Bahama Divers closed after lawsuit

[Zeke XA3]

ll this aside, if you read the article it looks like the plaintiff isn't going to collect anything. Bahama Divers was in debt to their landlord, their suppliers and their bank. They had no boats, no land and presumably no other major tangible assets.

Im just down the road and been talking to friends of friends and people around.

Seems they got the desist at the start of one month (july or august?) then allowed to operate for 1 more month then shut down. Gear was on lease so would be returned to brand, they owed the bank for overdraft and rental property (being shut over corona). As for the boats not sure what the deal was whether they were rented or owned etc. But a whole business under, people out of the job right after the shutdown of the virus and even the person launching the lawsuit will pretty much get nothing. Every one lost in this situation.

 

[The Chairman]

Every one lost in this situation.

Not the lawyers. The lawyers never lose.

 

[apenland01]

Not the lawyers. The lawyers never lose.

Especially divorce lawyers. Don't get me started.....

 

[tridacna]

Not the lawyers. The lawyers never lose.

Pete, how? Remember that this is contingency work. 30% of zero is zero. If you’re correct, then the plaintiffs made out big. Apparently they didn’t, so on what are you basing your comment?

 

[The Chairman]

Pete, how? Remember that this is contingency work.

Is it? Most lawyers are not on contingency. Even then, no contingency lawyer takes on a case that won't pay them. There's just no way they do it out of a desire for justice.

 

[tridacna]

Is it? Most lawyers are not on contingency. Even then, no contingency lawyer takes on a case that won't pay them. There's just no way they do it out of a desire for justice.

These cases are handled on a contingency basis. No question. Depending on the award, they get up to one third of the award depending on jurisdiction. If you lose, they lose and are not compensated for their time or expenses which may be considerable. This is not in doubt. Not sure why you're questioning this? And no way do they do this "out of a sense of justice". They're hoping for a big payout. Just like everyone else in the USA. Yell about the wrongs of torts until they themselves slip and fall. Then a miracle happens and they become fans. (OK - maybe not in Fiji ).

 

[The Chairman]

These cases are handled on a contingency basis.

You'll have to show some evidence that this was one of those lawyers. Those lawyers do due diligence so they don't waste their time. This was an attempt to ruin the business with such a large fee and they succeeded bigly.

OK - maybe not in Fiji

A few lawyers have tried to get me to do just that. It's not me. It will never be me. It's a matter of ethics and even though I feel I've paid out the nose with no help from the resort, I will stick with my ethics.

 

[boulderjohn]

These cases are handled on a contingency basis. No question. Depending on the award, they get up to one third of the award depending on jurisdiction. If you lose, they lose and are not compensated for their time or expenses which may be considerable. This is not in doubt. Not sure why you're questioning this?

I sued the person who injured me in a bicycle crash a number of years ago, and I interviewed several potential attorneys. All had the same mantra: we only collect if you win the case. I selected one, and before long they trotted out a document for me to sign. It said that no matter what the verdict, I would owe them the costs they incurred for handling the case, at their standard rate. If I won, it would come out of their percentage. If I lost, it would come out of my pocket. The document explained that this was part of state law, so it would have been true with any attorney I had selected. Luckily, I won.

 

[tridacna]

You'll have to show some evidence that this was one of those lawyers. Those lawyers do due diligence so they don't waste their time. This was an attempt to ruin the business with such a large fee and they succeeded bigly.

What fee? If there were any fees awarded, it would have come from an insurance company. PI attorneys only pursue cases in which recovery is very much a possibility. That's how they get paid. Attorneys always go after those with the deepest pockets. If they had no insurance, the attorneys would never had taken the case. NO plaintiff's attorney would take this case unless they believed that there was an entity that would pay. The retainer fee for such a case would not be affordable by the owner of a small diner in Illinois. Retainers are usually reserved for divorce attorneys and big corporations.

I have to show evidence? LOL. I could do a Lexis search but to prove what? 99% of PI cases are done on contingency in the US. YOU prove to me that this was an outlier case. Hardly likely.

 

[The Chairman]

What fee?

The judgement. Fee was a bad word to use there.

So, as I said: the lawyers always win.