Hot answers tagged

42

Not by payroll deduction, unless the agreement to do so was not a condition of employment While it is true (as Just a guy's answer notes) that under § 40.1-29(C) an employee may agree via "written and signed authorization" to an employer withholding money from paychecks, the agreement to do so must be voluntary and not a condition of employment/...


35

It depends on what your son signed § 40.1-29(C) of the Code of Virginia says employers need written permission to withhold anything besides taxes from paychecks: No employer shall withhold any part of the wages or salaries of any employee except for payroll, wage or withholding taxes or in accordance with law, without the written and signed authorization of ...


4

The fine would typically be around your monthly income. Legal basis: drunk driving per §316 StGB is punishable by up to one year in prison, but per §47 and §40 StGB short sentences are converted to a fine that depends on your daily net income (Tagessätze). There is likely no impact. Despite this being a crime, it will not appear in your criminal record that ...


4

Yes. This doesn't remotely approach the threshold to which the excessive fines clause applies. Also SR-22 insurance isn't a fine, it is a requirement that you take extra responsibility because you are a high risk driver. In general, states have broad authority to regulate the right to drive a car.


3

Technically the signage implied an agreement, and allowed you to infer one. But yes, I think that management could not legally insist on more than the posted price, whether for a lost ticket, or for a particular duration. (Unless the sign included "prices subject to change without notice" or something of the sort.) As a practical matter, challenge this ...


3

Bankruptcy does not obliterate legal financial obligations (taxes that you owe, fines, etc.). Fines either do or do not (any more) accrue interest, depending on jurisdiction. Fines for criminal conviction can accrue interest. By law, no fine can be unreasonable, but there is no simple determination of what is reasonable versus unreasonable. The matter ...


2

Q: Can the company be given a $7500*10 million=$75 billion dollar fine? Legally, mathematically and hypothetically yes. However a proper reading of the Act at 1798.155(b) shows that $7,500 is not a fixed mandatory amount but rather is the maximum that can be imposed for each intentional violation that is no remedied within the statutory timeframe. Courts ...


2

Damages are (generally) not constrained by the defendant’s ability to pay The purpose of a fine is to punish the wrongdoer and dissuade others from offending. The purpose of damages is to restore the wronged party to their original position. In recent times, there is a tendency to link fines to corporate profits or revenues but that is generally as a means ...


2

Germany: Actually, you have a license to ride a bicycle on public roads. You get it automatically, you have no paper as evidence, but it can be taken away. You can lose the right to drive a bicycle in Germany, and 1.66‰ is very drunk. Don’t go anywhere on your bicycle if you intend to drink lots of alcohol. 1.6‰ on a bicycle with no irregular behaviour can ...


2

The bike was signed over to A, which constitutes a sale. So A owns the bike. He can sell his bike as he sees fit. Further, A should have responded to all tickets with identifying B as the driver.


1

Usually, it is not the bus company itself that sets the fine for travelling without paying the fare, but it is the authorities that determine the penalty and how high the fine should be. If a ticket collector writes you a fine for traveling without a valid ticket, they are at that point acting as a representative of the authorities. Depending on agreements ...


1

It is possible that they cannot collect the fine. In Norway, a substantial fine is assessed for traveling on the train, bus etc. without a valid ticket. If caught by an inspector, you may pay on the stop, or later by giro with a further surcharge. I have no personal experience with violating the law, but I understand that in the latter case (you have no ...


1

It it was delivered to your residence, you received it The evidence from Royal Mail that the package was delivered to a given address is very strong to the point of being almost irrefutable. It doesn't matter who signed for it; if it was your residence the, legally, you received it.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible