Did you know that divorce is a $50 Billion dollar a year industry in North America (and yes that really says billion)... $50 BILLION!! That's huge! Did you also know that lawyers account for $35 billion in the industry, and that the remaining goes to courts, therapists, mediators, arbitrators, etc.
Litigation on the low end is $35,000 (per person) with a lawyer ... did you know that this number represents a down payment on a house! A HOUSE! Now I don't know about you but I think I will be enjoying the house a lot longer than the company of my lawyer (although at the current rate of processing within the legal system I could be completely wrong here).
Now I must ask ... if the only issues to be decided in a routine divorce are: property (if there is any), child custody/support (if there are any), division of assets (if there are any), and the actual divorce (if you are legally married by ceremony)... Why is divorce 76% more expensive than getting married? And why does it take so long to finalize ... well I think the answer lies in the $50 billion dollar question!
The answer ... you need to be focused in your approach, or your lawyer will happily enjoy your "unfocused" approach and with their new summer home/car/boat/vacation that they will be getting with your dollars.
A great place to start finding focus in the chaos is with LifeAction ... check them out on their blog (its pretty fresh but I hear good things are available and coming soon!)... so I say milk that cash cow in your favour!
C.
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Saturday, March 26, 2011
How to annoy your ex-wife ...
This may seem like a pointless topic ... however, most (I use this loosely) separated and divorced people do not want to continue to endure the wrath of their ex. Some walk on egg shells around the other, others unintentionally annoy ... and then there are the ones that do things to raise the blood pressure of their ex so high that you can actually see the steam escaping from their ears.
Here is my example ... by the way the bonehead is real, the incidents are real ... and I have no idea why I am proctecting their identity but here it goes. These are sure fire ways to annoy your ex however it is highly advised that you avoid them at all costs because ... karma can hurt like no body's business.
Picture the ex-hubby who cries proverty to the court, he has no money, living off the kindness of others so the judge takes pity and lowers substantially his support obligations ... forward 4 months ... poverty boy gets job and then avoids going back to (his scheduled date) court because he knows it will cost him more ... forward 8 months ... poverty boy takes 5 (yes that says 5) international vacations returns to court to announce poverty again because he has been fired from the new job (perhaps the 5 vacations had something to do with it?)... court takes pity again and says ok you don't have to pay for all the things you put in writing that you said you would pay for, for your kids ... forward 3 weeks (yes that says weeks) ...the incredible bonehead announces (remember he is unemployed) that he has bought a new home, a new car (one for the girlfriend too), is leaving for a couple weeks to go to Italy and then announces he has bought a diamond ring for the girlfriend and they are getting married.
Now to be clear ... the ex-wife only cares about one thing ... how can you cry poverty and plead to the court that you can't afford your kids when you can afford all that? Oh wait ... you can't afford your kids BECAUSE you bought all that. This behaviour is a guarantee to annoy your ex ... bottom line ... if you have kids ... they come first no ifs, ands, or buts.
Here is my example ... by the way the bonehead is real, the incidents are real ... and I have no idea why I am proctecting their identity but here it goes. These are sure fire ways to annoy your ex however it is highly advised that you avoid them at all costs because ... karma can hurt like no body's business.
Picture the ex-hubby who cries proverty to the court, he has no money, living off the kindness of others so the judge takes pity and lowers substantially his support obligations ... forward 4 months ... poverty boy gets job and then avoids going back to (his scheduled date) court because he knows it will cost him more ... forward 8 months ... poverty boy takes 5 (yes that says 5) international vacations returns to court to announce poverty again because he has been fired from the new job (perhaps the 5 vacations had something to do with it?)... court takes pity again and says ok you don't have to pay for all the things you put in writing that you said you would pay for, for your kids ... forward 3 weeks (yes that says weeks) ...the incredible bonehead announces (remember he is unemployed) that he has bought a new home, a new car (one for the girlfriend too), is leaving for a couple weeks to go to Italy and then announces he has bought a diamond ring for the girlfriend and they are getting married.
Now to be clear ... the ex-wife only cares about one thing ... how can you cry poverty and plead to the court that you can't afford your kids when you can afford all that? Oh wait ... you can't afford your kids BECAUSE you bought all that. This behaviour is a guarantee to annoy your ex ... bottom line ... if you have kids ... they come first no ifs, ands, or buts.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Judges without judgment ....
So you go to court because you and the other party just can't come to an agreement. You think you are going to go before an unbiased individual to help the two of you come to an amicable (or somewhat anyway) conclusion to your issues. Yeah .... ummmmmm this is not always the case. Some judges are completely biased, and abandoned common sense like a poor pathetic step child.
It amazes me how the bias of an individual can get in the way of seeing the facts ... afterall the facts are the facts right? Apparently, not always. Take for example, a contract. This is a pretty simple concept ... two parties put in writing what they agree to, if one party doesn't do what is in the contract then they are in "breach" of that contract. Now common sense says that if you then go to court in this matter it would be pretty simple, that the person in breach would be ruled against, consequences laid out, and retribution to the injured party. That is what common sense says. That is actually what the law says. HOWEVER, this is not necessarily what the judge will say .... Why you ask ... well because ...the judge has lost all grasps of reality and the concept of common sense has been thrown out like yesterday's bath water.
Judges become biased to a side along the way. They don't like your hair color, eye color, shirt color, your lawyer, etc. Even the reason for the bias doesn't have to make sense. Logic has vanished never to be seen from again! Just know ... it happens, and it isn't good for either party. Why? Because the wronged party will appeal, costing both parties more time, effort, stress and valuable resources.
Trust me it is all quite sad and tragic ... there will however be a memorial service for the loss of common sense and logic. Please make donations to the "Judge Sense Rehabilition Fund" in lieu of flowers.
C.
