Skip to main content

View Diary: Closely-Watched Court Decision Breaks Bad for Wall St. Has A Day of Reckoning Arrived? (154 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The problem is that the contract will appear (5+ / 0-)

    to say one thing but thanks to clever wording actually end up meaning something completely different.  That used to be considered theft by fraud, scheme, or device to deliberately make a deceptive contract but I guess that is just the way it is nowadays.

    You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

    by Throw The Bums Out on Wed Feb 06, 2013 at 04:43:06 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Sorry I was the ONE attorney in (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      a Commercial loan to spend 10 hours going through about 1000 pages to figure out that someone should not have been foreclosed on.

      Back in the day you had an argument. We inherited that idea. That you had equal bargaining power. You don't like the terms, you go elsewhere. Today? Not so much. They are what the law calls Adhesive. You are stuck with it because nomatter what you'll get the same. . . .

      Even if you're taking out a 20 million dollar loan you have no bargaining power.

      You think anyone actually reads everything they sign? Another fallacy the law should do away with.

      Bargaining power is flat out not what we have from English Common Law.

      Can you go into Macy's even and say "I think this shirt is worth 1/2" I'll take it? That's the idea those contract principles are based on. And that they'll listen not laugh. Maybe in 1812, not in 2013.

    •  It does happen. But most of the time the contract (0+ / 0-)

      terms are fairly clear. If you have a balloon loan, you can see it. People just thought they would flip a house a few years later.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site