u/MauBicara

Hola, soy extranjero y vivo en Chile desde hace un par de años. Hace unas semanas llegué a mi casa y encontré una masa de papeles en mi reja. Era una notificación de un receptor judicial para una parte que ya no vive aquí. Hablé con el dueño de la propiedad, y esto se relaciona con un antiguo arrendatario que no ha estado aquí desde 2021. Es de un juzgado de cobranza y mencionaba un posible embargo de bienes; he visto algunas historias terribles de terceros sin relación con la causa a quienes les han embargado sus cosas, así que me preocupé bastante.

Logré que el receptor volviera a mi domicilio y retirara los documentos; ingresó el resultado en el sistema como “búsqueda negativa” y me aseguró que no había ningún problema del cual preocuparme.

He estado siguiendo la causa en el portal judicial y veo nuevamente que el estudio jurídico solicitó registros del SII y de la Tesorería sobre el domicilio de la entidad que están buscando. Nuevamente, arrojó mi dirección... parece que nunca actualizaron el registro.

Cuando llegó la primera notificación, también contacté de inmediato al estudio jurídico para enviarles una copia de mi contrato de arriendo e informarles que actualmente soy el arrendatario del inmueble (no la parte que están buscando), pero no me respondieron.

Van a volver a molestarme, considerando que ya existe una búsqueda negativa que afirma que la entidad y su representante no funcionan en este domicilio? Qué puedo hacer para evitar problemas?

I'm feeling a bit defeated as my first marathon is getting closer, and I need some help with perspective and how likely (or not) recent disruptions to my training are to blow up my race plans.

I've been running for about a year (coming from a background in trekking and cycling), and set my sights on a marathon coming up on 19 July. My training block has been huge -- I have ran more than 100km every week since April, and peaked at 132km in early June. The second week of June, I ran into a wobble -- I rolled my right ankle on a tree root and that set me off for a few days. As a result, I cut my mileage back to 65km that week, but was back to 120 the week afterwards. All in all, since April 1, I've ran just over 1300km as part of this training block.

Just as I was beginning to enter my planned 3-week taper, however, a potentially more serious issue popped up. I got a dull ache in my left knee. It doesn't "hurt" per se, and is mostly a feeling of pressure that is notable when I bend the knee. Last Friday it felt like it was building on km 22 of a planned 25km run, which led me to stop at 24km. Since then, I have gone out for a couple 15km runs -- I can get through them, but the discomfort is still there.

Today I saw a physio and a sports doctor. Neither think I have a severe injury, but *something* is definitely inflamed. They have conflicting hypotheses. The physio thinks it's the Infrapatellar fat pad, the doctor suggests quadricep tendinitis. In any case, it is minor, and both think that in theory I should be able to make it to my race if I cut back on load -- I will be doing imaging soon to get a definitive answer and getting some exercises from the physio in the meantime.

I trust that with rest I will be able to make it to the starting line, but I am assuming that this means my taper is going to be far, far more aggressive than initially planned - maybe involving decrease to almost nothing between now and race day. Luckily, this is happening after the hardest work has been put in, but I've read a lot of conflicting information about how fast fitness decreases. I had initially been aiming for a 2:55 finish time. I'm now feeling quite depressed about how my plans have been set off track and am hoping for some perspective from some more seasoned runners.

Does anyone have any experience having their taper more or less blown to smithereens after an otherwise successful training block? How did it work out?

Soy extranjero residente en Chile y estoy intentando entender un problema que recientemente tuve con el Ministerio de Transportes.

Hace algunos años obtuve una licencia de conducir chilena. Como Chile no reconocía la licencia de mi país de origen, rendí todos los exámenes necesarios para obtenerla. En ese momento se me había asignado un número de identificación chileno válido, bajo el cual se emitió la licencia. Recientemente, las autoridades chilenas me asignaron un nuevo número de identificación. Puedo acreditar oficialmente que ambos números corresponden a la misma persona.

