In this week's episode, Anna sought advice on an ongoing car accident claim involving a tow truck company and her insurer, RAC, with Nick suggesting Consumer Protection and the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) as avenues for resolution. Lindsay raised concerns about a new development impacting his driveway, and Zeno questioned transfer fees for a new trailer, with Nick clarifying the buyer's responsibility and suggesting contacting the Department of Commerce. Finally, Greg discussed a parking fine issued by the Town of Cambridge due to an Easy Park registration error, highlighting the council's strict enforcement.

In this week's episode, Lindsay raised concerns about RAC's delay in repairing his car after an accident, with Nick recommending an AFCA complaint after an internal complaint failed. Chris inquired about a $15,000 fee to use a laneway for his property development, and Nick advised checking the City of Stirling's planning scheme for exemptions and potentially speaking to a town planner. Emmett sought a refund for a misrepresented product from a 4x4 fitment centre, and Nick suggested invoking Australian Consumer Law and threatening a minor case claim in Magistrates Court. Finally, Tracey discussed issues with her landlord, including backdated lease agreements and an invalid rent increase, with Nick confirming the impropriety of backdating and the requirement for rent increases to be in an approved form.

In this week's episode, callers discuss various legal issues. Nick clarified that smacking children in WA is lawful under specific conditions. Vicki queried about contesting her stepmother's will where Nick introduced the concept of promissory estoppel for potential claims. Troy's car purchase woes led Nick to advise on Australian Consumer Law for a refund. John's issue with an airline not refunding for a downgraded seat prompted Nick to suggest pursuing the claim in Magistrates Court. Diana raised concerns about retrieving a car in her son's name, to which Nick recommended police involvement or Magistrates Court. Finally, Rob asked about an estranged child challenging a will, and Nick stated that name changes do not affect the right to challenge.

In this week's episode, Dan sought advice regarding his entitlement to a portion of his ex-partner's personal injury settlement in their divorce proceedings, with Nick confirming his entitlement and explaining how the court assesses such assets. Graham called in about issues accessing his money at Bankwest due to not filling out required forms, and Nick suggested contacting the Australian Financial Complaints Authority if the issue persists after internal complaint and investigation. John inquired about the family court system's handling of perjury and contempt of court, with Nick detailing the high threshold for perjury charges and the court's ability to use contempt powers, also outlining the lawyer's ethical duties. Finally, Sam questioned the refundability of a wedding venue deposit after cancellation due to a breach of the cancellation period, and Nick advised on mitigating losses and pursuing a claim through the Magistrates Court.

In this week’s episode, Murray inquired about amending a power of attorney, and was advised to create a new form. David reported an illegally placed dumpster on his vacant block in Broome, seeking advice on its removal. Michael questioned discrepancies in breathalyzer readings after being pulled over, and was informed about recent legislative changes affecting readings. Kay's unpaid debts from a bankrupt individual were discussed, with Nick explaining bankruptcy procedures and limitations on recovery. Anthony raised concerns about inconsistent water supply due to a misplaced water meter, and was advised to pursue the matter further with the Ombudsman. Finally, the ACCC's legal action against a Chinese ute importer for rust issues in their vehicles was highlighted.

In this week’s episode, Nick discussed the government's ability to terminate a contract due to a breached term, Colin sought advice on pursuing compensation for property damage from a driver who crashed into his property, despite a high insurance excess. Further inquiries included Chris discussing issues with faulty vehicle repairs under warranty, and Nick raising problems with tracking bracelets for domestic violence offenders not working in regional areas, and a lady called Alana Weatherly's situation regarding GoFundMe scam situations. Additionally, James requested advice on pursuing a car refund under Australian Consumer Law after extended faulty repairs, Sue dealt with a neighbor's cat continuously trespassing and using a property as a toilet, Roy discussed resolving a neighbor obstructing shared property with car washing, and Tim inquired about the cost of wills with legal assistance.

In this week’s episode, Chloe inquired about the timeline for executors settling wills and a generic question about the coroner's involvement in deaths. Alana asked about cutting overhanging tree branches, while a segment focused on defamation, including a specific case involving Mark Latham. Jeff questioned differences in wills between states, and Norman discussed financial obligations during separation. David sought advice on a dispute with roller shutter installers, and Mary asked about updating her will for children living overseas. Lastly, Greg raised a question about defamation in the media, and Dave inquired about the validity of New South Wales Power of Attorney in Western Australia.

In this week’s episode, Nick defined "vexatious litigant" and explained the legal restrictions imposed on such individuals. Aaron shared a concern about his company withdrawing his work car after a takeover, and Nick advised examining the contract and company policies, highlighting the risk of dismissal for non-compliance. Melissa inquired about probate and executor duties, with Nick explaining the "executor's year" timeframe and the process for holding executors accountable. The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) was discussed as a free avenue for consumer complaints against financial firms. Superannuation division in family law was also addressed, along with a caller's positive experience with AFCA. Finally, a father shared a concern about his daughter's accident at a water park, and Nick recommended consulting a personal injury lawyer.

