Main thing to remember and to do isin a car accident insurance claim is to contact a lawyer as soon as possible.  Lawyerahead.ca is the best way to find your lawyer in Canada including car accident lawyers.  A car accident lawyer will help you handle the situation based on his professional experience and will be able to, speaking generally, negotiate a better settlement for you.  A car accident lawyer will define define the type of damages, chances of winning the case and lay out the entire strategy for maximizing results.  A list of other important dos and don’ts will follow.

1. Gather evidence right on the spot.  Take pictures (you can even use your cellphone) of the car and the place of the accdient, write data and any information you can gather related to the accident, and get the names of the witnesses involved.
2. Contact you insurance company as soon as possible, preferably immediately after the accident or as soon as you get home
3. Go over your insurance plan.  Review the “Coverage” and “Exclusion” on your insurance coverage before having the conversation with your insurance company representative.  During the conversation, ensure you document and take notes of the conversations and the details
4. In your conversation with the insurers, try to be honest as possible.  and present all the possible evidence you had gathered so that the insurers are able to get an accurate reading of the incident.
5. Check all your papers and documents for any additional insurance you may be eligible for.  Many times other policies like home insurance policies, “Umbrella policies”, and credit card policies may have additional coverage for you and will help recover your claim.
6. Keep receipts on all your expenses related to your claim especially medical bills.  Having record of these will ensure you get the maximum possible claims
7. Important: Do remember that the insurance company will try to minimize your payout.  Which makes sense as less money they shell out to you, more losses on their books.  Having a lawyer assist you is ideal.
8. Use Lawyerahead.ca to find a lawyer

The Don’ts of the Car Accident Insurance claims:

1. Don’t assume any responsibility or make any statements at the scene of accident.  Anything you say can be held against you.
2. Don’t sign anything before you fully understand the details.  Again, lawyer will be able to advice you depending on the seriousness of your accident
3. Don’t be afraid to refuse signing any documents if you consider them incorrect or could put you in liability
4. Don’t accept any “final payment” if you are not ready to do so or you feel is under compensated
5. Don’t loose time, you have a year after the accident to begin legal action, be sure to start it as soon as possible to maximize results and use fresh evidence
6. Don’t make any rash decisions, consult a lawyer first.

And as a side note, remember your insurance company must pay for the compensation as covered in your insurance policy.  Don’t let them get away with tactics to reduce this amount.  Don’t be afraid to enforce them either and stand for what is yours!

There are three main types of homeownership: Freeholds, condominiums and cooperatives.

Freeholds are what many think of when they think of owning a home. This is when you own the house and property that house is on. Although these tend to be the most costly of the three types, freeholds allow freedoms the other types of ownership prohibit. The freedom is very attractive and entails levels of privacy especially in freestanding homes (not duplexes or townhouses) from neighbors and others. Pets and smoking – two heavily regulated issues for renters and in other forms of home ownership – are solely up to the homeowner in this regard. As far as liabilities, the freehold homeowner is responsible for all maintenance, repairs, upgrades or any problems that arise in his or her home. These, of course, can be costly at times, but many find the freedom to do what they want well worth these infrequent expenses.

Condominiums are the second type of home ownership. They tend to be cheaper than freeholds. The owner of a condo is responsible for maintaining the inside of the unit and pays a fee (usually monthly) to the condo association or groundskeeper for things like lawn maintenance, garbage removal or other various expenses. The catch is that condominiums do not allow the same amount of freedom freeholds do by imposing regulations on noise, upgrade/renovations and pet ownership. It is much like living in an apartment complex only instead of paying rent to a landlord and building any equity, you own the unit and are only obligated to pay upkeep fees.

For those looking to own a home, but not yet financially prepared for a freehold mortgage or condo, cooperatives may be the way to go. Cooperatives or co-ops are groups of people who pool their money to own a collection of homes. These originated in the 1960s in response to many families who could not afford freeholds and were unsatisfied with the quality of rental properties. Realtytimes.com states the three basic types of co-ops are:

· Building Co-operatives: The earliest co-ops appeared in Eastern Canada where citizens banded together in order to build and finance their homes. Once construction was complete, they divided the properties into separate titles with separate mortgages.

· Continuing Co-operatives: Members rent from the co-operative, but also control and own it, preserving it for future members. Non-profit co-ops are of this form, established under federal and/or provincial guidelines, built with government funding and supported with rent-geared-to-income programs.

· Equity Co-operatives: These share-based forms, where residents benefit from appreciation in value, are distinguished from condominiums as the property is held by the co-op.

