Russian Women Discussion
RWD Discussion Groups => Experienced => Topic started by: Admin on December 15, 2006, 04:48:03 PM
-
Recently Gallup ran a poll of the most-respected, and least-respected professions. I could not help but notice that "International Marriage Broker" was NOT among the listed professions.
So I thought it might be helpful for us to conduct our own poll to determine where to place the 'IMB' in the overall Gallup poll.
Here is the list of most and least respected professions:
# 1. Pharmacists
# 2. Clergy
# 3. College teachers
# 4. Physicians
# 5. Dentists
# 6. Police
# 7. Engineers
# 8. Funeral directors
# 9. Bankers
# 10. Journalists
The bottom 5 are:
# 19. Lawyers
# 20. Labor union leaders
# 21. Advertising personnel
# 22. Congressman
# 23. Insurance salesman
# 24. Car salesman
Sorry I don't have the full list for comparison - but you should be able to vote based on those we see.
When complete in 10 days, I will submit it to Gallup to see if they care to modify their results (yeah right !!)
Cheers!
- Dan
-
Firstly I can't believe that there are so many people that trust journalists enough to rank them tenth!!!
In my mind many IMB's are dirty rotten scoundrels and therefore I would rank them just a little more highly than journalists... Therefore I'm slipping them in at 10! >:(
-
Well, it seems we are a LOT more critical of the IMB profession than I imagined. More than half the respondents rank the IMB profession as the LEAST ethical and LEAST respected of professions.
- Dan
-
Yea, even lower than lawyers and that is darn low. (sorry Solomon)
-
I feel so loved by the world. People dont like lawyers but as soon as something goes wrong I'm their daddy.
Yea, even lower than lawyers and that is darn low. (sorry Solomon)
-
Its because of your profession that we need to hire you, and end up doing alot or most of the work for you, then we get our wallet raped for doing so!!
-
IMB Rating....?????? :puke: :puke: :puke: My rating.....So low, they could tiptoe under a duck with their umbrellas hoisted high above their heads....!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D
-
Solomon,
Most of us consider lawyers pretty low on the scale, we make tons jokes about them. Then we think to ourself that if we had our life to do over we should have gone into the practice of law.
One of my lawyers had to put some work for me on a back burner because he had a trial against Lowes for a pipe falling on a woman's foot. He got the woman 6 million for her pain and suffering but I have to wonder how much pain and suffering he had for his cut of two milliion or more.
I think in reality there are good lawyers who care about people and ones who don't care much but get a ton of money for their clients. I am not sure either is bad but I do miss the old days when if somene tripped over a crack on your sidewalk they thought first about any injury they had and not about how much they were going to sue you for.
-
Turbo,
The case you just described is fairly unusual. On an hourly level, surgeons for example make 5 to 100 times more than lawyers. Have a disk replaced in your neck for example and the surgeon's fee alone for an hours worth of work will be around 20 grand. No one seems to blink an eye at this.
A lawyer in my office earned a verdict of 3.9 mil last year on an auto accident case. She spent a year preparing for the case. Her fee unreasonable? Maybe. She also could have received a verdict of zero or 100k. I think she spent 250k preparing the case for trial (experts, etc.). Then she would have recovered nothing. If you have a disk replaced in your neck, regardless of the outcome (e.g. medical malpractice), the surgeon will almost invariably get paid.
One of my mentors is co-counsel on a med malpractice case that if we went to trial would likely result in a 8 figure verdict. The only thing he cares about is forcing the hospital at fault to change its procedures. I will get there someday soon.
I am not sure if the litigious society we have is driven by the plaintiffs or the action of the potential defendants. In the old days at a local hospital if something went wrong, the nuns would rush to the scene to be with the family and ask them what they could do to help. The doctors or whomever were at fault apologized for their actions. A lawsuit rarely ensued and things were pretty good for all. Today, supposedly at the advice of their insurance companies, no one says anything. They batten down the hatches and hope the truth doesnt come out. Justice?
Even though good money can be made as a lawyer, it is a very stressful profession. Clients are demanding. Try getting your doctor to call you back the same afternoon or possibly ever. When a problem comes up, clients want me to drop everything and work on their problem. Regardless of the outcome of a case, clients are almost invariably dissatisfied. Lawyers on the opposite side that are a pain in the ass to say the least. Insurance companies that dont want to compensate your client for their injuries. Judges that are unsympathetic to your case. The list goes on. I think going to law school is valuable but the practice can be brutal.
Solomon,
Most of us consider lawyers pretty low on the scale, we make tons jokes about them. Then we think to ourself that if we had our life to do over we should have gone into the practice of law.
One of my lawyers had to put some work for me on a back burner because he had a trial against Lowes for a pipe falling on a woman's foot. He got the woman 6 million for her pain and suffering but I have to wonder how much pain and suffering he had for his cut of two milliion or more.
