just got a ckeck from Toyota... class action lawsuit

[nortonfb]

Could they make it any more obvious the only people that make out is the lawyers?

Lawyers keep them honest. How many auto recalls would exist without
the threat of suit?

Norton

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by nortonfb

Lawyers keep them honest. How many auto recalls would exist without
the threat of suit?

Norton

'keep them honest'....in whatever limited capacity that exists, it is largely a byproduct, not the goal. There isn't much altruism among lawyers, and much of what seems to exist is faux altruism (IMO). There are quite a few lawyers in my family (too many ). One is the head of the sex crimes division of a county DA's office. She is the only lawyer in my family with a significant amount of altruism in her soul. Also, this may be a distinction without a difference, but another (younger) attorney in my family (she graduated from law school in California in 2004, passed the bar in California the same year, and is now practicing) told me that a lawyer is anyone who graduated from law school and an attorney has passed the bar and has his/her license to practice (FWIW, all of the law school graduates in my family have passed the bar and are practicing).

[nortonfb]

Altruism doesn't put food on the table by it's self. You must have a case.
Anyone practicing law in Ca is under suspicion of something:)
The state that does the most to pervert legal view IMHO.
People blame lawyers for all kinds of problems. What kind of world would it be if it were run by insurance companies?
Byproduct or not it doesn't lessen the end result.
Norton

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by nortonfb

Altruism doesn't put food on the table by it's self.

Exactly why many attorneys should be doing something else rather than practicing law...have to compromise their ethics to make a buck.

You must have a case.

. Nope. I've never been involved in a civil case, and my only brush with the law was 1 reckless driver way back in my teens. You must be an attorney or a law student.

Anyone practicing law in Ca is under suspicion of something:)
The state that does the most to pervert legal view IMHO.

IMO, anyone who sees what it is like to live outside 'The Nanny State' (California) and chooses to still live there either:

A. Needs their head examined.

or

B. Is so tied in multiple ways to the state that extraction would be detrimental in the long run.

People blame lawyers for all kinds of problems.

....that are often created by lawyers.

What kind of world would it be if it were run by insurance companies?

Much better than one run by lawyers, and held down by regulation and overreach. Insurance companies are usually publicly held, and have a fiduciary duty to their share holders. This doesn't change, it is 'known going in'. I want to give insurance companies as little of my money as possible, but I respect them in a business sense. Are you against insurance companies maximizing shareholder value?..If you are, those aren't the words of someone who believes in Capitalism. I don't have the highest opinion in the world of the insurance industry, but it is higher than that of the legal profession.

Byproduct or not it doesn't lessen the end result.
Norton

I'd rather take my chances re no recalls if it meant significantly fewer lawyers and significantly less regulation.

[WeeYari]

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

Much better than one run by lawyers, and held down by regulation and overreach. Insurance companies are usually publicly held, and have a fiduciary duty to their share holders. This doesn't change, it is 'known going in'. I want to give insurance companies as little of my money as possible, but I respect them in a business sense. Are you against insurance companies maximizing shareholder value?..If you are, those aren't the words of someone who believes in Capitalism. I don't have the highest opinion in the world of the insurance industry, but it is higher than that of the legal profession.

Why do insurance companies need so much of your money? Fraud, lawyers, and healthcare.

I remember vividly a few years back when there was a huge public outcry in Canada to reduce automobile insurance premiums. This outcry was because the insurance industry as a whole generated a profit on automobile insurance for the first time in years. What really made me shake my head at the time was the profit made, by all of the Canadian insurers for the year, was about equal to what just one of the 4 major banks in the country reports as a quarterly profit.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by WeeYari

Why do insurance companies need so much of your money? Fraud, lawyers, and healthcare.

I remember vividly a few years back when there was a huge public outcry in Canada to reduce automobile insurance premiums. This outcry was because the insurance industry as a whole generated a profit on automobile insurance for the first time in years. What really made me shake my head at the time was the profit made, by all of the Canadian insurers for the year, was about equal to what just one of the 4 major banks in the country reports as a quarterly profit.

Just a different way of looking at things. The Canadian no-fault way of looking at this leaves me shaking my head. I wouldn't be an official resident of a U.S. state that had no-fault either (I'd guess this is one reason why there are so many crazy drivers in Florida ). It deters motivation for quality, alert driving. If you are able to avoid accidents that are your fault, why shouldn't you pay less? If you want to have liability only, and then get in an accident that is the other person's fault, why should any of the burden fall on you to make your car whole again? In a state without no-fault, the market should be allowed to be as competitive...driving rates lower....as possible. In such an environment, why would anyone (other than an investor, trader, client, or employee) care how much profit any given company is making.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by nortonfb

Anyone practicing law in Ca is under suspicion of something:)

Some might have this view of lawyers in at least a couple of other states as well .

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by nortonfb

Altruism doesn't put food on the table by it's self. You must have a case.

In case you mean these to be together (the 'you' being a plaintiff, rather than me personally), people bring baseless lawsuits all the time, and are paid to go away because that is cheaper than litigation. This might be less of an issue going forward IN TEXAS, because we passed a form of 'loser pays' (if you lose, you pay for the legal costs of the other person, as well as your own). This passed, despite the big money behind the opposition....PRIMARILY 13 MILLION USD FROM THE TEXAS TRIAL LAWYER'S ASSOCIATION .