The downside of a co-op, depending on the type a person gets involved with is that deciding to sell or drastically modify your property has to be approved by the co-op board. For example if you had a buyer lined up and they were a convicted sex offender they might decide that is not the type of person they want in their community and deny the sale, whereas with a freehold you could sell your home to sex offenders, convicted murderers, Glenn Beck or whomever you so choose.

Attorneys can help with legal aspects of home buying and you should consult with a lawyer with Real Estate experience before a home purchase.  Lawyerahead.ca prescreens its lawyers so you can avoid hiring the wrong lawyer.

Same-sex couples may be able to adopt children soon. Despite the spotlight-hogging drama ensuing in California over Proposition 8, Florida has managed to concentrate on its own laws and possibly repeal one from 1977 banning gay couples from adopting children if Nan Rich gets her way.

“… A good parent – whether they are heterosexual or homosexual – that’s what we should be basing decisions on, not sexual orientation. We need to be looking at what’s in the best interests of children,” says State Senator Rich, a democrat and co-chair of the Senate Children, Families and Elder Affairs Committee, who has submitted a bill to repeal the law disqualifying homosexuals and offers a second bill lessening the restrictions on adoptions to “the best interests” of the child in question.

The law in question was declared unconstitutional by Monroe County judge, David Audlin who allowed a Floridian lawyer and his male partner to adopt a child. Following the decision, Judge Lederman for the Miami-Dade Circuit reinforced Audlin’s ruling by permitting Frank Gill, a foster parent and homosexual, to adopt two of the children in his care. Lederman reiterated that the thirty-year-old law was unconstitutional. However, this case is currently up on appeal.

“There is no doubt in my mind that psychologists have determined what the key factors are to successful parenting.” One of the attorneys for the children in the Gill case, Hilary Bass stated in regards to the best interests of children. Continuing with, “Those characteristics are not limited to any demographic group. People are just as likely to be good parents whether they are single gay parents or in a married, traditional family.”

On the other side, Mathew Staver, founder of the conservative Liberty Counsel group is pushing for an injunction on briefs pertaining to the Lederman case. He argues that, since all lawyers (including those that support the ban) must be due-paying members of the Bar, taking a stand one-way or the other on gay adoption “places the Bar in direct conflict with its constituents.” Adding that, “Homosexual adoption is nothing less than a policy which says that moms and dads are expendable.”

The American College of Pediatricians seems to agree with Mr. Staver stating, “The College recognizes that the basic father-mother unit is the optimal setting for childhood development. …the lower court should have deferred to the Legislature’s judgment.”

As the controversy rages on, people like Frank Gill are left twiddling their thumbs while the rest of us question what really is in a child’s best interest. Is a child better off a part of a nuclear family? Can it be proven that children are mistreated or neglected when their parents are a same-sex couple? Is a certain level of naivety to what parents do behind closed doors more beneficial to a child’s development? Should there be laws regulating things like adoption in the first place?

The relationship between a policyholder and her insurance company is one of trust. Both parties agree to uphold their end of the agreement- the insured to pay their bill every month and the insurance company to pay all claims covered under the policy. The good faith of this agreement is the mechanism that binds the parties together. Unfortunately, some insurance companies choose to deny claims in an effort to cut down on costs. When an insurance company fabricates a reason to deny a valid claim, this is a bad faith insurance claim.

Consulting a lawyer is a viable tact once a claim is denied. Attorneys can untangle the legalese in the contract into a more understandable language and deduce if the insurance company acted in good faith or not. The law requires insurance companies to act in good faith, which simply means that they provide for claims covered under the contract. When the company denies a claim based on a reason that was not stipulated in the contract and acts recklessly with total disregard for the policyholder’s rights, they are acting in bad faith. Once this is established, one should contact his state’s department of insurance and take the offending insurer to court.

Punitive damages are a definite concern in this situation. Battling an insurance company can take many months and sometimes years of time in court, which can deplete the plaintiff’s bank account. Tacking on these added costs to the settlement modulates this to some extent, but it is important to know whether your state allows such claims. A short consultation with one’s attorney will clear this up.

Bad faith insurance claims are not necessarily outright denials either. Some insurance companies choose to mislead their policyholders by offering exorbitantly low amounts of compensation when they know full well the situation calls for larger sums. These “low-balling” tactics can be shown in court to be bad faith, although they are much more difficult to prove than denials.

In short, a claim denial is not necessarily the end of the story. Lawyers work with disenfranchised policyholders regularly to get what their clients deserve. Insurance companies playing the numbers game may rollover as soon as the subpoenas begin flying or could flounder around wasting time in court, but if bad faith is evident, a good lawyer and patience tend to favor the policyholder in the end.