I think in reality there are good lawyers who care about people and ones who don't care much but get a ton of money for their clients. I am not sure either is bad but I do miss the old days when if somene tripped over a crack on your sidewalk they thought first about any injury they had and not about how much they were going to sue you for.
-
Solomon
I had a problem with a woman asking me for money. She was in a 'car accident'. Rather than giving her money, I said I would call my lawyer and he could take care of everything. So I called this lawyer in SPB and asked for his help. I offered to pay him for his services. I gave him her cell and here is part of his reply back to me. Not all attorneys are bad guys.
"It is difficult for me to tell you whether or not you are cheated but all
scam elements are here. She refused me to review the case, the amount
of damage is not quite high so it will be possible to get such sum
from you, sad story about the accident and fairy tales about the
confiscation of the apartment plus as you mention her "Internet
reputation". I was surprised that she does not want me to help her.
When you really have the problem of such kind nobody reject legal help
espesially if it is free of charge. But if somebody has in mind to
cheat other person than lawyer is the pain in the neck.
I will not charge you for my work. I case you will be in St. Pete you
may take me out for a beer or if I happen to be in NY you may do the
same as well. Please let me know if you have any further questions."
Best regards,
Vladimir
-
I am not sure if the litigious society we have is driven by the plaintiffs or the action of the potential defendants.
Maybe GREED from the former (fuelled by certain lawyers and media reports of outrageous settlements), and RISK MANAGEMENT from the latter (again fuelled by certain lawyers) ? ;)
-
Lawyers
Real Estate people
Meth dealers
All about equal in integrity.
I use to say "coke dealers " now it's "meth "
I have lost over a million dollars because of Bob Blakey , a lawyer ,on a realstate deal .
-
You should not compare your profession with a surgeon's, lawyers are not even close to their league, a surgeon 8 years in school then another 4 in residency, a surgeon has your life in his hands every time he operates, a lawyer has his bank account to worry about. every time I had to hire an attorney i got screwed, the last time, was so bad that i tried to sue the lawyer for incompetence, i had all kinds of evidence, I want to 3 different attorneys, not one would touch the case, talk about a good ol' boys club. No i don't think you should compare an attorney to a surgeon, not even close
-
I filed a complaint with the state bar association and it went back and forth between me and my lawyer , in the end , nothing .
Is it illegal to kill lawyers ??
::)
-
Solomon, I don't have any dislike of lawyers unless they are suing me for something. Without lawyers we would have to go back to telling jokes about Polish people, Blacks and farmers daughters and those are all worn out. Actually I consider my lawyer and my accountant both among my friends but I have seen my lawyer recommend courses of actions that were designed more to generate fees than to help me.
I have been sued two times. One for my business and the only reason for the suit was the guy who pretended to be hurt was working under the table so workers comp wouldn't cover it. (He was hurt but the injury came in a hockey game the night after he fell of my machine.
The other time was driving and it was because I was there. I was making a left turn, 4 older guys were in the cross walk. I stopped for them. One was turned around talking to his friend, turned back around and saw my headlights and got scared, tripped, fell and broke his hip. I was stopped, not in the crosswalk and did nothing wrong but that one cost my insurance company $ 70,000.
I do think our legal system is disfunctional. You mentioned the income of doctors. I have heard of Doctors giving up thier practice over the costs of malpractice insurance. On my first EC social trip one of my friends I made on the trip was an Orthapedic surgeon who had just completed law school and was dropping medicine to practice law becuase the money was better.
-
Bush helped pass a recent law stating at $250K was the limit for medical law suits , I believe .
-
Solomon, I made a huge mistake hiring an immigration attorney to prepare the K-1 visa. He did little or no more than I could have done and charged $1,400.00 for his work. I did all the legwork, secured all the documents and got all the translations but he (or his secretary) typed the forms. I only hired him because the first lawyer was only charging $500.00 and would work me in whenever he had 5 or 10 minutes. After 2 months I was no further along than when I first hired him. He would attempt to call Ukraine and if the connection was bad he would never call back. He was going to send my fiance to Poland for her interview and everyone knows interviews are held in Kiev now. To make matters worse he was Ukrainian himself, born in Kiev.
I hired a second lawyer to complete the job quickly. I hate filling out forms but I ended up doing the AOS myself with no problems. I must be in the wrong profession as a health care worker if I could charge $1,400.00 for a simple K-1 visa that takes all of 2 hours to prepare the forms.
Lawyers are necessary for legal advice and when there are unforseen problems. Since there are many facets of law practices I am only speaking of immigration law. Contract law, criminal law and workers' compensation are some areas that are important.
-
I think one of the big reasons that lawyers are thought so "highly" of is that now our country is fully based on laws and not on justice. The laws have been so convoluted that there is very little or no justice anymore. Sorry Soloman I have more respect for drug dealers than I do for lawyers. At least they don't hide the fact that they are out to screw you over and make money off of you. Can't say the same for 99% of the lawyers I've had dealings with.
