|
|
Post by GySgtUSMC on Jul 30, 2004 11:05:25 GMT -7
Did anyone else get the Class-Action Lawsuit E Mail from the PayPal?
Chris,
As the resident attorney, can you translate the gist of it in one or two sentences
|
|
|
|
Post by stetto on Jul 30, 2004 13:33:23 GMT -7
Gee Marty, I'm not even an attorney and I can translate it; One or two attorneys are going to make millions of dollars on a scam lawsuit where the claimants might wind up with enough to buy a postage stamp... Ok, my priorities for a Presidential candidacy issue list just changed--National security followed by tort reform (if not tort removal)... The class-action suit is one of the biggest legal ripoffs ever devised, and the lawyers know it. That's why we see TV commercials complete with 1-800 numbers to call to build the claimant numbers to justify the bigger settlements, which wind up in the lawyers' bank accounts. I think that there are more ethical ways that ethical attorneys can call the public's attention to a misdeed or negligent practice by any corporation or organization and affect change in those practices. Oops...Sorry Marty, didn't mean to hijack your thread with a rant, but you pinched a nerve here  ... ...And Chris, yes, I have known several upstanding and ethical lawyers in my day, but they aren't the ones getting newsprint and airtime, now are they? |
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Jul 31, 2004 2:11:52 GMT -7
So you are against somone making money or as much money as they can in their profession. Also against I take it from someone who was hurt on the job, or a accident collecting as much money as the court will award. Your probally think base ball, foot ball ect. players should not make as much money as they can. Your probally mad about paying income taxes, so why not get educated and drop out, become a free man, get your IRS classifation re classified to exhempt and stop paying taxes instead of letting the government controll you. Lawyers are officers of the court, so get educated and get out of the courts controll. That $100,000 mortgage you have at the bank is not legal eather, get educated and be mortgage free. Change your property deed from being owned by the state as it is now to being owned by you . This country was founded and laws enacted to keep the government off our back, and out of our pockets ( English Government) so use these laws to your benifit, and quit letting lawyers & the government rip you off. Use gold and silver (legal money) instead of the IOU's in your pocket printed by the government, borrowed from the federal reserve that isn't federal but a private bank. REad the monster from Jeckle Island, and understand how the federal reserve was created, and how our so called national debt can be elimated by one stroke of the pen as it was created the same way.
|
|
|
|
Post by stetto on Jul 31, 2004 3:24:15 GMT -7
So you are against somone making money or as much money as they can in their profession. Also against I take it from someone who was hurt on the job, or a accident collecting as much money as the court will award. Your probally think base ball, foot ball ect. players should not make as much money as they can. Your probally mad about paying income taxes, so why not get educated and drop out, become a free man, get your IRS classifation re classified to exhempt and stop paying taxes instead of letting the government controll you. Lawyers are officers of the court, so get educated and get out of the courts controll. That $100,000 mortgage you have at the bank is not legal eather, get educated and be mortgage free. Change your property deed from being owned by the state as it is now to being owned by you . This country was founded and laws enacted to keep the government off our back, and out of our pockets ( English Government) so use these laws to your benifit, and quit letting lawyers & the government rip you off. Use gold and silver (legal money) instead of the IOU's in your pocket printed by the government, borrowed from the federal reserve that isn't federal but a private bank. REad the monster from Jeckle Island, and understand how the federal reserve was created, and how our so called national debt can be elimated by one stroke of the pen as it was created the same way. Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnooo Tail, I'm against scam artist lawyers using the vaguaries in the law to take advantage of thousands of people at a time with a promise of a "settlement" or "award", knowing full well that the ONLY beneficiary of such settlements is the lawyer. How this relates to sports, property deeds, federal reserve et al I do not know...  |
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Jul 31, 2004 8:57:04 GMT -7
Ah ok, guess I got off on one of my rants. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by ctdahle on Aug 6, 2004 10:56:29 GMT -7
Eric,
If a charge had been wrongfully applied to your PayPal account, I'm betting that you would like to see it on your PayPal statement before PayPal debited your checking account or your credit card, and I'm pretty sure you'd like PayPal to tell you how to correct it without hiring a lawyer.
That's what the class action suit is about.
There are some bank clearing house rules which require banking institutions to make certain disclosures in a particular format. They are the same rules that govern your checking account and credit card statements.
The rules are designed to prevent fraud and to help consumers discover if any charges were improperly applied to their accounts, and they provide consumers with particular rights to challenge potentially fraudulent charges, and adjust disputed charges.
Apparently PayPal had not provided the disclosures to its customers or clearly explained how its customers should deal with erroneous charges, and had maintained that they were not a "bank" subject to the same clearing house regulations.
