triggered. Mediation can be triggered by:
a court or tribunal
an agreement to mediate.
A contract can state that when a dispute occurs to do with the contract or any matter of contractual import or bearing the parties must go to mediation. A well crafted mediation clause will provide that the parties must agree upon a mediator or in the absence of agreement the contract should provide that the matter must be referred to a nomination body to nominate a mediator.
The contact will provide that the mediator will be free to conduct the mediation as he or she sees fit, but the contract will also provide that if the mediation breaks down then the parties are at liberty to abort the mediation. Conversely the contract will provide that if resolution of the dispute through mediation is effected then the terms of settlement that underpin that accord must be in writing, must be co signed by the parties and the mediator and the accord will then be binding.
An example of a contract induced mediation clause is below
The Parties must mediate disputes.
The parties to the contract must use the mediation procedure to resolve a dispute before commencing legal proceedings.
The mediation procedure is:
The party who wishes to resolve a dispute must give a notice of dispute to the other party, and to the selected mediator, or, if that mediator is not available, to a mediator appointed by the president of the Law Institute.
The notice of dispute must state that a dispute had arisen, and state the matters in dispute.
The parties must cooperate with the mediator in an effort to give an opinion to technical matters. Each party must pay a half share of the cost of the opinion.
If the dispute is settled, the parties must sign a copy of the terms of settlement.
If the dispute is not resolved in 14 days after the mediator had been given notice, or within any extended time that the parties agreed to in writing, the mediation must cease.
Each party must pay a half share of the costs of the mediator to the mediator.
The terms of the settlement are binding on the parties and override the terms of the contract if there is any conflict.
Either party may commence legal proceedings when mediation ceases.
The terms of settlement may be tendered in evidence in any mediation or legal proceedings.
The parties agree that written statements given to the mediator or to one another and any discussions between the parties or between the parties and the mediator during the mediation period are not admissible by the recipient in any legal proceedings.
Court or Tribunal Ordered Mediation
Most courts require litigated matters to be referred to mediation before the case goes to hearing. The courts normally have a published list of mediators that the parties can choose from and each party has to pay the costs of the mediator.
If the mediation facilitates a settlement then the matter is concluded and the legal proceedings will be aborted by consent. If the mediation is unsuccessful then the matter will in all likelihood proceed to trial.
In some jurisdictions like the VCAT (Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal) the parties do not have to pay for the mediator and this is a significant cost saving and benefit that flows from such benevolence.
Agreement Based Mediation
Any party to any dispute, be it civil, commercial or planning can at any time agree to mediate. All the parties need to do is to find a mediator and then in good faith attempt to settle the matter.
There still however needs to be a rigour, there is little point in settling a dispute unless the settlement is agreed in writing, is witnessed and is evidenced by an instrument that states that the parties have agreed to resolve all of their disputes and differences to do with the subject matter.
Any mediated settlement agreement has to be comprehensive, well drafted and must embrace all matters that gave rise to the dispute. Poorly drafted settlement agreements are open to challenge and are frequently challenged when one of the parties in hindsight thinks that result could have been better.
If matters can be mediated at the gestation of a dispute, a mediated outcome has considerable merit. There is little doubt that the fastest and cheapest way to resolve a dispute if negotiations breakdown is through mediation. In any partnership agreement that I have entered into with fellow practitioners or businessman I have insisted on the inclusion of a mediation clause. Resort to court, is last resort.
One of the ostensible benefits of mediation is confidentiality. If a matter is resolved by mediation the disputants can keep their issues of discontent "in house". If there is any "dirty linen" it is "washed" in-house, never in public. For people in high office this is most important, reputations particularly in this day of age where communications via the internet are immediate and widespread mean that anything odorous can be seized upon and published very quickly. Furthermore once the odium is out there it can never be archived or placed in a vault that is dedicated to the scurrilous. Information that is published on the web remains there in perpetuity for all and sundry. The need for confidential resolution of disputes is therefore greater than ever and mediation is a useful although not necessarily perfect way of achieving this.
