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.

In this week’s episode, Nick discussed a class action lawsuit against Sportsbet for allegedly circumventing laws against live betting. A caller named Mo sought advice on creating a will and appointing an executor, and Nick provided guidance on the process and costs involved. Another caller, Anthony, asked about his daughter's parking fine from a private operator. Nick offered insights into dealing with such fines and the difference between private enforcement and government-issued fines. Lastly, Mike inquired about his neighbor's surveillance camera that overlooked a common area, and Nick explained the relevant legislation and potential courses of action.

In this week’s episode, Carl faced a $3 million building defect issue due to a collapsed builder, and Nick emphasized reviewing insurance policies and contracts, recommending specialized legal advice. Rob detailed a car-purchase scam stemming from a dealership email hack; Nick explained that consumer privacy obligations could leave the dealership liable. Another caller, Paul, learned his uninsured daughter could sue the at-fault, unlicensed driver, though recovering damages might be futile if the driver has no assets. Finally, Jody discovered her employer’s attempt to dock holiday pay without consent likely breaches employment law, and Nick advised contacting the Fair Work Ombudsman for assistance.

In this week's episode, Nick discussed beach ownership, clarifying that Australian beaches are government property. Julie sought advice on returning a TV that didn't meet the salesperson's claims about its performance in bright rooms, and Nick advised her on her rights under Australian Consumer Law. Lastly, Nick explained the importance of preparing an advance health directive or enduring power of guardianship to ensure medical wishes are followed in the event of incapacitation.

In this week's episode, Nick discussed divorce day and the lengthy divorce process in Western Australia. Kevin, a caller, sought advice on enforcing a court order against his ex-partner who was violating their agreement, and Nick outlined the legal procedure for enforcement. Des, another caller, expressed his frustration over the lack of victim support, recounting his experience with his former wife's murder and the difficulty in obtaining information about the juvenile involved in a prior break-in. Nick offered condolences and explained the limitations due to privacy laws.

In this week’s episode, Nick Marouchak offered advice on consumer rights for faulty Christmas gifts, family law issues during the holidays, and end-of-year workplace disputes. A caller named Nick discussed contesting a speeding ticket due to a recent speed limit change. Marouchak suggested using a mistake of fact as a defense. He also recommended settling property disputes between ex-partners outside of court.

In this week’s episode, a key point of discussion revolves around the recent amendments to the superannuation regulations for contractors, where Nick elaborates on the specific scenarios that warrant super contributions. He also addresses Brian's predicament with a blinds company, shedding light on consumer rights and the legal recourse available when services don't meet the agreed-upon standards. The conversation shifts to the topic of superannuation access due to financial distress, and Nick imparts insights on some lesser-known traffic regulations.

In this week’s episode, Sean sought clarity on the legality of speed limit signs during inactive roadwork weekends, which may cause confusion and unintentional speeding. Nick clarified the legal necessity to adhere to the signs regardless of roadwork status. Peter queried about the legitimacy of his previous job being filled after his redundancy two years prior, and was informed by Nick that the window for legal recourse has closed. Dan raised concerns about his rights concerning a persistently defective washing machine, with Nick outlining the consumer's entitlement to opt for a refund or repair under Australian Consumer Law for a major fault. Finally, Rob brought up an uneasy situation regarding a letter from Ford about a potential defect in his car, and Nick recommended seeking assurance from a dealer.

In this week’s episode, a listener named Martin sought advice regarding his friend's entitlement to her husband's estate in the event of a divorce after one year of marriage. Nick from MKI Legal provided insight, noting that in such short marriages without children, the husband's claim to assets typically remains limited. He also touched upon the concept of spousal maintenance for financially dependent spouses. Another topic discussed was the rights of security guards to conduct bag searches outside supermarkets. Nick emphasized the need for consent in such searches and outlined the conditions under which a citizen's arrest might be appropriate. Lastly, Nick delved into consumer rights, advising that Australian Consumer Law offers guidance on remedies for defective products or goods unfit for their intended use.