Door wide open for white collar crime
A CNS reader writes: Although it’s valid that our police lack a compelling strategy to deal with escalating violent crime, the door to blue and white collar crime has also been left wide-open and duped consumers merit some recourse. The existing judicial structure of our court system caters to small claims under $20k, and then a huge justice gulf exists to higher-dollar Grand Court items where merely filing a claim can cost low five figures and puts your name in Offshore Alert.
You can spend well into six figures on lawyers before your case is even heard – and those can bleed-on for upwards of 6 years before a verdict reached. Even if you win, maybe you’ll get 75% of your costs back.
This creates a forgiving environment where rip-off artists in the $30-50,000 range become commonplace, and settlements typically end in some kind of revolting accord, a “suck it up buttercup” shoulder shrug, and/or lifetime grudge. You still have to endure these crooks at the school concert and the local grocery store knowing what they did to your family.
This comment was posted on More public input sought on consumer protection bill
The door open for white collar crime , that has always been open , and not because Watson and the Accountant is in prison that would close the door. Northward is not big enough and it would continue .
Any financial crime should be investigated by the RCIPS FCU, however I wonder if there is a minimum amount that they just don’t bother with if it is under that amount? If you wish to effectively stop the type of crime you are talking about, all deceptions and thefts need to be bought to court. On the other hand, many don’t want the publicity that goes with it, that somehow they were duped…
Hmmm… Zero comments!
That’s because its racist. How would you feel if certain other crimes wee labelled Black Collar?
I hope, for your sake, that’s intended to be amusing but I rather doubt that it is.
This is very true. The court system is not aligned with the needs of the community for civil matters, including family law. Too often the system is set up to protect the desires of attorneys at the needs of litigants. The attorneys in this system are well aware of the major faults in the distribution of justice, and are very quick to take advantage and game the consumer in the bid for higher fees. From my experience in family law, this has included placing children in significant harms way, routinely misleading the courts and other irresponsibly conduct, because the system is set up for only the Chief Justice to address unprofessional attorneys, and the attorneys for civil and family law will not report each other for unprofessional conduct. Perhaps if the Government set up a public oversight body for these attorneys, their conduct would improve. Unfortunately without any adequate intervention to address the unprofessional attorneys who are gaming the system, the public will continue to be disenfranchised by the court system.