4 ms·

But that's the point: what does that comment mean? Class actions, like any court action, isn't meant to make the plaintiffs rich. It's to obtain restitution for

But that's the point: what does that comment mean? Class actions, like any court action, isn't meant to make the plaintiffs rich. It's to obtain restitution for their harm. If they were ripped off $10, then they should get something around that. The lawyers who got them that compensation should of course be paid for their work.

ryanbrunner 9y ago
Right, but if we take his statement at face value, and a significant portion of the money changing hands in a class action is going towards lawyers, it's at the very least a massively inefficient system.
- tlogan 9y ago
  Good question. Lets take lawyers a side. How much would you pay to somebody to ensure that a big evil corporation is not cheating their ~10M customers by $10/year (100M/year in total)? $10M? $50M?
  - astrocat 9y ago
    This is the perspective that makes sense to me. Regular Joe individuals may not be getting rich, or even getting decent compensation for the harm they experienced, but is society getting a benefit by having a process that disincentives large companies from harming millions of people in small ways for big profits? I'd say that yes, that is VERY valuable for society, and if a handful of lawyers are getting millions for it... so what? This doesn't mean it's the ideal solution to widespread consumer harm, but it's a tool we have at our disposal NOW instead of hypothetical legislation or regulation we might have at some point in the future...
- Sangermaine 9y ago
  Well, in the article the author of the linked article points to a study he commissioned at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which found >In reality, lawyers collect a small portion compared with consumers, and only if they succeed. For every $10 that a company pays out for wrongdoing, we found about $8 goes to consumers and $2 goes to pay legal costs. Of course we could take issue with this study, but unless someone can present some evidence in its favor the notion that only the lawyers ever profit from class actions seems like received wisdom "everyone just knows".

ryanbrunner 9y ago

Right, but if we take his statement at face value, and a significant portion of the money changing hands in a class action is going towards lawyers, it's at the very least a massively inefficient system.

tlogan 9y ago
Good question. Lets take lawyers a side. How much would you pay to somebody to ensure that a big evil corporation is not cheating their ~10M customers by $10/year (100M/year in total)? $10M? $50M?
- astrocat 9y ago
  This is the perspective that makes sense to me. Regular Joe individuals may not be getting rich, or even getting decent compensation for the harm they experienced, but is society getting a benefit by having a process that disincentives large companies from harming millions of people in small ways for big profits? I'd say that yes, that is VERY valuable for society, and if a handful of lawyers are getting millions for it... so what? This doesn't mean it's the ideal solution to widespread consumer harm, but it's a tool we have at our disposal NOW instead of hypothetical legislation or regulation we might have at some point in the future...
Sangermaine 9y ago
Well, in the article the author of the linked article points to a study he commissioned at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which found >In reality, lawyers collect a small portion compared with consumers, and only if they succeed. For every $10 that a company pays out for wrongdoing, we found about $8 goes to consumers and $2 goes to pay legal costs. Of course we could take issue with this study, but unless someone can present some evidence in its favor the notion that only the lawyers ever profit from class actions seems like received wisdom "everyone just knows".