-
Solomon, Just because we look at some lawyers as being more concerned with thier own welfare than their clients. We all know you are a good guy and care about the people you have as clients.
-
My previous opinion was to kill them all. Unfortunately, sometimes one needs a lawyer in our society. Probably, thats because the lawyers made it that way, but thats another long discussion topic. If it was up to me, I'd take 95% of the lawyers and send them on a one way trip to Iraq. I figure the best 5 % mean well ::), and we all know Solomon is a good guy and William III has impressed me with his giving nature this past year. So, there is hope for them ie. lawyers as a group.
-
There are good lawyers and there are bad lawyers, just as there are good and bad mechanics. The problem is not with the lawyers, but with the legal system in this country. Even if you have a good lawyer, you may end up with less than favorable results because of the system.
Unfortunately, I have had a lot of experience through my businesses and personally with attorneys over the years. Most of the lawyers I have had dealings with were of high caliber simply because I refused to deal with the others. The problem with people's perception of lawyers (being low) is that do not understand how to pick or how to work with a lawyer. Most people walk into an attorney's office and dump their story on his desk and hope he can acquire the desired results. They do not stay involved with their own case. They give the attorney what I call the "doctor treatment." They think that the attorneys knowledge and experience is so far superior to there own, that they need to just wait for the right magic pill to be prescribed and everything will be just hunky dory. It just don't work that way.
The client has to stay involved all through out the procedure. No one knows the merits of your case better than you. It is your responsibility to keep the attorney informed of what you want to do in a layman's kind of way and it is responsibility for the lawyer to act almost as an interpreter to put your wishes into legal terminology and to administer your wants and desires through the legal system (such as it is.) He is your mouthpiece, but he should be mouthing your translated words and ideas. It is also very important that you stay involved with all strategies regarding your case. Again, a lawyer is not some magical mystery man where you dump your problem and wait for him to solve it on his own.
A classic example of what I am speaking of is my first divorce. My ex wife hired an attorney highly reccomended by the pack of man haters she was running with. This attorney was very unimpressive through out the early stages of the divorce and mishandled many different facets of the case. He acted very inexperienced. Years later, my attorney ran into him at a party. My ex had switched lawyers in mid trial and he was asked why? My ex had hired the wrong lawyer. She wanted to hire her attorney's father and got stuck with junior! She only found out the mistake when she told junior that he looked real good for a man in his 60's! (Maybe she was trying out her new date smack)
Even her new and improved attorney had little hope for success against my lawyer because I stayed involved with the case step by step. At trial (yes, we went to trial on a divorce) her attorney kept stumbling over the facts of the case where mine was well informed and sharp on the facts. Results are that your attorney's performance is dependent upon how well you make him work for you. Always remember that he works for you and insist that he represents whatever it is you want, not what he wants.
KenC
-
Wow......!! Our lawyer friend has had a real working over here. I am sure he is taking legal advice on the matter right now...!! ;D ;D (Joking of course)
There is some very sound advice in KenC's remarks. When employing anyone, professional or otherwise, you must moniter the performance day by day. Professional friends of mine remark that they feel very similar to a PC at times, that is, "Trash in Trash Out". They can only work with that which they are given to work with.
However, it has been a relatively recent addition down here that a "Law Firm" may openly advertise their services and I do tend to think this has seen a rather dramatic downturn in the average quality of service available and certainly a significant shift in the ethos of many "Law Firms".
My Lawyer, (If I may use that expression) who BTW makes very little money from me has become a close personal friend over the years, however if or when it comes to the professional side of our relationship, he understands very clearly that he is working for me and as such, demands every possible shed of information before plans are formulated, because he understands that I demand his best perfomance. For this, he has my respect.
If you feed peanuts, you will get monkeys, if you feed meat, you usually get men. (Not designed to be sexist in this politically correct day and age)
I/O Who is probably the most politically incorrect being on the entire plannet. ;D ;D
-
I/O,
Lawyers here get a bad rap IMHO. They have clients come to them with weak cases, little information and a tricky legal system. They have an up hill battle from the beginning. When the case is not resolved to the clients liking, of course it is all the attorney's fault. Some of the "bad" attorneys just happened to have "bad" clients.
KenC
-
Lawyers here get a bad rap IMHO. They have clients come to them with weak cases, little information and a tricky legal system. They have an up hill battle from the beginning.
I have no doubt...!! Unfortunately one factor we, down here, also lead the world in now is "Per Capita" litigiousness. Shocked.? Unfortunately it is true. We over took you guys a few years ago. Probably the one contention I might have with your comment as it stands, is that I do believe that lawyers are morally bound to advise the client frankly from the outset regarding likely success or otherwise. I feel that some lawyers fail to do this at times.
