Blame Lawyers for Mortgage Mess
Be honest now. Did you ever read all the fine print when you signed up for a home mortgage?
I never did for the half-dozen such deals I made in the past. One thing’s for certain, though; as time went by, the paperwork exploded.
Today it must be overwhelming. So I disagree in part with Sen. McCain’s take on the problems: “...it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers.”
Are those young families thirsting for that first home being irresponsible when they fail to read all that gibbberish they must sign? I think not. Instead, the settlement attorneys should warn them of the pitfalls. Do they? I wonder. After all, their fellow lawyers are the ones who have piled on all the added documents and qualifiers over the years, both on the real estate and legislative sides.
In my view, such weighty documents are mainly the result of past lawsuits by greedy lawyers winning huge settlements for whatever reasons.
So let’s blame them, not the hapless home owners in trouble, for making the mortgage situation supposedly untenable. There are tons of those hapless souls, right? No. As George Will notes in a recent column, “96 percent of mortgage borrowers...are filling their commitments...” Besides, how could we have expected a pleasant outcome from the do-gooder political efforts to help more and more otherwise ineligible folks qualify for mortgages, who should have been renting and not borrowing,
Regardless, the utterly confusing paper mess is happening in other areas of legal transactions also. To wit: 26,300 pages in federal tax code in 1985 but over 67,000 in 2007. And have you gone to get a prescription filled lately? You literally have to sign your life away to get the pills. Surely there’s a direct link between those required documents and the huge class-action settlements lawyers in recent years have won against the drug companies.
I don’t read any of those pharmacies’ fanny-covering documents either. I have better things to do, and haven’t been burned, yet.
And maybe you think I hold a grudge against lawyers? Not at all. Local attorney Clark Leming probably handles more land deals in Stafford than anyone in history, appearing at planning commission meetings more often than the commissioners themselves, I would guess. He’s competent, totally honest and a county asset, as far as I can tell.
Then there are the big shots who give all lawyers a bad name. Fortunately, some are being introduced to the slammer. Multimillionaire trial lawyers William S. Lerach, Melvyn I. Weiss and Richard F. Scruggs are now known as crooks. From paying kickbacks to plaintiffs for lying, to bribing a judge, they have won many huge class-action lawsuits.
Those kinds of settlements have given direct rise, I suspect, to all the defensive paperwork now being thrust upon us consumers today.
Nevertheless, don’t hold your breath waiting for any Democrat candidate to condemn the greedy lawyers. In a debate a few months ago when most of the candidates were still running, an extended discussion of what they would do about the health care mess elicited not a single word about ending lawyers’ crippling lawsuits against drug companies and physicians. After all, candidate John Edwards had been one of the wealthiest of them
Lawyers of similar persuasion drove my good friend and physician Manuel Belandres from his highly beneficial practice in Stafford some years ago. Also on Potomac Hospital’s staff as a general surgeon, Belandres was Prince William County’s man of the year once in the 1990s for having established and run the county’s free clinic. Virginia’s insurance for doctors, reflecting the state’s spate of costly lawsuits, rose and drove him and other doctors out of business. Some had organized protests to the legislature in Richmond, which had little effect despite a Republican majority. After all, most of the legislators were, you guessed it, lawyers too. And now, mostly Democrats, alas.
Not to end on such a somber note, please enjoy two samples from the book, “Disorder in the American Courts:”
ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.”
ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?
WITNESS: July 18th.
ATTORNEY: What year?
WITNESS: Every year
_____
Note: In case you missed a few columns recently, you can catch up by accessing blogger.com/home and click on "You should see this." Regards, Ben Blankenship
I never did for the half-dozen such deals I made in the past. One thing’s for certain, though; as time went by, the paperwork exploded.
Today it must be overwhelming. So I disagree in part with Sen. McCain’s take on the problems: “...it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers.”
Are those young families thirsting for that first home being irresponsible when they fail to read all that gibbberish they must sign? I think not. Instead, the settlement attorneys should warn them of the pitfalls. Do they? I wonder. After all, their fellow lawyers are the ones who have piled on all the added documents and qualifiers over the years, both on the real estate and legislative sides.
In my view, such weighty documents are mainly the result of past lawsuits by greedy lawyers winning huge settlements for whatever reasons.
So let’s blame them, not the hapless home owners in trouble, for making the mortgage situation supposedly untenable. There are tons of those hapless souls, right? No. As George Will notes in a recent column, “96 percent of mortgage borrowers...are filling their commitments...” Besides, how could we have expected a pleasant outcome from the do-gooder political efforts to help more and more otherwise ineligible folks qualify for mortgages, who should have been renting and not borrowing,
Regardless, the utterly confusing paper mess is happening in other areas of legal transactions also. To wit: 26,300 pages in federal tax code in 1985 but over 67,000 in 2007. And have you gone to get a prescription filled lately? You literally have to sign your life away to get the pills. Surely there’s a direct link between those required documents and the huge class-action settlements lawyers in recent years have won against the drug companies.
I don’t read any of those pharmacies’ fanny-covering documents either. I have better things to do, and haven’t been burned, yet.
And maybe you think I hold a grudge against lawyers? Not at all. Local attorney Clark Leming probably handles more land deals in Stafford than anyone in history, appearing at planning commission meetings more often than the commissioners themselves, I would guess. He’s competent, totally honest and a county asset, as far as I can tell.
Then there are the big shots who give all lawyers a bad name. Fortunately, some are being introduced to the slammer. Multimillionaire trial lawyers William S. Lerach, Melvyn I. Weiss and Richard F. Scruggs are now known as crooks. From paying kickbacks to plaintiffs for lying, to bribing a judge, they have won many huge class-action lawsuits.
Those kinds of settlements have given direct rise, I suspect, to all the defensive paperwork now being thrust upon us consumers today.
Nevertheless, don’t hold your breath waiting for any Democrat candidate to condemn the greedy lawyers. In a debate a few months ago when most of the candidates were still running, an extended discussion of what they would do about the health care mess elicited not a single word about ending lawyers’ crippling lawsuits against drug companies and physicians. After all, candidate John Edwards had been one of the wealthiest of them
Lawyers of similar persuasion drove my good friend and physician Manuel Belandres from his highly beneficial practice in Stafford some years ago. Also on Potomac Hospital’s staff as a general surgeon, Belandres was Prince William County’s man of the year once in the 1990s for having established and run the county’s free clinic. Virginia’s insurance for doctors, reflecting the state’s spate of costly lawsuits, rose and drove him and other doctors out of business. Some had organized protests to the legislature in Richmond, which had little effect despite a Republican majority. After all, most of the legislators were, you guessed it, lawyers too. And now, mostly Democrats, alas.
Not to end on such a somber note, please enjoy two samples from the book, “Disorder in the American Courts:”
ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.”
ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?
WITNESS: July 18th.
ATTORNEY: What year?
WITNESS: Every year
_____
Note: In case you missed a few columns recently, you can catch up by accessing blogger.com/home and click on "You should see this." Regards, Ben Blankenship