Illegally Obtained Evidence for Administrative Hearing

[jk]

so, did your wife steal from the credit union? Did the disclosure of the account records support the claim?

and you still haven't answered how this affected your credit rating, how it required you to obtain an attorney, and how it put you behind on your bills.


has her unemployment been terminated?

[Dogmatique]

...given the length of this thread already, cbg evidently made a valid point

But really - this is going nowhere. You're arguing a point which isn't a point at all. Hence the responses you've received.

[jsonnebe]

It's going nowhere because you are being obtuse. Sorry to bother you with such a long thread. You win, I'll go somewhere else.

[Dogmatique]

It's going nowhere because you are being obtuse. Sorry to bother you with such a long thread. You win, I'll go somewhere else.

We'll likely see you there.

I'm sorry you didn't like being told the truth

[jsonnebe]

"I'm sorry you didn't like being told the truth."

Actually, you told me your opinion. There is a difference, and I generally try not to take advice from people who confuse the two.

I will research this matter further on my own. I guess I was wrong when I actually tried to discuss a problem on a discussion board.

[Dogmatique]

"I'm sorry you didn't like being told the truth."

Actually, you told me your opinion. There is a difference, and I generally try not to take advice from people who confuse the two.

I will research this matter further on my own. I guess I was wrong when I actually tried to discuss a problem on a discussion board.

My opinion is that you should pay an attorney to listen to you.

And that is the truth.

Look, we see it all the time. A poster asks a question, receives an answer s/he doesn't like and then proceeds to argue the point despite there being no real point to argue. When advised to seek legal counsel, poster oftentimes gets snippy with the responders as if it's all our fault to begin with.

That's not quite how it works on a forum made up of volunteers. That's what you pay an attorney to do - which is what you were (correctly, I might add) advised to do quite awhile back.

Good luck with your legal endeavors.

[jsonnebe]

"A poster asks a question, receives an answer s/he doesn't like and then proceeds to argue the point despite there being no real point to argue."

Actually, I asked alot of questions and discussed others opinions and tried to clarify the situation. I didn't do any arguing.


"When advised to seek legal counsel, poster oftentimes gets snippy with the responders as if it's all our fault to begin with."

I never blamed anybody for anything.

Look, I see it all the time. Some volunteer on some board starts to think that s/he has big britches. Then all problems are solved with one short, uninformative answer. Then if the OP even attempts to get clarifications they get hit with "get a lawyer" or "ask for a refund" or some other snippy remark.

If you are not willing to discuss an issue then you probably shouldn't be "volunteering" on a discussion board.

[jk]

If you are not willing to discuss an issue then you probably shouldn't be "volunteering" on a discussion board.

thanks for the lesson. Now go hire a lawyer and don't forget to ask for your refund on the way out.

[jsonnebe]

CREDIT UNION ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 215 of 2003


490.381 Disclosure of confidential information.

Sec. 381.

Except as otherwise required by law, a director, officer, member of a committee, or employee of a domestic credit union shall not disclose any confidential information related to the conduct of the business of the domestic credit union that he or she has a duty not to disclose, including, but not limited to, personnel matters, matters involving actual or potential litigation or real estate transactions, or other matters related to strategic business endeavors of the domestic credit union, and shall not disclose any information concerning transactions between the domestic credit union and either its members or other persons. This subsection does not apply to any disclosure necessary to the conduct of the business of the domestic credit union.


History: 2003, Act 215, Eff. June 1, 2004

[Dogmatique]

CREDIT UNION ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 215 of 2003


490.381 Disclosure of confidential information.

Sec. 381.

Except as otherwise required by law, a director, officer, member of a committee, or employee of a domestic credit union shall not disclose any confidential information related to the conduct of the business of the domestic credit union that he or she has a duty not to disclose, including, but not limited to, personnel matters, matters involving actual or potential litigation or real estate transactions, or other matters related to strategic business endeavors of the domestic credit union, and shall not disclose any information concerning transactions between the domestic credit union and either its members or other persons. This subsection does not apply to any disclosure necessary to the conduct of the business of the domestic credit union.


History: 2003, Act 215, Eff. June 1, 2004

Now..read it again and see why it doesn't apply to your wife's situation.

Hint: The last sentence. The one you didn't bold and underline.