>Hi Thomas,
>
>SNIP
>
>
>>Let's say your neighbor has a canalization problem. Sometimes there are pieces of your garden under water. Why not give him a few hundred bucks to specifically fix this ?
>>
>
>No, it would be better to pay for the repair or pay a portion of the repair costs directly to the contractor rather than to your neighbor.
>
>This is actually quite humorous to me (your example only I mean) because on a recent episode of one of the Judge Judy/Texas Justice shows (or whatever it was - not sure because I only caught a few minutes by accident when I was scrolling through channels and stopped to hear the trial in progress) a person had given his neighbor 200.00 to be used towards the cost of cutting down a tree that straddled the two pieces of property. The receiver of the funds didn't use the money for that purpose - in fact, he never had the tree cut down so the giver took him to small claims court. The judge basically said in effect that when money is given as a gift you have no say over its use. You cannot specify what the money will be used for unless you pay for a service and receive a receipt for the funds. If you want to specify that it go for a specific purpose then he should have paid the tree removal service directly and not his neighbor. He was basically out 200.00
I would do my best to avoid that neighborhood! :)
Previous
Reply
View the map of this thread
View the map of this thread starting from this message only
View all messages of this thread
View all messages of this thread starting from this message only