It amazes me how the bias of an individual can get in the way of seeing the facts ... afterall the facts are the facts right? Apparently, not always. Take for example, a contract. This is a pretty simple concept ... two parties put in writing what they agree to, if one party doesn't do what is in the contract then they are in "breach" of that contract. Now common sense says that if you then go to court in this matter it would be pretty simple, that the person in breach would be ruled against, consequences laid out, and retribution to the injured party. That is what common sense says. That is actually what the law says. HOWEVER, this is not necessarily what the judge will say .... Why you ask ... well because ...the judge has lost all grasps of reality and the concept of common sense has been thrown out like yesterday's bath water.
Judges become biased to a side along the way. They don't like your hair color, eye color, shirt color, your lawyer, etc. Even the reason for the bias doesn't have to make sense. Logic has vanished never to be seen from again! Just know ... it happens, and it isn't good for either party. Why? Because the wronged party will appeal, costing both parties more time, effort, stress and valuable resources.
Trust me it is all quite sad and tragic ... there will however be a memorial service for the loss of common sense and logic. Please make donations to the "Judge Sense Rehabilition Fund" in lieu of flowers.
C.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Paid interviews? ...
Let's consider this ...When was the last time you were paid to interview for a job? This has actually never happen to me, I'm not saying that I wouldn't like it to happen ... it just never has. I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that this has a really low likelihood of happening ... However, in the realm of hiring a family lawyer, this is actually a pretty common occurence...
When you are setting up an interview to meet potential counsel to determine if they are the right fit for you and your matter, some (many) want you to pay for the conversation... But why do I have to pay someone who has not done anything to earn the money? Why do I have to pay to interview?
Now I know that many in the legal community will argue with this about how valuable their time is, how grand their knowledge is, and their expertise is valuable, blah, blah, blah ... oh and my favorite... they need to be paid to determine if they want to take your case.... ummm you need to determine if me, my problems and money are worthy of you? I think not, plus in this timeframe of interviewing, you are actually not doing any work for me.
You already know why I am coming to see a "family lawyer", I know you have the expertise and knowledge but I don't know YOU so now we need to see if we can work together. Yes Ms/Mr potential counsel .... I am a new kind of client, the educated, the informed, the I want to keep my money and get value for what I spend kind of client.
If my counsel and I cannot work together then I shouldn't be hiring them because if I do it will end badly. Feeling will be hurt and now instead of just dealing with the dissolving of one relationship I will have to deal with two ... I don't want to have the conversation of "its me not you, when really I mean its you not me". So please do not be offended with me interviewing you for the position of my legal counsel. Fit is so important and this should be blindingly obvious for people practicing family law ... obviously "the fit" in my last relationship didn't work (hence the reason for you), so interviewing becomes a much needed and essential part of the process.
I would like to thank all candidates for their interest in this position and would ask that candidates please have 3 references ready ...
C.
When you are setting up an interview to meet potential counsel to determine if they are the right fit for you and your matter, some (many) want you to pay for the conversation... But why do I have to pay someone who has not done anything to earn the money? Why do I have to pay to interview?
Now I know that many in the legal community will argue with this about how valuable their time is, how grand their knowledge is, and their expertise is valuable, blah, blah, blah ... oh and my favorite... they need to be paid to determine if they want to take your case.... ummm you need to determine if me, my problems and money are worthy of you? I think not, plus in this timeframe of interviewing, you are actually not doing any work for me.
You already know why I am coming to see a "family lawyer", I know you have the expertise and knowledge but I don't know YOU so now we need to see if we can work together. Yes Ms/Mr potential counsel .... I am a new kind of client, the educated, the informed, the I want to keep my money and get value for what I spend kind of client.
If my counsel and I cannot work together then I shouldn't be hiring them because if I do it will end badly. Feeling will be hurt and now instead of just dealing with the dissolving of one relationship I will have to deal with two ... I don't want to have the conversation of "its me not you, when really I mean its you not me". So please do not be offended with me interviewing you for the position of my legal counsel. Fit is so important and this should be blindingly obvious for people practicing family law ... obviously "the fit" in my last relationship didn't work (hence the reason for you), so interviewing becomes a much needed and essential part of the process.
I would like to thank all candidates for their interest in this position and would ask that candidates please have 3 references ready ...
C.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Ransom Money ...
I would like to no longer refer to retainer fees as retainer fees ... we will now be calling retainers what they really are ... Ransom.
You have hired a lawyer, and now before they will even think about doing work for you, you must give them a sum of money of their choosing to be disbursed to them at their will, and without dispute from you. Isn't this what criminals do when they have something you want, they demand unreasonable sums of money in exchange for it with little or no regard as to its effect on you and your well being? In fact, isn't it usually an amount that is very detrimental to you and your well being. Isn't that illegal?
If this (extortion, ransom, well ok retainer - pick your own word here)is illegal when criminals do it then why is it ok for lawyers to do it? Why is it ok to suppress your financial security, nest egg, and fiscal ability when you need it the most to re-establish your life?
How come it is legal for lawyers to do what is illegal for everyone else to do? Anyone?
C.
You have hired a lawyer, and now before they will even think about doing work for you, you must give them a sum of money of their choosing to be disbursed to them at their will, and without dispute from you. Isn't this what criminals do when they have something you want, they demand unreasonable sums of money in exchange for it with little or no regard as to its effect on you and your well being? In fact, isn't it usually an amount that is very detrimental to you and your well being. Isn't that illegal?
If this (extortion, ransom, well ok retainer - pick your own word here)is illegal when criminals do it then why is it ok for lawyers to do it? Why is it ok to suppress your financial security, nest egg, and fiscal ability when you need it the most to re-establish your life?
How come it is legal for lawyers to do what is illegal for everyone else to do? Anyone?
C.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)