Legal Information:  The best way to find Toronto Lawyers, Vanncouver Lawyers, Brampton Lawyers, Ottawa Lawyers, Mississauga Lawyers or local lawyers in your area for your legal needs is through Lawyer Ahead.  Learn more by visiting the site at http://www.lawyerahead.ca/

Injuries resulting from negligence are troublesome because of the emotional reactions of the injured party to the stresses presented by their current situation. This may cause them to act irrationally and could potentially cripple their chances of getting the settlement they deserve. Here are some Dos and Don’ts for any personal injury case.

Do get a lawyer. The first step in a negligence case should always be to consult with an attorney. Lawyers experienced in tort law and the specific type of negligence a client was affected by will be able to evaluate the merits of the case, how they should proceed, what damages were actually caused, and what the injured party is eligible to receive as compensation.

Don’t threaten whoever the tort suit is against. This may seem obvious, but many are tempted to forgo legal remedies and seek direct revenge. This is never a good idea. Making threats, especially toward a business, may end up irreparably hurting one’s case. Emotions run high in personal injury cases and it’s important to follow a lawyer’s guidance throughout the life of the case.

Do get checked out by a medical professional. A doctor can quantify the actual damage a patient has suffered. This may be something obvious that the injured party already knew they had, but it could be something more subtle and insidious. This benefits the case by putting realistic numbers in the place of mere speculation.

Having a medical professional explain what the recovery process clarifies the situation to a jury if the case goes to trial. Discovering that treatment for the injuries would require four years of physical therapy and an extended absence from work paints a more detailed picture of the hardships the plaintiff will endure - as opposed to simply, her ‘back hurts’. Fleshing out the nitty-gritty details by seeing a doctor will give the lawyer a point of reference for the severity of the injuries and what the claimant is entitled to.

Don’t preemptively take a settlement. In some cases, the offending party may contact the injured party with a settlement before the injured party has a chance to find out the true extent they have been damaged. It is difficult to turn down money right when the initial shock of hospital bills begins, but this is why the offending party offered a settlement in the first place. By taking a settlement at this stage, one is almost guaranteed to be selling themselves short. These arrangements usually entail a signed contract, promising that no future actions can be taken against the offending party. This eliminates any chance of compensation for future, unforeseen expenses. All offers made in these circumstances should be immediately disclosed to one’s attorney. An attorney will know if the client should disregard the offer or, in the rare circumstance of a good deal, if they should accept it.

These are only a few basic rules regarding personal injury cases. A personal injury lawyer will know what particular actions a client should take and which ones they should avoid in every unique case. An injured party is already, in fact injured, so it’s vital one does not compound damage by ignoring these fundamental principles.

Sometimes it is in the best interest of landlords to allow tenants selective use of a property. This can benefit both parties and tends to be the best solution in a variety of scenarios. Originally this was done through subdividing the land for a tenant use, but over the years, government has encroached upon this practice through legislation that regulates subdivisions which, in turn made it feasible for landlords to define the land as an easement instead.

The government has transformed subdivision into a potential money pit. Through the Local Government Act, municipalities and other local governments are granted powers over zoning and land subdivision. The powers to control subdivisions are heightened in the Land Title Act, which goes as far as to say an “approving officer may refuse to approve a subdivision plan…” if it doesn’t comply with myriad local and provincial regulations.

Noting that, creating an easement instead offers more freedom. Common Law has four requirements for land to be considered an easement and these are: There must be a dominant and servient tenement (‘dominant’ being the land benefiting from the easement and ‘servient’ being the land subjected to the easement), the easement must accommodate the dominant tenement, the owners of the dominant and servient lands in question must be different people, and the easement must be strictly defined.

Lack of exclusive possession concerning easements may be considered a downside. If a landlord filed for an easement granting their tenants exclusive possession, she would be denied, because granting exclusive possession makes it a lease, not an easement. Although this is the case, one may grant exclusive occupation, allowing tenants occupation rights while maintaining rights to ownership. Also, landlords may include a few conditions in the easement agreement regarding: Limiting access to the easement area to tenants and landlord, allowing tenants to install fences around the area, and limiting landlord’s easement access to certain times and in the presence of the tenant.

Creating an easement as opposed to a subdivision will save time and money. Although it may not be a hundred percent the same, the benefits from choosing an easement far outweigh the rights gained from a subdivision. As always, consult with a lawyer, specifically real estate lawyers regarding any contract. During consultation, posing the question of whether creating an easement is more beneficial than subdividing couldn’t hurt. Experienced lawyers, well-versed in property law and the local zoning laws will know what the best interest of a landlord is, given his or her specific situation and will answer any questions that arise.