Not everyone however is convinced that a benefit of mediation is confidentiality.
"It could be said that the reality of confidentiality in mediation is in large part reliant on the goodwill of the parties. If good will breaks down, then somewhat ironically, whether confidentiality will be upheld or not depends on relatively insecure legal protections"
(Field, Rachael and Wood, Neal (2006) "Confidentiality: An ethical dilemma for marketing mediation?" Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 17(2):pp. 79-87 at 7).
"From an ethical marketing perspective it is less than desirous to use the concept of confidentiality to promote mediation; certainly not without providing full information about the qualified nature of the concept in practice. Indeed, the accuracy and legitimacy of some of the assertions made about confidentiality in mediation can be brought into serious question"
(Field, Rachael and Wood, Neal (2006) "Confidentiality: An ethical dilemma for marketing mediation?" Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal 17(2):pp. 79-87 at 16).
As one of the perceived benefits of mediation is confidentiality, yet in actual practise as the said co-authors contend this may be an assumption in some instances rather than a fact, settlement condition "belts and braces" should be brought to bear to secure confidentiality. Where settlement via mediation is engineered the settlement agreement should have a confidentiality clause, any breach of which is actionable in a court of law. If part of the consideration in the settling of a dispute is confidentially it should be expressed as such, then a breach of confidentiality is a breach of that confidentiality provision and actionable.
A greater problem is if settlement is not effected by mediation. How confidential is information conveyed during negotiations in these circumstances? Field, Rachael and Wood have said the notion of whether information remains confidential or not may be reliant upon the good will of the parties. All well and good but of little comfort to disputants at loggerheads with one another, particularly if the mediation proves fruitless and as it can on occasion, counterproductive and a tension exacerbater.
(Michael Moffitt "Suing Mediators" Boston University Law Review, Vol. 83:147 at page 150)
The difficulty in suing mediators is probably because it is a new addition to the dispute resolution repertoire, somewhat of a dark and evolving art. As canvassed previously mediators are not supposed to make decisions and although a mediator never makes a decision, the errant mediator in making a recommendation or proffering an opinion that affects a settlement is influencing the decision to settle. If the decision is settled and compromised on the basis of a misconceived mediator`s expressed inclination, the conduct of the mediator should be actionable at law.
Yet actionable on what basis? The duty of the mediator in not codified or regulated rather it is ill-defined and speculative As some mediators are not remunerated by the parties does their duty to the party differ to circumstances where the mediator is remunerated by the parties, (presumably on a fifty- fifty basis)?
Unlike lawyers who are required to enter into cost agreements with their clients that are regulated by solicitor conduct acts, mediators do not explicitly contract with clients to dispense impartiality, ethical reverence or detachment. So in the absence of any contractual obligation for one to sue a mediator, one would have to imply certain duties, duties that are to reiterate ill-defined and opaque.
For the above reasons it is not surprising that mediators apparently have not been sued to date. Although a party in the absence of any mediator immunity would be at liberty to sue a mediator, success could prove elusive. There would have to be compelling evidence that the mediator, very forcefully recommended a course of action, based upon flawed rationale or pretext, resulting in a settlement that materially prejudiced a party`s interests.
Furthermore if the aggrieved was represented by lawyers it would be even more difficult to sue the mediator, because the question would be asked "Why did your lawyer not advise you to refuse to accede to the mediator's recommendation?"
The disquieting consideration for lawyers, is that the lawyer must be ever vigilant and bold if need be, in ensuring that a bad deal that is put to the client is described as such in no uncertain terms, least the lawyer be implicated in a questionable outcome. The last thing the lawyer would want to become is a client "safety net" for a compromised settlement in circumstances where a forceful or vociferous mediator extolled the virtues of settlement and the lawyer meekly acquiesced or endorsed in that facilitation. For to do so could mean that the lawyer would be sued for a failure to emphatically reject the mediator`s recommended course of action.