Ahora necesito renovar mi licencia, pero la municipalidad me indicó que cambios recientes en su sistema impiden hacerlo. Escribí al Ministerio para solicitar una aclaración, y me indicaron que, debido al cambio de identificación, corresponde iniciar el proceso "desde una etapa inicial", como si nunca hubiese tenido una licencia chilena.

Lo que me llama la atención es que no logro encontrar dónde la Ley de Tránsito establece esa consecuencia.

Entiendo perfectamente que una nueva licencia deba emitirse asociada al número de identificación actualmente vigente. Lo que no entiendo es por qué un cambio de identificador implicaría desconocer validaciones, exámenes y certificaciones ya realizados por la misma persona y registrados por el propio Estado.

Según mi lectura, la ley parece regular requisitos de las personas, no de los números de identificación utilizados para registrarlas.

Alguien conoce alguna disposición legal, reglamentaria, dictamen de Contraloría o jurisprudencia que establezca que un cambio de identificación obliga a tratar a una persona previamente licenciada como si fuese un postulante de primera vez? O, más generalmente, cuál sería el fundamento jurídico para considerar que una persona deja de ser la misma persona simplemente porque cambia su número de identificación?

I am a relatively new runner, but have recently worked my way up to around 85km-100km of weekly volume, and have signed up two marathons this year. My half marathon race pace was around 3:56/km, and I am aiming to finish the fulls better than 4:20/km. I am roughly 6'1 (185cm) and 160lbs (73kg).

While I have really enjoyed getting into running, one thing I have not particularly loved is my experience with shoes. My first pair that I bought was a Puma Velocity Nitro 4 (in size 11). While I felt that they were pretty fast and did not set off any red flags while I was trying them on, I realized quickly that I get pretty severe blisters if I hit longer than 12km in them. I still use them for runs up to around 12km, usually just planning for a little manageable discomfort afterwards.

Once I realized longer runs were not in the cards with my Pumas, I decided to give Asics a try. I read into what might have caused my blisters with the Pumas, and wondered if they may have been a little on the big side. Accordingly, when I switched to Asics, I also switched to 10.5.

Initially, I tried the Gel Nimbus 27. It was OK, but I was getting some ankle pains (more specifically, my left posterior tibial tendon) that I associated with those shoes. Eventually, I switched to the Superblast 2 (also in 10.5) and have enjoyed them. I have about 500km on one pair, and bought a second pair that has around 120km on them so far. I am starting to notice a little bit of ankle pain again with the pair that has 500km on them, this time on my left achilles. I am wondering now if the cause might be that 10.5 is slightly too small for my left foot (which is longer than my right foot).

I tried to get a pair of Megablasts a few weeks ago, also going for the 10.5. After a 10k though, I had a pretty bad blister on the top of one of my left toes. I was able to return them, but this led me to think more as to whether I should be a size 11 after all...

I've now retired the Gel Nimbus 27s, keep the Pumas for 0-12km runs, and am thinking of retiring (or at least reducing use of) my higher-mileage SB2s soon. Accordingly, I need to get a nother one or two pairs of shoes. However, I live in a country where there is really no service to speak of at the running shoe stores, and return policies are generally zero tolerance for use. As such, I need to think about the following:

- Could I really be a size 11 rather than 10.5? Was the Puma causing blisters in the instep an at that size something I should worry less about with other brands?

- How can I really know if a shoe is the right size for me? I'm fine to drop some decent cash on some new shoes, but I worry about getting stuck with another pair that causes pains during longer runs.

- Superblast 2s are becoming very hard to come by in my country of residence, and SB3 is impossible. Accordingly, what alternatives might you recommend? I am interested in the Megablast, but afraid after the blisters I had in the 10.5. I'm also happy to try other brands but frankly know very little about their lineups.

Ideally, I would buy another pair of super trainers that can handle distance and speed workouts, and a race day shoe for my coming events.

Thank you for any advice or recommendations!