Small business can be quite lucrative. For some, this appeal outweighs the unavoidable problems which arise. For instance, when customers aren’t satisfied with merchandise or service, when products do not arrive on time or in a suitable condition, or when a business partner breaks a contract. Most of the time, these problems are manageable and tend to run their course without a lot of hoopla, but on occasion they do not and this may lead to lengthy business litigation. Sidestepping that, many companies choose to resolve their differences through arbitration and mediation. Even though business dispute resolution does not take place in a courtroom it is important to consult a lawyer prior and possibly retain them for the duration of the arbitration.

Attorneys specializing in business dispute law take the emotion out of a rather emotional situation. Consultations will bear new perspectives on what the actual circumstances are and on some realistic solutions for your dilemma. They help business owners focus more on outcomes than on the problems and wrongs surrounding the case, which tend to clutter their mind.

Because business dispute resolution is constantly in flux, it’s good to have someone on your side who has been there before. Although each case is unique and things that worked in one case may not work in another, having lawyers with extensive bargaining experience can prove fruitful. They may have a similar case which they’ve consulted on that turned out favorably and have a framework of how to arrive at these desired outcomes.

Another reason to (at minimum) consult with a lawyer is the other guy may have a lawyer too. Obviously you’re not on good grounds with this person so it’d be tough to get a bead on if they actually do or not, but why chance it? Having representation ensures at least a level playing field and hopefully an edge at the bargaining table.

Business owners should not consider a business dispute attorney as an expense, but rather as part of the package. Litigation is quite costly and agreeing to arbitration is already saving tons of money. An experienced lawyer actually saves time and money by allowing one to delegate his or her energies toward other pressing business matters.

The bottom line is that consulting and hiring a lawyer saves a business owner by helping to ensure a speedy arbitration without any speed bumps. At first you’d think arbitration would be a one-speed process, but addressing key aspects of the dispute instead of getting bogged down in the minutia will speed the process up immensely. This is why the next time a conflict needs resolution make sure to consult an attorney, because as business people know- time is money.

Present Your Business Dispute case to Toronto Lawyers, Vancouver Lawyers, Ottawa Lawyers, Mississauga Lawyers, and Brampton Lawyers.

Earlier is better than later. In almost all legal actions, finding and retaining a lawyer early in the process will aid the resolution of the case. The longer you wait, the harder it will be for your lawyer to gather relevant evidence or prevent a misstep. Retaining counsel early may actually save money because witnesses and evidence are easier to track down and preserve.

How do I find an attorney? Although this is the first time you have retained counsel, it is likely that people you know have used the services of a lawyer before. If they had a good experience, ask them who they used. Even if that attorney doesn’t handle your type of case, they will be able to recommend lawyers who do. Failing that, research local law firms and lawyers on the Internet. You will find information about what sort of cases they handle and how experienced they are. Lawyerahead.ca is a great place to start your search for a lawyer. 

When you first meet your attorney, they will ask you some background questions about your case. They are acting much like a physician diagnosing a patient. They will listen to your story and hear it with ‘lawyer’s ears’ – picking out the essential elements both for and against you. Further investigation may be required, since it is unlikely you will know all the key elements and facts.

However, with this background information, your attorney should have a general idea of whether or not your particular case has merit and how to proceed. He or she will question you about what you envision a satisfactory result to be and comment on how realistic your hopes are.

If it appears that you have a valid case, the next part of the initial interview should be about costs. Attorneys understand that fees and expenses are a real consideration in any legal proceeding. They should be quite up-front about what they charge and what other costs are involved. If your case is taken on a contingency fee basis, they should tell you whether or not you are responsible for expenses and what happens if you lose and no money is collected.

You should not be afraid to lay out all your concerns, even if they seem silly. You are relying on this person to represent your interests - communication and trust are an important part of deciding who to hire.

Your initial consultation should end with a general plan of action. What you should and should not do in the near term. You should ask who is the contact person for your case (it may be an associate or a paralegal – someone empowered to answer general questions you may have and forward information to your attorney). You should be ready to call your contact person with new developments and to get updates on your case.

It is likely that your lawyer will give you a ‘homework’ assignment, perhaps gathering information he will need for your case. You should have a clear idea of ‘what happens next’ when you leave. You should also have a sense that you are in capable hands. Remember, questions aid all concerned. When you are not sure about something, ask. And if you still aren’t sure, ask again.