Nevertheless, I suspect we have bashed our dear lawyer friends here quite enough for the present and if I could suggest something positive and relevant to the thread for the new year, perhaps some of them might like to devote some of their skills to cleaning up the IMB profession. Hmmm profession is something of a paradox when used in the same sentence with IMB. Just MHO. :o :o
-
I have no doubt...!! Unfortunately one factor we, down here, also lead the world in now is "Per Capita" litigiousness. Shocked.? Unfortunately it is true. We over took you guys a few years ago. Probably the one contention I might have with your comment as it stands, is that I do believe that lawyers are morally bound to advise the client frankly from the outset regarding likely success or otherwise. I feel that some lawyers fail to do this at times.
Nevertheless, I suspect we have bashed our dear lawyer friends here quite enough for the present and if I could suggest something positive and relevant to the thread for the new year, perhaps some of them might like to devote some of their skills to cleaning up the IMB profession. Hmmm profession is something of a paradox when used in the same sentence with IMB. Just MHO. :o :o
One of our 'projects' is aimed at positively influencing the agencies. Check out our latest site at: www.CertifiedMarriageAgencies.org - and, in particular, the Agency Code of Ethics which is published there.
It is a VERY new initiative - but gaining a strong following and foundation.
- Dan
-
www.CertifiedMarriageAgencies.org - and, in particular, the Agency Code of Ethics which is published there.
It is a VERY new initiative - but gaining a strong following and foundation.
- Dan
Actually the agencies would be of no use to me right now anyway, as I am well and truely off the market. ;D ;D However, yes I will have a read. "Certified"....now there is a good word which should be applied to most of the leach owners of these organisations.
I am biased, very biased, but I have no time for this, "I must have an agent for everything" mentality. I notice that employment and career agents are the current fashion world wide, no less here in my country and I would never, I repeat never trust one of these monkies with my career, much less trust someone similar with any aspect of my personal life. Ok I'll have some more coffee and get off my soap box now. ;D ;D ;D
I/O who can't stand agents of any sort and considers they are often for lazy people who don't want to do the hard work themselves.
-
Actually the agencies would be of no use to me right now anyway, as I am well and truely off the market. ;D ;D However, yes I will have a read. "Certified"....now there is a good word which should be applied to most of the leach owners of these organisations.
I am biased, very biased, but I have no time for this, "I must have an agent for everything" mentality. I notice that employment and career agents are the current fashion world wide, no less here in my country and I would never, I repeat never trust one of these monkies with my career, much less trust someone similar with any aspect of my personal life. Ok I'll have some more coffee and get off my soap box now. ;D ;D ;D
I/O who can't stand agents of any sort and considers they are often for lazy people who don't want to do the hard work themselves.
Sounds like a bit of the 'rugged individualism' approach - and as someone who grew up in the rural western US, I can relate to it pretty well.
I think, however, the agencies have their place - but it involves them acting in honest and ethical manner. Something which, quite obviously, they are not known for.
Let me know what you think of the CMA site.
- Dan
-
Sounds like a bit of the 'rugged individualism' approach - and as someone who grew up in the rural western US, I can relate to it pretty well. Let me know what you think of the CMA site.
- Dan
Oh Yes...!!! Much to my own detriment at times nevertheless. ::) ::) Rural western....I can certainly relate to this, and I will add to the "Reality Of Risk" thread, in the not too distant future in a form that may give you some insight to the commonalities of rural upbringings regardless of geography.
Yes I will have a good look at the CMA site although anything to do with agents galls me. ;D ;D
I/O who has been described as being "As subtle as a train smash". ::) ::)
-
Let me know what you think of the CMA site.
- Dan
Dan: Some intitial remarks upon a curserary glance over the COE aspect of the site. Notwithstanding the organisation will gain quite significant affiliates/members, I have reservations about the long term integrity of any privately owned entity being established as the "Industry Watch Dog" so to say. Particularly where there is or maybe common ownership or directorship between the entity and industry players. Kind of like leaving the "Fox in charge of the hens" so to say.
Public entities, unfortunately are often clumsey and out of touch with reality, but they do at least maintain a perception of independence which I feel is vitally important to such an organisation's integrity.
A substantial "Fee paying" affiliate structure does encumber the client base and ultimately the end user population with a further cost for service.
I would suspect that in a "Privately owned" entity of this type, the "Definition lines" or "Rules of Affiliation/Compliance" may well become somewhat blurred if or when the "Balance sheet / Profit and Loss" statements are not generating an appropriately pleasing set of numbers for the owners.
Certainly, Affiliation with such an organisation can and will provide a significant marketing tool for the various members and hopefully improve the industry standards for the end users. However, I have serious concerns about it being held in any other than public hands. It adds another plane of cash draw from the industry which may or may not produce the desired result at a grass roots level.
I completely concur with the notion that some controlling body needs to be established in order to improve, if not regulate the industry. However I stand firmly by my view that it should not be a privately owned entity. Even "Non Profit" organisations have paid managers and directors who may well hold something of a pecuniary interest.
From a strictly business and marketing perspective, I would be quite confident that it will succeed, at least for a reasonable period of time. However, my underlying reaction is that it is a conduit for some to put another hand in the ever growing "Cookie Jar". The ethos has my support, but the "Blue Print" is something about which I am far from convinced.
I/O Who understands that $ rule.
-
Dan: Some intitial remarks upon a curserary glance over the COE aspect of the site. Notwithstanding the organisation will gain quite significant affiliates/members, I have reservations about the long term integrity of any privately owned entity being established as the "Industry Watch Dog" so to say. Particularly where there is or maybe common ownership or directorship between the entity and industry players. Kind of like leaving the "Fox in charge of the hens" so to say.
Public entities, unfortunately are often clumsey and out of touch with reality, but they do at least maintain a perception of independence which I feel is vitally important to such an organisation's integrity.
A substantial "Fee paying" affiliate structure does encumber the client base and ultimately the end user population with a further cost for service.
I would suspect that in a "Privately owned" entity of this type, the "Definition lines" or "Rules of Affiliation/Compliance" may well become somewhat blurred if or when the "Balance sheet / Profit and Loss" statements are not generating an appropriately pleasing set of numbers for the owners.
Certainly, Affiliation with such an organisation can and will provide a significant marketing tool for the various members and hopefully improve the industry standards for the end users. However, I have serious concerns about it being held in any other than public hands. It adds another plane of cash draw from the industry which may or may not produce the desired result at a grass roots level.
I completely concur with the notion that some controlling body needs to be established in order to improve, if not regulate the industry. However I stand firmly by my view that it should not be a privately owned entity. Even "Non Profit" organisations have paid managers and directors who may well hold something of a pecuniary interest.
From a strictly business and marketing perspective, I would be quite confident that it will succeed, at least for a reasonable period of time. However, my underlying reaction is that it is a conduit for some to put another hand in the ever growing "Cookie Jar". The ethos has my support, but the "Blue Print" is something about which I am far from convinced.
I/O Who understands that $ rule.
It seems a conundrum. If not a private party who offers to be the standard-bearer - then who? As we saw in the US (and possibly Canada soon), when the government (a non-private entity) gets involved (with IMBRA), they manage to trample all sorts of fundamental constitutional protections in their regulations - and there too, there is a tremendous cost to the agencies and to the end user.
I agree that there is a 'slippery slope' with monetary interest potentially clouding good judgment - and that is exactly why we took the approach to initiate the program with a nominal fee ($5 USD). We can see private interests acting in similar capacities in NUMEROUS industries. This is hardly ground-breaking stuff - except as it applies to this particular industry.
And as a final note - as I've said since the beginning - if the ONLY thing we accomplish by the creation of CMA and the publication of ACoE is that guys and gals everywhere have a standard of reference against which to measure the agencies they work with - AND - because of the hard questions they ask the agencies begin to treat them with a little more dignity, a little more honestly, a little more candidly - then that will STILL have been a significant asset to the 'industry' and the men and women who work with those IMB's who are considered so low on the totem of ethics.
Hey - thanks for your comments - and your contributions. Your posts are a pleasure to read and you have a lot to share.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
- Dan
-
However, my underlying reaction is that it is a conduit for some to put another hand in the ever growing "Cookie Jar". The ethos has my support, but the "Blue Print" is something about which I am far from convinced.
If you have a better idea, spit it out. At least somebody is trying.
I continue to fight unethical agencies, many times to my own detriment, but I coninue the fight mostly because somebodies gots to do it. If not me then who? is the way I look at it.
I have been attacked, chastised & threatened for speaking my mind at times & yet I don't give up. This industry needs a aserious house cleaning. And just because you don't like agencies, we do serve a purpose & we are not all dishonest, but as in all things, one bad apple spoils the barrel. However, in this industry there are a he!! of a lot of bad apples & I'll be the first to admit it. But that still doesn't make us all bad.
Maybe more support for the good guys & active participation in recommending the CMA & the honest agencies would put the not so honest at a disadvantage, instead of the other way around. JMHO
-
Rvrwind & Dan Probably time for me to back off with my typically blunt remarks. ::) I should clarify and perhaps qualify some comments before I go any further, one being my cheap shots at agents in general is not particularly aimed at introduction agents. Heck..!! To some extent I wouldn't even be here on this site if it wasn't for internet introduction sites. The other is not particularly aimed at you guys trying to get something done.
All credit for trying to initiate something tangible in order to clean up an industry which most sadly has become something of a dirty business.
My cynicism regarding agents comes from a long history of dealing with stock and station (Real estate & Livestock) type agents and watching them also bleed customers with no real interest in representing the clients interests. When in the position of appointing an agent, by definition, one is appointing another party to take care of their interests. Unfortunately where commission selling is involved, this rarely happens.
Perhaps one of the first places to envoke reform in this industry, might well be looking at how "Marriage Agencies" are catagorised or more importantly difined. You have probably noted that I have carefully avoided the terms "Dating" and or "Marriage" with regard to internet sites. I would tend to go the same way with "Shop Front" services. However I will return to this in a moment.
Internet / international "Dating" is an unfortunate product of the scene. Many seem to view it as "Speed Dating" by distance. Such thoughts gall me and encourage several undesirable elemants. 1) the "Key Board Romeos". 2) The "Sleaze" element as has been mentioned in previous posts. 3) the "Dreamers" who sit behind their 15" screens with one hand on the keyboard, one hand on 2" of something else and no financial capacity to actually go any further. 4) Not least of all the unethical agents.
For mine, a "Date" is when you actually meet someone for a social outing. (JMHO)
Scamming and "Cons" at all levels require 2 parties to succeed. One being the "Con Artist" and the second being a person who is trying to get something for less than it's real value. The person prepared to pay full value is difficult to con. In this example, most often it is the person who thinks they can sit at home and "Order In Love" at a discount cost. In other words, the pretty girl is offering to come to him and when he cuts the numbers, the few dollars she is quoting for airfares and visas looks like a better deal than him travelling to visit her, which he should be doing regardless. Bottom line is, he is trying to get something for nothing, which puts him in the same catagory as the scammer. I will quickly say that some don't even realise what they are doing and as such are to an extent innocent. Notwithstanding, the greatest "Con Artists" of all time have generally remarked that the most difficult person to "Con" is the honest person.
I believe, (JMHO) businesses in this industry would serve themselves and their clients better by discarding the words "Dating & Marriage". For mine the word "Introduction" has far more taste and is in fact a closer definition of the reality. I also feel that leaning on an "Introduction Ethos" starts to move away from the misleading marketing which invariably occurs.
Enough of the preamble, to address your origional reponses, yes it is a $64K question as to who, how and when such a controlling body should be administered or structured. Being in a service industry myself, which has a long history or less than admirable behaviours, we went down a similar road at a "Sate Wide" level in order to service the industry and better serve the end users. However the difference being the model we have used is "Industry Owned". In other words, an independent entity in which the industry players are all affiliate members, but in fact the board of directors is elected by the industry players and are usually, but not manditarily industry managers or directors. The CEO, who in this instance is very much a "Hands On" person, directly and regularly reports to the board. I have not really had time to think through the ramifications of whether or not this would be viably applicable to the introduction industry.
Having said all of that, of course I don't have all the answers and I am well aware that it is much easier to sit back with a critical attitude than it is to actually develop an "In Play" workable solution and as such I thougherly commend any effort which is genuinely aimed at improvement for the betterment of both consumers and service providers.
I/O who understands just how difficult it can be to improve standards in the service industry.
-
Well said I/O...I particularly agree with this statement:
I believe, (JMHO) businesses in this industry would serve themselves and their clients better by discarding the words "Dating & Marriage". For mine the word "Introduction" has far more taste and is in fact a closer definition of the reality. I also feel that leaning on an "Introduction Ethos" starts to move away from the misleading marketing which invariably occurs.
When I first opened my buisness I purposfully marketed it & still do market it as an "Introduction Ageny". Common sense alone says I cannot guarratee that a marriage will result, I cannot even guarrantee the woman you like will even date you. All I can do is introduce you to each other, the rest is up to you.(not you per-say just for example you understand).
Any company that markets themselves as a "Marrige Agency" or "Dating Agency" is by deffiition guarranteeing that you will get married or able to date the lady or ladies you chose. Factoring in human emotions etc, I don't see that as the reality, therefore making the very deffinition a falshood from the jump. Any company that does guarrantee it would be foolish as there is no way it can be guarranteed.
A wise man once said that, "There are only two guarrantees in in life, death & taxes, all the rest is just window dressing!."
-
A wise man once said that, "There are only two guarrantees in in life, death & taxes, all the rest is just window dressing!."
I concur entirely, but recently I have been howled out of anther forum for quoting this exact remark.
I/O who well understands there are very few certainties in life. Death and Taxes are two.
-
Louie,
It sounds like you are equating education with competence. So if someone has a high school education then they are per se incompetent at whatever they do? I guess Bill Gates is incompetent since he has only one year of college education. Separately, if a doctor commits malpractice, would you know it? If a lawyer makes a mistake, it makes the paper. If a doctor kills someone, it is swept under the rug. Is it significant that surgeons leave 78,000 pieces of "surgical materials" in people every year?
You said that every time that you have had to hire an attorney that you got screwed. Based on what standards? You said that you got screwed on a case but none of 3 lawyers would touch the case. Because of the so-called good old boys club or you call it or because there was malpractice in the first place?
You should not compare your profession with a surgeon's, lawyers are not even close to their league, a surgeon 8 years in school then another 4 in residency, a surgeon has your life in his hands every time he operates, a lawyer has his bank account to worry about. every time I had to hire an attorney i got screwed, the last time, was so bad that i tried to sue the lawyer for incompetence, i had all kinds of evidence, I want to 3 different attorneys, not one would touch the case, talk about a good ol' boys club. No i don't think you should compare an attorney to a surgeon, not even close
-
Regarding malpractice insurance, doctors and insurance companies alike constantly complaint about this. However, the American Trial Lawyers have gone to the US Senate, the House and every legislature in the country asking for the data of a correlation between litigation and malpractice insurance. It doesnt exist. There is a ton of chatter about it. The cost of insurance is directly related to the highs and lows of the investing of the insurance companies of the premiums that doctors pay. This also applies to any type of insurance.
I do think our legal system is disfunctional. You mentioned the income of doctors. I have heard of Doctors giving up thier practice over the costs of malpractice insurance. On my first EC social trip one of my friends I made on the trip was an Orthapedic surgeon who had just completed law school and was dropping medicine to practice law becuase the money was better.
-
Son of Clyde. Were you referred to either of these lawyers from someone knowledgeable and trustworthy? Of course applies to any profession.
Solomon, I made a huge mistake hiring an immigration attorney to prepare the K-1 visa. He did little or no more than I could have done and charged $1,400.00 for his work. I did all the legwork, secured all the documents and got all the translations but he (or his secretary) typed the forms. I only hired him because the first lawyer was only charging $500.00 and would work me in whenever he had 5 or 10 minutes. After 2 months I was no further along than when I first hired him. He would attempt to call Ukraine and if the connection was bad he would never call back. He was going to send my fiance to Poland for her interview and everyone knows interviews are held in Kiev now. To make matters worse he was Ukrainian himself, born in Kiev.
I hired a second lawyer to complete the job quickly. I hate filling out forms but I ended up doing the AOS myself with no problems. I must be in the wrong profession as a health care worker if I could charge $1,400.00 for a simple K-1 visa that takes all of 2 hours to prepare the forms.
Lawyers are necessary for legal advice and when there are unforseen problems. Since there are many facets of law practices I am only speaking of immigration law. Contract law, criminal law and workers' compensation are some areas that are important.
-
Thanks. Tired of defending my profession. Walk a thousand miles in my shoes guys.
Solomon, Just because we look at some lawyers as being more concerned with thier own welfare than their clients. We all know you are a good guy and care about the people you have as clients.
-
Well said KenC. I encourage anyone who doesnt like lawyers to represent themself on even a simple case and let me know how it works out. If it works out great, let me know how it goes the second time.
There are good lawyers and there are bad lawyers, just as there are good and bad mechanics. The problem is not with the lawyers, but with the legal system in this country. Even if you have a good lawyer, you may end up with less than favorable results because of the system.
Unfortunately, I have had a lot of experience through my businesses and personally with attorneys over the years. Most of the lawyers I have had dealings with were of high caliber simply because I refused to deal with the others. The problem with people's perception of lawyers (being low) is that do not understand how to pick or how to work with a lawyer. Most people walk into an attorney's office and dump their story on his desk and hope he can acquire the desired results. They do not stay involved with their own case. They give the attorney what I call the "doctor treatment." They think that the attorneys knowledge and experience is so far superior to there own, that they need to just wait for the right magic pill to be prescribed and everything will be just hunky dory. It just don't work that way.
The client has to stay involved all through out the procedure. No one knows the merits of your case better than you. It is your responsibility to keep the attorney informed of what you want to do in a layman's kind of way and it is responsibility for the lawyer to act almost as an interpreter to put your wishes into legal terminology and to administer your wants and desires through the legal system (such as it is.) He is your mouthpiece, but he should be mouthing your translated words and ideas. It is also very important that you stay involved with all strategies regarding your case. Again, a lawyer is not some magical mystery man where you dump your problem and wait for him to solve it on his own.
A classic example of what I am speaking of is my first divorce. My ex wife hired an attorney highly reccomended by the pack of man haters she was running with. This attorney was very unimpressive through out the early stages of the divorce and mishandled many different facets of the case. He acted very inexperienced. Years later, my attorney ran into him at a party. My ex had switched lawyers in mid trial and he was asked why? My ex had hired the wrong lawyer. She wanted to hire her attorney's father and got stuck with junior! She only found out the mistake when she told junior that he looked real good for a man in his 60's! (Maybe she was trying out her new date smack)
Even her new and improved attorney had little hope for success against my lawyer because I stayed involved with the case step by step. At trial (yes, we went to trial on a divorce) her attorney kept stumbling over the facts of the case where mine was well informed and sharp on the facts. Results are that your attorney's performance is dependent upon how well you make him work for you. Always remember that he works for you and insist that he represents whatever it is you want, not what he wants.