So, will some lawyers make money? Yeah, they will, but on the otherhand, until the lawsuit was turned into a class action, PayPal didn't amend it's statements or included the required disclosures. If you want to be pissed off about it, why aren't you pissed that PayPal assumed that it didn't have to follow the rules?
|
|
|
|
Post by stetto on Aug 7, 2004 4:58:17 GMT -7
If a charge had been wrongfully applied to your PayPal account, I'm betting that you would like to see it on your PayPal statement before PayPal debited your checking account or your credit card, and I'm pretty sure you'd like PayPal to tell you how to correct it without hiring a lawyer. Yep, I would. But that doesn't change my mind about ambulance chasers doing a group screwing with the inferred monetary gain of the claimants. The system is geared to stuff lawyers' pockets, and in this country I find it hard to believe that other avenues aren't available to correct a corporate wrong-doing... That might be what the designers of the class-action suit had in mind (or maybe not), but that is not how I see it (ab)used these days, nor in recent memory. I believe I made this remark earlier: "I think that there are more ethical ways that ethical attorneys can call the public's attention to a misdeed or negligent practice by any corporation or organization and affect change in those practices."...But then, there's no rediculous amount of profit in that, now is there? Not even worthy of addressing? Oh, so there are RULES then? Why isn't a "controlling legal authority" made to do their job then? If there are rules to enforce, then they should be reported and enforced, not left for oportunistic lawyers to pad their coffers with. Oh, please... I didn't say that I wasn't pissed, Chris. I addressed the means by which people have chosen to go about change, no doubt at the urging of those who were to gain the most. These vultures perpetuate a stereotype, apparently greed has that effect. One of the things that would curtail this frenzy of lawsuit bloodlust IMO would be capping what an attorney can reap from a lawsuit. But that won't happen, will it? And we all know why; The country is RUN by attorneys... Oh, and thanks for completely ignoring my point in lieu of pressing your own...Very attorney-like of you. Sorry I couldn't reciprocate in kind... |
|
|
|
Post by ctdahle on Aug 9, 2004 12:11:42 GMT -7
Eric, My intention was to answer Marty's question. Your bizzare misunderstanding of how a class action suit operates merely gave me a rhetorical opening.
For the benefit of everyone else:
Vast areas of government regulation have no formalized bureaucracy (or as Eric puts it "a controlling legal authority") to ensure enforcement, and we couldn't afford the tax burden if they did.
The point of a class action suit is to provide a means of enforcment without incurring taxpayer expense where a number of individuals, but not the public at large are damaged by a regulatory violation.
We allow private individuals to hire an attorney (these are known as "private attorney's general") to pursue regulatory violations that affect a limited class of people.
Ronald Reagan preferred such a privatized means of regulatory enforcement, and so do I.
The alternatives would be to either ignore many violations, or to establish a Federal Department of Crawling Up Your Ass to bird dog every regulation on the books.
In the PayPal case, you can be pretty sure that if the matter had been handled by the Federal Department of Internet Regulation, Computer Monitoring and Data Processing Control, the whole thing would cost both PayPal and the taxpayers one hell of a lot more than 9.5 million.
|
|
|
|
Post by stetto on Aug 10, 2004 3:24:37 GMT -7
Your bizzare misunderstanding of how a class action suit operates merely gave me a rhetorical opening. For one, you being an attorney, you should know much much better than than to make a grandiose and asinine assumption like that based on my OPINION of a legal process. You have no clue as to what I understand or not, other than my skepticism concerning attorneys' ability to be anything other than greedy and control addicts, hence their preponderance in the political arena...(a generality, but then, you only MAKE the shoes, now don't you?...  ) My understanding of class-action suits will never rival yours, for a very good reason, and I see that you are using this fact to your advantage in order to dismiss my OPINION... Another quote from my first response in this thread: "Oops...Sorry Marty, didn't mean to hijack your thread with a rant, but you pinched a nerve here..."Most, I assume at least, would take this comment to mean that I was addressing a subject other than the topic...Hence the term hijack... I realize that most folks in this forum read what they want to see, Chris. What a shame that a few of us who should be aren't above that... |
|
|
|
Post by ctdahle on Aug 10, 2004 5:48:19 GMT -7
Eric, I represent little girls who have been raped with hot curling irons. If that makes me a greedy control freak, fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by stetto on Aug 10, 2004 11:02:31 GMT -7
...And I still stand by this statement Chris... ...And Chris, yes, I have known several upstanding and ethical lawyers in my day, but they aren't the ones getting newsprint and airtime[/b], now are they?[/quote] I tend to be as blunt and to (my) the point as I can. If I thought for a moment that you were among those in my rant, I would have said so... |
|
...
)