Instead of starting a new business, many entrepreneurs become franchisees. There are some definite pros and unfortunate cons to franchising and knowing as much as possible before taking the plunge will help stave off future problems.

The Franchise Agreement. Any franchising arrangement requires a lot of paperwork. The bulk of the deal is the franchise agreement. This stipulates the framework of the arrangement, detailing what both parties must do. Some franchises require a percentage of the gross revenue. Others may only want an upfront, one-time fee. Most require certain uniforms be used, suppliers, and a specific store layout. It’s important to note that there is little to no term negotiations with established franchises. Your lawyer will help you decipher the different commitments expressed in the many clauses of a franchise arrangement.

null

Laws governing franchising vary depending on location. Since franchise agreements fall under provincial jurisdiction, it is important to research what applies. Only a few provinces have laws regulating franchises (Ontario being one of them) so it is important to do your homework. Lawyers and Attorneys experienced with franchise law know what will affect the specific situation.

The main idea with franchises is that you are “leasing” the name. One of the most beneficial elements is the built-in customer base of the company. Franchising allows you to skip the arduous process of building a good name for the business. People already know what they are getting when they come to a Tim Horton’s in Windsor even if it is their first time visiting the city. The main idea is uniformity and as the saying goes, if it’s not broke don’t fix it.

Good deal or a bad deal? After the agreement is understood, it is vital to crunch some numbers and find out if it is worth it. In general, franchising has its perks, but specifically, it can get messy. For example, Dan buys a McDonald’s franchise. After six months, the restaurant is making money hand over fist. Business is outstanding and Dan can’t be happier. Soon after, another McDonald’s springs up down the block. Business at Dan’s store slows as customers start going to the new McDonald’s. Because the contract he signed did not stipulate any exclusivity rights, Dan is now stuck in a situation where his franchise is competing against itself. McDonald’s doesn’t mind, because it’s getting its cut either way and probably more now that there’s two separate stores paying franchising fees and a percentage of the profits. The customers don’t mind because of the shorter lines at either restaurant. In the end, Dan’s left holding the bag because he didn’t realize the initial deal he was getting wasn’t that good.

Overall franchising is a viable course for entrepreneurs. With the help of a good lawyer, doing your homework, and some common sense, becoming a franchisee can be a rewarding experience- especially, if it means free happy meals for the kids.

Since the beginning of marriage, there has been adultery. Statistics show first marriages have a 50% chance of ending in divorce and the possibility grows larger with each successive marriage. Divorces in Canada peaked in 1987 following the introduction of the Canadian Divorce Act, which shortened the length of separation required before divorce to a year and allows an immediate divorce when adultery or cruelty are admitted to or proven. Infidelity has ruined its fair share of marriages, yet the 21^st century has brought new forms of adultery into the spotlight.

null

As times change, so must the law. Same-sex marriages are on the rise and this will inevitably lead to more and more same-sex affairs. With progressive provinces like British Colombia and Ontario taking the lead on issues like child maintenance and spousal maintenance during same-sex divorces, it is only a matter of time before these rights are ubiquitous.

In 2005, the Supreme Court of British Colombia amended their definition of adultery to include same-sex adultery. This was in response to a wife’s request for immediate divorce from her husband who had cheated on her with another man. Up until then, immediate divorce for adultery would only be granted if one of the spouses admitted to having “voluntary sex with someone of the opposite gender, to whom he or she is not married.” Although the federal definition of adultery is unchanged, this decision most likely influenced the courts of New Brunswick.

In 2006, a New Brunswick court heard a similar case. Courts initially refused Pascal Thebeau’s divorce because the federal definition of adultery was limited to heterosexual affairs. After Thebeau challenged their ruling, the New Brunswick court chose to expand the definition to include same-sex affairs as adultery and granted his request for a divorce.

This appears to be the way courts are leaning. Although there have not been landmark cases in each and every province, the cases on the books show a tendency towards granting divorce, albeit after challenge, due to same-sex adultery. The official definition of what constitutes adultery has yet to be changed and there is a chance a judge may take it upon his or herself to refuse a divorce, because the “adulterer” cheated with someone of the same sex, but that seems less than likely at this point. What is odd to me is that gay marriage was legalized in part back in 2003 and it took three years for the issue of same-sex adultery to arise- originating from a conventional marriage no less. Perhaps when 2010 brings around the dreaded “seven-year itch” there will be further precedent set on a nationwide basis.

Find a Family Lawyer, Lawyers and Attorneys at Lawyer ahead.ca.  Its quick, effective and is the best free way to find a lawyer.