As an aside the author can attest to his disappointment with respect to some of his experiences at mediation, albeit a minority of experiences. One case concerned a multimillion dollar dispute where the author was retained by an insurance company and the author's client flew an insurance instructor from one jurisdiction to the jurisdiction where the mediation occurred. The mediator was a fairly relaxed sort of character but the amount that he charged being $6,000 per day certainly did not relax the disputants. It was observed on a number of occasions that when there were "breakout" caucuses, the mediator used his downtime to read the newspapers in the public reception area that someone very kindly left in the reception of the office.
In another matter, again an insurance dispute, one team flew from one jurisdiction to another, at great cost. The mediation was getting traction but because the mediator and some other members of one of the adversary fraternity had to attend a religious festival, the mediation was cut short. The author, a religious man himself, considered that it would have been a far better idea for the mediator to arrange a date that did not conflict with either his or one of the other party's religious commitments. Particularity when the mediator was charging in excess of $5,000 per day and the combined legal spend for the day would have been $12,000. Needless to say that the team lacking the same religious affiliation was in a word; disappointed.
One of the greatest risks with mediations is that successful mediations in the author`s experience often go well into the night. In these circumstances many mediators instead of adjourning over to the following day put pressure on the parties to expedite the "wrapping up" of a settlement. In such circumstances mistakes can be made particularly in regards to the drafting of terms of settlement. This makes one hark back to Michael Moffitt's observation that the lack of formal structuring can compromise the quality of mediation services.
Mediation is relatively cheap and in tribunals such as the VCAT and the NZ WHT it is free. Court nominated mediators however are not free and when the courts, compel the parties to mediate the parties have to engage and pay for recognized and reputable mediators. This can cost anywhere between $1,500 and $10,000 a day but is money well spent if the matter is resolved quickly by mediation.
The most cost effective deployment of a mediator is at the outset of the dispute, at a time that precedes the initiation of legal proceedings.
An actual mediation rarely takes more than a day or so. The critical thing is to ensure that the mediation occurs close to the beginning of the dispute rather than on the eve of trial.
On point, the author was engaged by the Law Reform Commission and the Law Institute of Victoria in the early 90's to co-author a plain English building contract with Jude Wallace (Jude worked with the Victorian Law Reform Commission). We decided to make mediation the first "port of call" in the dispute resolution process whereby it was a term of contract that no party could issue proceedings in any jurisdiction unless they had at first instance attended mediation. The contract also provided that the parties remunerated the mediator on a 50/50 basis, regardless of outcome.
It is critical, for fear of labouring the point that mediation occurs at the outset. Ideally, a mediator should be engaged before a matter goes to court, arbitration or a tribunal but this requires a contractual condition that binds the parties to this course of action.
A mediated outcome at the earliest possible time can indeed arrest the deterioration of a commercial relationship. Mediated outcomes can also be positive, they can turn the tide from discord to accord and where this occurs the relationship can be strengthened.
Adversaries can also learn more about one another, a constructive mediation can enable both parties to better understand the other party's point of view. As Sir Laurence Street, the prominent Australian mediator and a past NSW Supreme Court Chief Justice likes to say. "If you look at a coin, the coin has a head and a tail. In any given dispute one party sees the tail, the other can only see the head, yet they are both looking at the same coin".
Bronchitis is the inflammation of air passages that lead directly to the lungs. There are two main types of bronchitis: acute and chronic. Either of the conditions can be aggravated by exposure to inhalants that irritate the lungs, such as cigarettes and air pollution. People who have other underlying medical conditions such as heart or lung disease are at high risk for developing bronchitis and therefore should not smoke.
- A severe cough that produces blood
- A low-grade fever that persists for at least three days
- High fever accompanied by shaking chills
- Thick, green mucus, often accompanied by a foul odor
- Chest pain or shortness of breath
The condition often worsens after exposure to tobacco smoke, air pollution, or other inhaled contaminants.
Foreclosure Defense Lawyer Garland