Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Oz Teens Going Bankrupt

Jump to new
OmegaTrader said:
Fine and make them pay over their lifetime like Hex
Click to expand...
I agree with this too. Why is it that dead beat Dads are pursued all the way to the grave for divorcing their wives but people who cause serious damage or death get let off with a slap on the wrist or a BIG discount? Sounds pretty unfair to me.

Why didn't AWG's friend have insurance? Maybe they have to make 3rd party property damage insurance compulsory too. o_O
 
SirRumpole said:
Some shops I've been in refuse to serve people talking on mobiles.
Click to expand...

Depends on circumstances. Agreed it's annoying if it's idle chatter.

But if the phone rings 5 minutes from now then I'll answer it certainly and I'm being paid to do so. Likewise I'm required as part of that to be fit for work at immediate notice whilst I'm sitting at home right now.

Not everyone who talks on a mobile is doing so for the fun of it.
 
Smurf1976 said:
Not everyone who talks on a mobile is doing so for the fun of it.
Click to expand...

True, but I doubt if shopkeepers can tell the difference. It's unreasonable to expect to be served while trying to talk to someone else at the same time. Hang up and be served or let someone else go before you.
 
We live in a time when many expect instant gratification. That attitude is overriding not only common courtesy, but also attention to tasks that require undivided attention to another job.
If people choose to ignore the former, that's their choice. If that lack of respect and courtesy is aimed at me, I choose to react the same way I react to any boorish lout: I ignore him.

On the road, in traffic, it's different. The person calling me doesn't know that I have a job to concentrate on. I make it my job to let them know: I switch off my mobile phone and let calls go on voicemail, which I can react to as soon as I've arrived at my destination. That way, I increase the odds that I do arrive in one piece by a significant margin.
 
tech/a said:
Sounds like a good negotiation.
Congratulations.
There are always alternatives.
Click to expand...

OmegaTrader said:
But I disagree with 20% payment. Responsibility is 100% not 20%

I always pay 100% of my bills. Not 20%

1) People can get worse after jail
2) we have to pay 100,000+ a year to keep them there

Fine and make them pay over their lifetime like Hex
or

if they can't pay it off slowly make people work it off eg in the bush or the army so it is more economical

my two cents
Click to expand...

Hi & all

Tech/A whose probably been on the ar$e end of a few bad deals is right, everything is negotiable

@ OTrader, hoping, (probably failing) not to sound condescending here;

most cases I have settled with Insurance have been subject to negotiation, might have have been by costly lawyers (but not in my instances)

In each case, have either been able to reduce my payout, or improve their payment to me
These were commercial negotiations, conducted in good faith..like...umm..a trade!

So my general question would be, if you find yourself in a situation whereby you either have no choice, (or indeed have full choice), will you accept the first offer/demand..or attempt to get a better deal?..(now that you know it is commonplace)

btw, as I instructed my teens to drive, I explained to them at any one time, at least 10% of drivers on the road were completely unfit, due to reasons including fatigue, legal and illegal drugs, physical and mental conditions such as dementia, anxiety, poor eyesight etc, road rage and just plain incompetence, leaving aside stupidity and inattention altogether.

My sister-in-law has crashed hit 3 times by red light runners, 2 ice users, and one prominent Ozzie golfer, drunk..as a result, I do not proceed thru a green light without checking first, if possible
 
awg said:
Hi & all

Tech/A whose probably been on the ar$e end of a few bad deals is right, everything is negotiable

@ OTrader, hoping, (probably failing) not to sound condescending here;

most cases I have settled with Insurance have been subject to negotiation, might have have been by costly lawyers (but not in my instances)

In each case, have either been able to reduce my payout, or improve their payment to me
These were commercial negotiations, conducted in good faith..like...umm..a trade!

So my general question would be, if you find yourself in a situation whereby you either have no choice, (or indeed have full choice), will you accept the first offer/demand..or attempt to get a better deal?..(now that you know it is commonplace)

btw, as I instructed my teens to drive, I explained to them at any one time, at least 10% of drivers on the road were completely unfit, due to reasons including fatigue, legal and illegal drugs, physical and mental conditions such as dementia, anxiety, poor eyesight etc, road rage and just plain incompetence, leaving aside stupidity and inattention altogether.

My sister-in-law has crashed hit 3 times by red light runners, 2 ice users, and one prominent Ozzie golfer, drunk..as a result, I do not proceed thru a green light without checking first, if possible
Click to expand...

it is ok to only pay 20% of your bills because:

1) there are alot of idiots around
2)People try and rip you off in bad business deals

sorry doesn't cut it for me

That is wiggling out by settling for a smaller amount because lawyers fees are exorbitant or threatening to go bankrupt instead of paying

I wouldn't call that good faith...

I accept responsibility, I pay my bills, I do not use the system just because I can.

Buying something is different to destroying someones car or injuring them.
 
OmegaTrader said:
I accept responsibility, I pay my bills, I do not use the system just because I can.
Click to expand...

For the insurance company it's probably a choice between something or nothing. Sure they could take the guy to court, but if he/she has no assets then it's unlikely they will see any money, the lawyers will get most of it. Garnishee wages ? Administratively expensive and probably not worth the trouble.

