[Homestead] Snake oil in Texas and snake oil in looming Fed Legislation

Tvoivozhd tvoivozd at infionline.net
Wed Sep 22 15:37:52 EDT 2004

"Tort-Reform" is a buzzword that means you, Mr. Ordinary Citizen, are 
deprived of your legislative rights, are deprived of any regulatory 
rights, and are deprived of your last resort (at great expense to you), 
access to any court system to remedy your victimization by predatory 

No limit on the damage predatory corporations can and will do to 
you---no real punitive damages to restrain their conduct---you get the 
finger and the predators run screaming with laughter to the 
bank----hand-in-hand with the Great Enabler George Bush who did it in 
Texas and with his Superbribers is trying to do it on the National scene.

	E-mail story 

Texans Still at Odds Over Bush's Legal Reforms

In Texas 
In Texas 

(Brett Coomer / For The Times)
Related Stories

Kerry Keys In on Bush's Iraq Record 

September 22, 2004
At a Michigan Grill, an Arab American Voice Quizzes Cheney 

September 22, 2004
Their Words, and Then the Facts 

September 22, 2004
Mouthpiece Is Given an Earful 

September 22, 2004
New Kerry Advisor Lockhart Finds a Place in the Middle of the Action 

September 22, 2004
The News Keeps Getting Worse for Embarrassed CBS 

September 22, 2004
Fundraisers Tied to DeLay Are Indicted 

September 22, 2004
Interactive Map

Eighteen New Polls
State surveys released in recent days include Iowa, Michigan, Ohio and 
New Mexico. 

*Special Package* <http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/>
Interactive Electoral Map 
Commentary <http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/commentary/>
Find Your Candidates <http://capwiz.com/latimes/e4/address/>
California Races, Initiatives 
Search By State <http://capwiz.com/latimes/e4/>
Latest Times Polls <http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/timespoll/>
Complete Coverage <http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/complete/>

Times Headlines

Texans Still at Odds Over Bush's Legal Reforms 
The News Keeps Getting Worse for Embarrassed CBS 
Kerry Keys In on Bush's Iraq Record 
Bumper Crop of Clout 
Board Picks 4 Preferred Campus Sites 
more > <http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/>


Subscribe <http://myaccount.latimes.com>
	TEXAS <http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/results.html?QryTxt=texas> 	
	BUSH <http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/results.html?QryTxt=bush> 	
	SUITS <http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/results.html?QryTxt=suits> 	


By David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer

BELLAIRE, Texas — On his first day as governor of Texas, George W. Bush 
declared that limiting lawsuits was an "emergency issue" for his state.

"We must put a stop to the frivolous and junk lawsuits which clog our 
courts," he said in January 1995, a popular line he has repeated often 
since then.


Getting rid of "frivolous" suits — or even defining them — proved 
difficult, but the new governor won limits on how much money could be 
awarded in the biggest cases. For example, punitive damages were capped 
at twice the amount of a victim's loss.

But the legal-reform movement Bush launched in Texas has gone far beyond 
questions of monetary awards. Among other things, it has led to limits 
on the right to sue in the first place.

"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' 

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."

Since leaving Texas for Washington, Bush has continued to voice his 
disdain for "frivolous and junk lawsuits," although his administration 
has pushed only two relatively modest changes so far: capping 
noneconomic damages in medical malpractice claims and funneling 
class-action lawsuits into federal courts. Democrats in the Senate have 
stalled both proposals.

But Bush served notice at this summer's Republican National Convention 
that if reelected, he plans to make "tort reform" a key part of his 
second-term agenda. In the president's view, lawsuits raise costs for 
businesses, doctors and ultimately consumers. He says there are better 
ways to protect the public against shoddy products and services.

Bush's legacy in Texas, supporters here say, was the reining in of a 
civil justice system that was out of control.

"This state was known for egregious abuses of the legal system," said 
Ken Hoagland, a spokesman for Texans for Lawsuit Reform. "It was 
entrepreneurial law. The trial lawyers would find a moneymaking cause 
and then go recruit some plaintiffs. But since 1995, we've really 
changed the landscape."

To hear critics tell it, however, Bush-style legal reform is bad news 
for consumers.

Until the mid-1990s, Texas had one of the nation's strongest 
consumer-protection laws. Known as the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, it 
allowed cheated consumers to sue and take their claims before a jury. 
The targets of these suits ranged widely: car dealers, health clubs, 
home-repair contractors, promoters of get-rich-quick and weight-loss 
schemes, even marketers of fake sports memorabilia.

In legal changes, some begun under Bush and others that occurred after 
he became president, the pro-business Texas Legislature and state 
Supreme Court made it harder for consumers to sue and win damages. One 
industry after another — including real estate brokers, architects and 
engineers — won protections against being sued.

No industry was more effective in protecting its interests than the 
politically powerful homebuilders.

Even before Bush became governor, the builders won passage of the 
Residential Construction Liability Act, which gave them the "right to 
repair" defects before homeowners could sue. But a series of amendments 
under Bush, and more since his tenure, tilted the law heavily toward 
builders, critics say.

In practice, the "right to repair" became the "right to delay" without 
penalty, according to aggrieved buyers. Later amendments made it harder 
for homeowners to prove that damage was caused by the original 
construction. If the builder was shown to be at fault, the law limited 
how much money could be awarded.

At the same time, builders began adding arbitration clauses to their 
contracts so that unhappy homeowners were forced to take their 
complaints before a privately hired arbitrator, rather than a judge and 
jury. As of last year, inspectors chosen by an industry-dominated panel 
determined the facts on which the arbitration was decided.

None of the legal changes was promoted as a means to shortchange 
consumers. Rather, industry lobbyists said it was better for both buyers 
and sellers if disputes were resolved quickly and without costly lawsuits.

Developers and home contractors say juries cannot be trusted to fairly 
resolve these disputes between a builder and a buyer.

"The last place you want to go is the civil court system. The facts 
don't matter to a jury," said Bobby Bowling IV, a builder from El Paso 
and president of the Texas Assn. of Builders. "In court, the plaintiff's 
lawyer makes it rich versus poor. It's about the redistribution of wealth."

Bowling said he and other builders were convinced that private 
arbitration was the best way to settle disputes.

"It's been a great system for me. I had a woman who had about 60 things 
she wanted fixed. I finally said, 'Let's go to arbitration,' " he said. 
"It cost about $10,000 to take care of it all. And it was done in 30 to 
60 days. There's nothing like that in the civil justice system."

But consumer advocates say that closing the courthouse door to buyers 
removes a strong incentive for builders to do right by their customers.

"Having a legal remedy does two things," said Reggie James, director of 
Consumers Union in Austin. "It gives an individual a right to be 
compensated. And it is a deterrent for business in the future.

"And businesses respond to that. By the late 1990s, the builders here 
didn't have to worry about the risk of liability."

When Mary Cohn and her family moved out of their still-new home, she 
said, her builder offered $8,000 to repair the roof. That did not begin 
to cover the cost of replacing the moldy wallboard.

After concluding that the arbitration process was stacked against the 
buyer and would cost them several thousand dollars, the Cohns hired a 
lawyer and tried to sue the builder.

"They got screwed big-time. They paid three-quarters of a million 
dollars for a house that they couldn't live in," said Jim Moriarty, 
their lawyer. "This was as obvious a case of a construction defect you 
will ever see."

However, a succession of judges threw out their claim, saying their only 
choice was to take their dispute before a privately hired arbitrator.

In the end, a generous interpretation of their homeowners insurance 
policy paid most of the $300,000-plus repair cost. But the Cohns say 
they paid $35,000 in upfront deductibles.

The Cohns almost got their wish to go to court. While the repair work 
was underway, they put a bright orange sign in front of their home that 
urged others to "Think Twice" before hiring their builder. When they 
refused to take down the sign, he sued them for slander.

"I couldn't believe it. I couldn't sue my builder, but he could sue me," 
Mary Cohn said.

A judge eventually dismissed the lawsuit, citing the Cohns' right to 
free speech.

The new climate for Texas home buyers has spawned a vigorous and 
well-organized consumer movement that is calling on the Legislature to 
enact a "home lemon law."

It has also focused attention on arbitration, the business community's 
preferred alternative to going to court. The practice has become 
widespread, partly in response to criticism of costly lawsuits and what 
sometimes appear to be outlandish damage verdicts.

But courts are divided on whether unwitting consumers can sign away 
their right to sue, which is enshrined in the U.S. — and Texas — 

In California, for example, some judges have refused to enforce 
arbitration agreements because the pacts are tilted against the 
consumer. Others have ruled that the buyer has no choice but to go to 

The Texas Supreme Court and its nine elected justices, all Republicans, 
have consistently sided with builders in upholding arbitration clauses.

"There is no place in the country like Texas. The Texas courts have 
rejected the notion that something could be unfair to consumers," said 
Paul Bland, an attorney for Trial Lawyers for Public Justice in Washington.

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.

If a consumer sues in court, a trial lawyer will usually take the case 
for free and cover the cost of hiring experts and investigating the 
defendant through "discovery" ordered by the court. If the consumer wins 
the lawsuit, the lawyer's fee is a percentage of the monetary verdict, 
often one-third of the total.

"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."

Texas homebuilders are big contributors to Republican political campaigns.

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.

Dubbed by the Dallas Morning News the "most influential man in Texas you 
have never met," the reclusive Perry gave three times more money to 
state politicians than anyone else in 2001-02.

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.

As a homebuilder, Perry had plenty of allies in winning a 
business-friendly state government. The group that has given the most 
money to Texas politicians — other than the two parties — is Texans for 
Lawsuit Reform.

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.

Consumer advocates are skeptical. "This commission was created by the 
builders for the builders. They didn't want our input. It has nothing to 
do with consumer protection," Cobarruvias said.

Indeed, the new brochure says: "Attention Builders and Remodelers! The 
Texas Residential Construction Commission serves you, your business and 
your industry."

More information about the Homestead mailing list