Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Georgia Bard's Corner -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bob sims who wrote (4580)	8/1/1998 11:19:00 AM
From: Ga Bard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9440

Absolutely, Attorneys as I have discovered have a motive. THe more I learn the more I question the more I question the more I realize belief, fact and truth are totally different scenarios. There was an article written by the Wallstreet Journal I believe June 25 that brought this point out. Ambulance chasers that instead of having to find a main plaintiff like a fund or other deep pocket merely gather up a group of small time investors. I also belive there was something mentioned about there had been changes for "meritless" lawsuits also to stop ambulance chasers. Attorneys posting or advertizing on line especially in the secret realm like Private Messages I really question. Just drumming up work. Can't wait till someone decides to sue someone and the one that sues gets nailed ... A personal experince ... I had a house boat once and I let someone use it for a month. THe last day he was there it suddenly sank. There was an attorney at the site before I was able to get there. This soon became my lesson in ambulance chasers. The belief was the occupants were to blame and to protect myself from the insurance company not paying off or trying to cheat me. Well, I gave him $500.00. I soon found out there were no facts (evidence) of intentional wrong doing or even why it sank. Plus the insurance company when they made an offer to pay 70% which would have covered the financing that attorney told me I could get replacement valve for another $1,000.00. The insurance got ticked spent thirty days going back over the boat with a fine tooth comb then made another offer of 30% plus they wanted the boat for salvage and everything on it or I could keep the boat as salvage and get nothing. I bought the boat for $25,000.00 owed $17,000.00 ... Insurance first offered was $17,500.00 however they only paid $8,000.00 I ended up paying $11,000.00 ($9,500.00 note & $1,500.00 attorney fees) instead of making $500.00 on the original insurance offer. Oh the guy that left I could not prove anything on and I was told by ambulance cashing (no typo) attorney that once disclosure was made between the attorneys the guy had nothing worth going after. Also if I tried to pursue it there was going to be a counter suits for defamation and such. Belief - I had a solid case based on facts and loss, ... a no brainer Facts - There were none except for a belief of their existence however nothing to support them. (burden of proof, evidence, intent etc) only fact I had a sunk boat and I owed money on it. Truth - I got nailed by the insurance, the friend, & the attorney (OH and the insurance commissioner backed up the insurance company) I had a sunk boat and I owed a lot of money. There is a lot of evil on the internet that prey off the emotions of people. Heck what was a dormain to share DD willingly is now going silent. Again fear comes to the internet. GB .