In this week’s episode, Terry inquired about the probate process for his brother's will, with Nick clarifying the requirements based on asset values and real estate holdings. Bruce raised concerns about the security of his new rental property's entry door, and Nick outlined his rights under the Residential Tenancy Act, including urgent repair options and protection against retaliation. Henry questioned the legitimacy of escalating fees from an overseas traffic infringement, and Nick advised on the complexities of international debt collection and potential courses of action. Callers also discussed road rules, specifically right-hand lane usage and speed limits, with Nick providing clarification on relevant regulations. Robin shared his experience with a similar overseas traffic fine and offered advice on negotiating with debt collectors. Peter questioned the legal implications of not paying council rates, and Mo inquired about will executor services, though Nick clarified his firm's current practice areas and offered to provide referrals.

In this week's episode, Catherine sought advice on revoking an enduring power of attorney she signed, and Nick explained the formal process of applying to the State Administrative Tribunal. Peter inquired about enforcing a $9,000 reparatory payment from a theft case five years prior, learning about the potential six-year expiry date and the process of enforcing the order through the Magistrate's Court. Another caller, Nick, raised concerns about additional storage fees incurred due to a shipping company's alleged failure as a customs broker, with Nick advising on potential claims under Australian Consumer Law for negligence. Matt questioned the liability of new neighbors for half the cost of a fence erected years ago, and Nick advised on potential time limitations. Lastly, Robin discussed the witnessing requirements for power of attorney forms and the implications of joint versus joint and several appointments.

In this week's episode, Nick discussed several legal issues. A warning about dodgy unlicensed car dealers and private car sales was issued, highlighting the reduced consumer rights in private sales compared to purchases from licensed dealers. Selling four or more cars in a 12-month period qualifies one as a dealer. Auction purchases were noted as riskier due to limited Australian Consumer Law protection. Greg inquired about employers discovering a second job, with Nick advising honesty in tax declarations and reviewing employment contracts for exclusivity clauses. Concerns about AI use in legal and medical contexts were raised, particularly regarding data privacy and the authenticity of witness statements. John asked about licensed dealers selling repairable write-off vehicles, to which Nick confirmed they can if disclosed in writing. Rob sought advice on a landscaping quote that increased significantly post-completion, and Nick suggested challenging the additional charges using unfair contract terms. Milton, a 62-year-old aspiring law student, received tips on gaining practical experience through volunteer work at community legal centers. Finally, Peter Dutton's potential policy on public servants returning to the office was discussed, with Nick explaining employee rights to request flexible work arrangements.

In this week's episode, Annabelle sought clarification on joint tenancy versus tenants in common for her property and was advised by Nick to change to joint tenants for automatic survivorship, though a will is generally sufficient. Mark questioned the property rights of secondary owners listed on his boat registration, and Nick explained the concept of constructive trust, suggesting he consult a property lawyer. Natalie asked about ensuring her children inherit her share of her mother's estate if she predeceases her mother, with Nick recommending an express provision in the will. Richard inquired about obtaining power of attorney for his aging parents, and Nick advised getting a doctor's letter assessing their mental capacity before proceeding. Luke raised a hypothetical question about proving innocence in defamation cases, and Nick outlined the process and defenses involved. Finally, Trev discussed issues with a vehicle purchased at auction and discovered odometer tampering, with Nick advising reporting to the Department of Commerce and Department of Transport and consulting a lawyer.

In this week's episode, Nick addressed several legal queries. New scam laws were discussed, highlighting increased protections for consumers and potential legal action against companies failing to prevent scams. Travis sought advice on a defective vehicle purchased from a dealer, with Nick explaining statutory warranty rights and potential recourse through the Department of Commerce or a minor case claim. Dawn inquired about insurance issues in a strata title property, focusing on the requirement for joint insurance and potential recovery of costs. Brian raised concerns about roller shutter safety in a commercial unit, with Nick advising on communication and potential legal action to ensure repairs. Finally, Paul sought guidance on defective flooring in a new build, and Nick suggested contacting the building commission and potentially taking action against the builder for the defects.

In this week’s episode, Mark asked about a warranty issue with an oven repair, and Nick explained consumer rights under Australian Consumer Law, stating that the seller must cover all costs within a reasonable period. Another caller, Martin, reported an issue with a store's return policy regarding solar batteries, and Nick advised that the store must honor the return as represented by their employee. John, a business owner, asked about recovering costs for pursuing unpaid invoices. Nick clarified that court filing fees and bailiff costs are recoverable, but not legal costs for claims under $10,000. Andrew texted in with a concern about a company making employees pay for discrepancies, which Nick stated is a breach of the Fair Work Act. Lastly, Les inquired about warranty coverage for a second-hand TV, and Nick confirmed that Australian Consumer Law applies to second-hand goods within a reasonable period.

In this week’s episode, Debbie discussed her difficulty in getting a refund from the ATO after accidentally paying her bill twice. Nick advised her to pursue an internal review and potentially commence proceedings against the Commission of Taxation. Neil shared his experience of being falsely accused of being drunk and abusive at a bottle shop, leading Nick to explain the legalities of defamation and suggest Neil speak to the store owner. Joe inquired about the legality of a Facebook group organizer sharing his court conviction publicly, and Nick clarified that it is permissible if the information is truthful and no non-publication order was in place. Brendan asked if Debbie could receive interest on her refund from the ATO, and Nick confirmed she is entitled to prejudgment interest. Finally, Nick provided his website and contact number for those seeking legal advice.