Answer:
Extension proposals are not rare because of the buyer's perspective of bridging finance as well as the explanations for both the requirements can indeed be broad. The much more common explanations are.
Explanation:
- It has required longer than planned to secure planning approvals.
- When a transaction has been negotiated, the borrower awaits an exchange of contracts.
- Additional resources as well as time are needed by the creditor to accomplish his project.
- Refurbishment analysis was suddenly postponed.
- Before actually refinancing the debt, the creditor waits for something like a new lender to conclude his thorough research.
- Throughout the final moment, the buyer of the creditor's property backs out, causing the borrower to bring the estate back into the marketplace.
- Throughout the last minute, the previous buyer refinancing the property backs out, obliging the creditor to find some mortgage company.
Answer:
The correct answer is: Collateral Assignment.
Explanation:
Collateral assignment of a life insurance sets a lender as the beneficiary in front of the decease of the insured, so the benefits will be used to cover the debt of that loan. The lender could be the insured of the life insurance or anybody else the insured decides to appoint.
The answer to that is roof
Full Question:
<em>Suppose it is discovered that the first zurvanites were influenced more by indian than by babylonian conceptions of cyclical time. does this discovery support the author's argument?</em>
A: The author does not claim that Zoroaster was the first to proclaim the end of history, just that this claim was one of the “most striking elements” in his teaching (lines 27-29). This discovery would not be inconsistent with the passage.
B: The author suggests that the Zurvanite conception of time as a sentient being was based in Babylonian speculations that time is cyclical, and so unending (lines 29-35). An early Zurvanite denial that history has an end (i.e., a claim that history and time do not end) would strengthen, not weaken the author’s argument.
C: The author very strongly argues that the Zurvanites committed “a deep and grievous heresy” by claiming that the two primal beings were brothers (lines 52-56). If Zoroaster himself made this claim, the Zurvanites would not in fact have “betrayed Zoroaster’s fundamental doctrine.”
D: The author does not argue that Zoroaster had no premonitory inkling of what heresies were to come. This discovery would have no effect on the author’s position.
Answer:
Yes. The author very strongly argues that the Zurvanites committed “a deep and grievous heresy” by claiming that the two primal beings were brothers (lines 52-56). If Zoroaster himself made this claim, the Zurvanites would not in fact have “betrayed Zoroaster’s fundamental doctrine.”
Cheers!
