15
Typically the landlord will have a preexisting clause in the lease that says the landlord may choose to amend the lease at a later date.
While that may be in contracts, I don't see that holding up in court. You can't unilaterally amend contracts to add new terms without acceptance on part of the lessee. Any clause in the contract like that will require ...
9
Your bank is not discriminating against you.
Your reasons for not having the required amount of funds pass thru your account has nothing to do with your marital status.
In general, it's problematic to make a chain-of-cause-and-effect argument for discrimination.
For example. Your argument is analogous to the following.
My boss fired me for being late ...
9
Yes, you are then an online bank. This is an issue that computer games have had to figure out, when it was possible to move money both ways, cash to game gold and game gold to cash. (think Diablo's Real Money Auction House).
If you allow people to store cash value in the game, and then take the cash value back out, then you are banking. Even though it's a ...
answered Jan 9 '20 at 4:56
Harper - Reinstate Monica
9,2052 gold badges12 silver badges44 bronze badges
9
Contracts are transferrable
The default rule is that the rights and obligations that one person holds under a contract (your original bank) can be transferred to any other person (your new bank). This is only not the case where the contract is one for personal services (e.g. an employment contract) or where the contract explicitly prescribes or otherwise ...
7
Would this be legal?
Probably at this scale. Not necessarily extrapolated to a large commercial operation involving more parties.
At some point it becomes a payment system and a financial enterprise that becomes subject to financial regulation.
Could her transfer be viewed as a donation as well?
This is not a donation transaction and efforts to characterize ...
6
Can you plead guilty to a crime, get probation and simultaneously
avoid a conviction?
Yes.
In a deferred prosecution, there is not a conviction. If a defendant follows the terms of the program faithfully, the charges are dismissed and a guilty plea is never entered.
It is a bit like a conviction with a probation sentence, but milder, because if you ...
6
So, in short, the bank did what you asked them to do (close your account).
What do you think they did that might be unlawful?
5
Both of your question are creatures of contract. Their disclosures when you set up the account (or potentially amended disclosures or terms they've mailed to you subsequently) control both of these questions. They don't have to share the results of their internal investigation against you (they do have to give you proof that the deposit/transfer was ...
5
You haven't suffered a legally cognizable harm because you got your money back, before you even had a chance to complain, so you have no basis for a lawsuit.
For what it is worth, pretty much every adult in the United States was affected by the Equifax breach. Also, usually Equifax wouldn't have had access to full bank account numbers in the first place, ...
5
It's not a violation because Congress created and gave the Federal Reserve the power to issue Federal Reserve Notes in the Federal Reserve Act which created the Federal Reserve. More here on the relationship between Congress and the Fed: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-09-27/how-congress-governs-the-federal-reserve.
5
Firstly, true artificial intelligence does not yet exist. The term "artificial intelligence" is a bit of a buzzword, used to refer to things like neural networks and decision trees, which are really just elaborate statistical calculations. They do not have a "mind of their own" by any stretch of the imagination, though it is possible to make them appear as ...
5
FDIC Regulation 500 prohibits discrimination in making loans on the basis of "National origin" but not on the basis of immigration status. This story from The Nation says that Bank of America is denying accounts to non-citizens, and arguing that it is legal because of increased risks, although there are current court challenges to this. Perez v. Wells Fargo ...
5
It is unlikely that you could successfully sue the bank for breach of contract, but of course the first thing you should do is carefully read the agreement and see exactly what they promised. It is understandable that you would like to get your money right now, but that isn't necessarily guaranteed under the agreement. Assuming there is no statement in the ...
5
They are probably not required to provide online access at all. They are probably required to provide some sort of written statement, unless you have waived that in favor of online or electronic versions. The exact requirements will vary in different jurisdictions.
5
My first knowledge of it was that my debit card was declined.
That is probably the only thing that you have legal standing to complain about.
As pointed by Dale M, contracts can be transferred unless they explicitly prohibit transferring. You are entitled to continue to receive the same service under the same conditions as your original contract provided ...
4
It's essentially a legally enshrined incentive for high net worth investors to supply capital, which is consistent with the other entities that qualify in § 230.501. It tends to come with increased access to riskier offerings, where the risk ensues from exempted registration.
While nominal dollar thresholds typically get eroded away by inflation, they ...
4
I reported this to my bank as soon as I found out, and Chase said that the money would be reimbursed once they completed their investigation (within 10 business days).
Chase was likely indicating that the money will be reimbursed within 10 business days of completing their investigation; not 10 business days from the date you told the that someone forged ...
4
You are talking about "joint tenancy." I am familiar with bank accounts having multiple owners characterized as "Joint tenants with rights of survivorship" (JTWROS). This keeps the account out of probate: a death certificate simply removes the name of any owner who dies. But a probate court afraid that a deceased may not have enough assets to satisfy ...
4
They are still in business because they went to the agencies that regulate them and sought exemptions and waivers from the requirements that they not have criminal convictions.
Certain highly regulated industries, like the banking and securities (stocks, bonds, etc.) industries require the companies, their executives, and individual people be licensed. ...
4
Well ... the crime of fraud and the tort of deception.
If you say you will do X and enter a contract on that basis knowing that you won't then that is fraud and it carries gaol time. Your bank could also revoke your contract and sue for damages.
4
As a general rule, if a business, like a bank, is legally required to keep information confidential, and an employee breeches confidentiality, then your recourse is to sue the business for damages. See for example ch. 35 of Title 12. The bank cannot claim "It's not our fault, an employee did it" (the Latin for this is "respondeat superior", whereby a part is ...
4
The person getting the item by fraud didn't get any ownership. Therefore when you bought it, you didn't get ownership either. It's still the company's property, and they can do with it what they like (within reason, they wouldn't be allowed to make it blow up in your face). If you sent back the item, good on you, because the item is now with its rightful ...
4
It's governed by your credit agreement or some similar document, which you surely signed as a condition of receiving credit. There was almost certainly a clause that said the bank could reduce or revoke your credit line if you missed payments.
3
This is an interesting idea, but very risky for the bank. Oregon and Washington's truce with the Feds involves strong state backing, banks willing to take risks that no Colorado bank has been willing to take, and a tacit understanding that the Feds will tolerate this because the banks know their customers and are very familiar with their state's regulatory ...
3
None
First, only cash transactions are reportable: electronic and cheque transactions aren't. The only ones that will be reported are your single withdrawal and deposit.
As you say $10,000 is not a lot of money. What law enforcement is looking for a people who frequently have large cash transactions: they use data matching algorithms to identify these ...
3
If I send you a check that is stolen or well forged, then your bank will accept it, put the money into your account, and it can take ages (say ten weeks) until they find out, and then they take the money back. If you spent the money, then you owe the bank that money. For example, you might be given a $10,000 check stolen from a person who only notices months ...
3
You have been scammed - report this to the police. There is little to no chance this person will ever be found or that if they are that you will get your bitcoins back from them. On the plus side, for the bargain price of $9,500 you have learned never to trust a cheque until it is cleared.
You do, however, have avenues with your bank. You can ask Westpac ...
3
As noted in your update, Cal. Civ. Code section 1947.3 says
(a) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a landlord or
a landlord's agent shall allow a tenant to pay rent and deposit of
security by at least one form of payment that is neither cash nor
electronic funds transfer.
Paragraph 2 related to cases of recent bounced checks, and it sounds ...
3
Right of survivorship means that if one of the coowners dies, the other person immediately gets the ownership without having to go to probate. If a ownership is without the "right of survivorship", then the portion owned by the deceased falls to the estate and must be handled via the will or the probate. For example, if two non-related people own property in ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