KenC
-
I think I am done venting. ;D
Nevertheless, I suspect we have bashed our dear lawyer friends here quite enough for the present and if I could suggest something positive and relevant to the thread for the new year, perhaps some of them might like to devote some of their skills to cleaning up the IMB profession. Hmmm profession is something of a paradox when used in the same sentence with IMB. Just MHO. :o :o
-
Solomon, I think most of us in real life have more respect for Lawyers than we let on here. I think the results that were mentioned at the start of this thread is much more realistic.
Sometimes we might not think it is true but Lawyers are people too and there are good and bad, dedicated and selfish, caring and disinterested. I have a great deal of respect for both you and William. You are both very good guys. I think it is a little like car repair places. Most try to do a good job and charge a fair price but there are a few rats who give the others a bad name. There are some lawyers who are not a credit to your profession. The same applies to the agency's. You have Richards and Kevins and other good agency's and then you are Hot Russian Brides and Army of Brides that puts them way down on the poll from where they would be if there were only Richards quality of guys in the field.
You don't have anything to defend about your profession. It is one you can be proud of. Just always try to do it in a way that you can always be proud of what you do and the more guys who do that the better the reputation of the industry will be.
-
Hey, my ex-AW-wife was a Divorce Attorney (whom I helped put through Law School ::) :P) and Certified Family Law litigator, so if I can still think civilly about attorneys anyone can :D.
But IMHO, even though she won most of her cases she argued in court, she would easily lose in any argument with a typical FSU woman ;D.
-
Lets talk about clients for a minute. . . .
In 19 years of practice, there are a few things that I found. ANd as I say that, I am not referring to the people involved in cross-cultural relationships.
Most of the time, I was always looking to see which one of the parties was lying the most.
I spent inordinate amounts of time figuring out which EXACT questions I had not asked my client because there was always something that was not presented by the client and when a detrimental fact was uncovered, it would always be "you didnt ask me that EXACT question." Although dozens of questions had already been asked all around the question that should have elicited the correct response.
10% or the clients take up 90% of the time.
Hourly cases never want to pay hourly or for telephone calls that would stretch out for hours.
Clients hire an attorney as a field general but most clients will then do whatever they want to do because their brother in law or some other family member had the same exact case 10 years ago.
An attorney is usually supporting a couple other people and an office by his billable hours/fees. And since many clients will not pay their bills in a timely manner, the attorney needs to get their fees up front.
My "favorite" case right after I opened my own office was a guy from India on one of those shaky "cultural" contract arrangements. Tough case and the client was on the losing end. I get together a game plan but warned him that we were going to lose.
Guy has very little money, or so he said, so I took the case without a retainer. Getting money was like pulling teeth. Hours on the telephone, negotiations, etc. Then the guys does what he wants, loses our case by reaching an agreement outside of the case, which the other party reneged on, and then files bankruptcy, including my fees.
Many attorneys get burned out over the law after a few years. I know several that are now teaching-extending their lifespan for many additional years by moving to a low stress job.
Now what was the topic of this thread again?
-
Thanks. Tired of defending my profession. Walk a thousand miles in my shoes guys.
Lawer are not really the problem, laws are the problem...
First, the language used in law text have nothing in common with normal language... Second, lawer are needed because usual people cannot know all the laws ( lawer too but they know already more that us )...
By example, in December 2006, Belgium gouverment have publish more of 4000 page of new laws... No one usual citizen will have to read so much page each month for know laws...
Each time that i have represent myself in tribunal, i have loose... for the appel, i have hire a lawer and have find a few procedure error who break the first judgment or who allow me to win...
The problem here is that everything need to go via justice procedure... your neightbourg have thief a 5$ hammer and you need pay several thousand $ for the justice procedure and lawer expense...
Lawer is certainly one of the more old job ( maybe after hooker )... they have always exist and will always exist... and in several case, they are needed... that they are expensive, suck your money is a other problem... sometime for a few minutes in the tribunal, they need work several days for ready a case...
PS: i don't like lawer but sometime i need them...
-
Lets talk about clients for a minute. . . .Clients hire an attorney as a field general but most clients will then do whatever they want to do because their brother in law or some other family member had the same exact case 10 years ago. Now what was the topic of this thread again?
Now...!!! Isn't this the truth...!!! Not limited to Lawyer/Client relationships either. The other thing which I often notice and have been guilty of this myself on many occaisions, is, launch the process themselves and when their process fails, then revert to a Lawyer or some other expert in order to resolve not only the original problem, but also the precipitent compounded problem.
I/O who has tried in vain many times to be his own best expert. ::) ::)