20% return looks good value.
 
SirRumpole said:
For the insurance company it's probably a choice between something or nothing. Sure they could take the guy to court, but if he/she has no assets then it's unlikely they will see any money, the lawyers will get most of it. Garnishee wages ? Administratively expensive and probably not worth the trouble.

20% return looks good value.
Click to expand...
What about taking responsibility and paying it back by your own will......
 
Perhaps a true tale " may " get you thinking
Everything is negotiable.

11 yrs ago I finished a good sized domestic project for $89000

Finished the project and the client had payed a $30000 progress claim.
Try as I may and jumping through every hoop known to man I couldn't get a cent from this guy.

Here in SA we can place liens on property to protect debt which we did.

Over the next 5 yrs I offered a settlement of $45000
His advice was that the longer he drew it out the lower I'd go.
The offer was open for 3 years without prejudice.
I withdrew the offer 2 yrs from court.
Legal costs add up over 5 yrs I'm sure many can attest to that.

The $45000 settlement included my costs around 30k
But to court it went with a good mate of mine a criminal barrister and a very good one
On my team
Costs in court look like the US debt clock.

To the crux
After 1 hr his team decided to enter into negotiation

Our negotiation was pay the lot including your and our costs or continue for the next 4 days with the debt clock ticking.

The result was he came to his senses and settled after 5 years.
The amount $138,000

All he had to do was pay his bill for works performed.
 
SirRumpole said:
How quaint !
Click to expand...

almost as quaint as Adam Gilchrist walking once when replays showed he never went close to hitting the ball, nipped off a crack instead

just last night I negotiated a deal, turns out the guy is wealthy, and small change means little to him, so he is virtually giving me something, and wants to meet me, even though his time is valuable...cause I talked him into it

on the other hand, I am outraged about a situation where large super companies gobble up small employee payments, and have decided to take one on. They are very arrogant, and I have adopted a more aggressive negotiating style. I openly tell my opponent they will come to dread the phone ringing, just in case I am on the other end. Eventually they settle, I frequently remind them this will mean they never have to deal with me ever again...something they desire very much by that stage

and yes, it was me footing someone else bill, that I didnt have to, nor wish to, would much rather have spent the money on booze and passionate women, or even just wasted it..did mention in my grovelling correspondence with the Insurer that there was a "moral obligation" to settle debts
 
tech/a said:
Perhaps a true tale " may " get you thinking
Everything is negotiable.


Try as I may and jumping through every hoop known to man I couldn't get a cent from this guy.

Here in SA we can place liens on property to protect debt which we did.

His advice was that the longer he drew it out the lower I'd go.

The offer was open for 3 years without prejudice.

After 1 hr his team decided to enter into negotiation

Our negotiation was pay the lot including your and our costs or continue for the next 4 days with the debt clock ticking.

The result was he came to his senses and settled after 5 years.
The amount $138,000

All he had to do was pay his bill for works performed.
Click to expand...

sorry my edit & bold..I ask them if they are familiar with the film Terminator, (one of my favorites)
and the line where they say "they will never stop, they cannot be stopped"...always infuriates them.

one time our company dug up alongside Pacific Highway, and laid telco gear on the instruction of a foreman from a major Oz Construction Co, when we invoiced them, they said we dont have a purchase order for that. Offered settlement on Court day for half, we had no choice at all but to accept
 
I must admit that negotiation has been something I've become a lot better at over the years.
As they say you have to know when to hold em and when to fold em.
Best to cut your losses and move on.

On the other side of the coin being right doesn't mean you'll be right.
Standing for principal in front of common sense can be time wasting
and brain draining.

eg and I see this all the time ---weekly.
A site survey is done and the neighbour is found to be 50 mm inside your property.
You know if it was me I wouldn't give a fXck
But lots and lots of people stop the world and get ridiculous---in my view.
 
tech/a said:
I must admit that negotiation has been something I've become a lot better at over the years.
As they say you have to know when to hold em and when to fold em.
Best to cut your losses and move on.

On the other side of the coin being right doesn't mean you'll be right.
Standing for principal in front of common sense can be time wasting
and brain draining.

eg and I see this all the time ---weekly.
A site survey is done and the neighbour is found to be 50 mm inside your property.
You know if it was me I wouldn't give a fXck
But lots and lots of people stop the world and get ridiculous---in my view.
Click to expand...

So true, my daughter and partner are building, the neighbors are being a pain in the ar$e.
I told them, don't worry, they will be developing their block soon, what goes around comes around.lol
 
tech/a said:
Standing for principal in front of common sense can be time wasting
and brain draining.
Click to expand...

I did think of this whilst settling the last matter, over which I had to fight far more vehemently than the others, for ~$20hr, but commonsense WAS on my side, so I persisted.

can usually save $100+ an hr by negotiation, ~$1000p/r on the Insurance case was a good result... (more cost effective to save a $ cost than earn a $ as it is after tax)

Sometimes provide this service to other persons in need, and save them plenty, never ask for a $ in return
 
Top