Texas: Bush's Anti-Consumer Tort Reforms
The LA Times reports:
"Texas has gone from one of the most friendly states for consumer protection to one of the most anti-consumer states," said University of Houston law professor Richard M. Alderman, an expert on consumer rights. "It all began in 1995. Bush oversaw a significant retreat for consumer protection, and it was all done under the guise of attacking 'frivolous' lawsuits."
The impact has been felt by home buyers such as Mary and Keith Cohn, whose elegant new residence in this well-off Houston suburb came with a leaky roof that led to rotting and moldy wallboard throughout the structure. After their daughters became ill, the Cohns moved out. The repairs ultimately cost more than $300,000. To their astonishment and dismay, they learned that when the builder refused to repair most of the damage, they could not sue him for redress. Instead, they could pursue private arbitration, a process they considered stacked against them. "This is the largest purchase of your life," said Mary Cohn, "but you have zero consumer protection."
That's because consumer protection is bad for business. If consumers are protected from faulty product or fraud, then they might be able to launch frivolous lawsuits and that, of course, only increases the costs for everyone. We don't want industries like home building to be outsourced, so Bush realized that he needed to eliminate consumer protections.
Homeowners can take builders before an arbitration board, but it's evidently a scam:
Arbitration is often surprisingly costly, especially for consumers, as trial lawyers like to point out. Several Texas homeowners who had extensive mold damage said they were shocked to learn they would have to pay as much as $14,000 to take their claims to arbitration — the cost of paying for the arbitrator and construction experts. ... "Arbitration is a scam. We pay taxes for judges and juries and a courthouse, but we can't use them," said John Cobarruvias, a software engineer for NASA in Houston who became a homeowner activist after he had to pay $20,000 to repair defective windows in his new home. "The builders are afraid of juries."
In the 2002 election cycle, Bob Perry and his wife, Doylene, the owners of Houston-based Perry Homes, gave $4.2 million to Texas candidates and their political action committees, including $905,000 to the Texas Republican Party. ... A longtime friend and ally of Karl Rove, President Bush's political strategist, Perry also gave most of the money that funded this summer's ad campaign by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacking the military record of Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry.
The group gave $1.98 million to Texas candidates in the 2002 election, which saw Republicans win a clean sweep of the governor's office, Legislature and Supreme Court. The Legislature didn't give a hearing to the consumer-backed home lemon law last year. Instead, lawmakers passed another bill drafted by the homebuilders. It says homeowners must take their complaint to a new state commission — whose nine-member board is dominated by builders and lacks any consumer representative — before they consider going to arbitration. The commission chooses the inspectors who will determine the "factual" basis on which arbitration will be based. This "neutral" evaluation can lead to a speedy resolution and "avoid time-consuming lawsuits," the commission says.
I'd like to say that I am very glad that I don't live in Texas — after what George W. Bush and the Republican Party have done to it, it sounds like one of the worst states in the entire nation now. Unfortunately, Bush and other Republicans want to do the same thing to the rest of the country that they did to Texas, and that is scary.
People who complain about "frivolous" lawsuits can't even adequately define the concept that has them so upset. Sure, they can point to lawsuits that they think are "frivolous," but without a coherent definition that includes all the frivolous lawsuits and none of the non-frivilous lawsuits, we can't really trust any legislation designed to fight the so-called "problem." We need to know what is being targeted before we can tell if the laws are even likely to be successful, but less that they won't cause injustice by hurting reasonable lawsuits.
Of course, that assumes that those involved don't want to hurt reasonable lawsuits. Is there any reason to make that assumption? The evidence suggests not.
Read More:
Comments
Having been a longtime California resident, we were shocked at the lack of consumer protection in Texas. The TRCC needs to be reformed for adequate protection of the consumer, not just the builder. It is our understanding that at least one consumer protection group was denied a member on the board of the TRCC. In addition, we believe all the TRCC Board Members may have ties to the building industry. Our Choice Homes in Texas has several conditions which are covered by our warranty, although the buider continues to deny some of our warranty requests. It is imperative that homeowner consumer protection is reformed. It is also important that we work together to void the arbitration clauses required to buy a new home in Texas! Until both of these issues are dealt with, the consumer will continue to fall victim of what we feel to be unscrupulous multimillion dollar revenue builders. Our suggestion…never buy a new home in Texas until law is legislated to adequately provide balanced and fair consumer protection.