Importing a used (nearly new) Mercedes from the USA to Canada

Oh, boy. I'm going to have some fun with this one.

No, it was not in error. McDonald's was sued, and they lost. I'm not sure of the exact amount, but it was a huge sum of money. The point here was that it was a frivilous lawsuit to begin with and should not have resulted in the judgement that was granted. McDonalds was equally at fault, too, not because they served hot coffee, but because it came to light that they had settled similar cases like this over 700 times out of court, which only encourages more lawsuits of this nature. The problem here is that when a company tries to fight a lawsuit of this type, if generally costs more in legal fees to defend themselves than it would to pay the settlement. McDonalds, from a corporate standpoint, was simply doing what most any company does when it looks at the bottom line--take the cheapest way out. As far as believing the media, well, that depends on what media you pay attention to. We have a very liberal biased media here in the states, unfortunately, but there are still media sources which will give both sides of a story without an agenda of their own. My favorite newspaper, for instance, would be the Wall Street Journal, where you get just the facts. >Having said that, however, there are US citizens whose constitutional rights

If, by tinsel town, you are referring to Hollywood, I will agree that they are liberal leftest as well (not all, but as an industry it would seem so). But to say they are calling the shots is off. In case you haven't noticed, the liberal left has been losing power in government for many years. Bush was elected twice, conservatives have the majority in Congress and the House of Representatives, and liberal democrats are losing polital offices everywhere in the country. Why? Because they are on the wrong side of history, and most of the American people, who are not the dummies that they would like to portray, know this. Most of us just shake our head when some of these actors say the things they say.

I'm not at all sure what rights you feel we citizens are losing here. You will have to be more specific on that. The fact that lawyers push frivilous lawsuits isn't causing me to lose any rights--I could do the same thing; I just don't chose to. It may cause the price of a certain product to go up, but I can shop the competitor, and that puts the burden back on the original company to examine its' own behavior concerning suits.

As far as the legal system in America going the way of GM and Ford? Last time I looked, being a lawyer had nothing to do with selling cars. There will always be a legal system; our country couldn't do without it. We are a nation based on the concept of laws and due process. The system may go astray sometimes, but it isn't going to go away, and, it is not a "corporation".

You couldn't be more wrong here. Doctors don't pay the price, we do. We are the ultimate consumer, and we will pay the ultimate price. Just like any business, when a doctors' expenses go up, the price for their services go up. The bad guys here aren't the doctors, but the lawyers who create huge malpractice suits, resulting in monetary awards that are ludicrous, are. Because of the constant threat of being sued, whether they ever are or not, all doctors must have malpractice insurance. Without this insurance, one suit could put them out of business. These costs are then passed on to us, the consumer.

By the way, doctors don't murder people. They might make a mistake, because they are, after all, human, but they don't deliberatley set out to injure people. And if they do make a mistake, is it fair to award someone millions of dollars? Look, we're talking about people who spend a great deal of money and many years of study to become what they are. One of the reasons they make the money they do is because they didn't start working in their field until 8 yrs or so after high school. It takes a lot of dedication to be a doctor, so I don't begrudge them their fees. I don't like the malpractice aspect of it, but, again, that is not their fault--that is brought about by tort lawyers and judges who award these assinine large awards.

As far as I know, there is no obvious collusion between lawyers and doctors. Doctors, as a rule, would rather not have anything to do with lawyers, and, as far as doctors and lawyers plotting to take more money from the rest of us? Do you know how insane that sounds? In fact, the last part of this post has me thinking that you have had several shots too many and need to lie down. I can't even comment on such blather. You are one atom from calling doctors frankenstein and using lightning bolts for medical procedures.

Reply to
wolfpuppy
Loading thread data ...

That case was not frivolous, and the award totally justified. Google it.

Reply to
Richard Sexton

Not true. Would you work three years for free? I've never met an attorney that didn't do at least some pro-bono work. How many other professions can say that?

Reply to
Richard Sexton

Are you sure you understand the meaning of "pro bono"? The superficial comment above indicates you don't understand the reality but have swallowed the myth.

This is an MB group, thus this is OT.

Reply to
Helen

I have lots of friends that are lawyers and to they do work for free. In pro per and pro bono are terms I understand, thanks.

Is that why it says "OT" in the Subject: line of the header?

Reply to
Richard Sexton

Yes. OT for how the thead detoured. "Lots of friends that are lawyers"... me too. I graduated with several of them years ago.

BTW, OT is used so that those who aren't interested can avoid reading and/or downloading the thread.

Cheers.

Reply to
Helen

REALLY? Here's one case in point! You should get out more and check out the rest of the world.

formatting link
(CBS) Most Americans know that if you get sick enough to go to a hospital, it's going to be expensive. But you may be surprised to learn that hospitals all over the country charge their highest prices, by far, to those who can afford it least - the 46 million Americans who don't have health insurance.

Hospitals charge uninsured patients two, three, four or more times what an insurance company would pay for the same treatment. And, when the uninsured can't pay, they often find themselves the target of collection agencies or in bankruptcy court.

60 Minutes had no idea how much hospitals can charge people without insurance, until we met Carlos Ferlini and his daughter Peggy.

"I would consider us, you know, right at the bottom of the middle class. We're not poor," says Peggy Ferlini.

"I pay my bills. I pay all the regular guys, but I'm not a rich man," adds her father, Carlos.

Carlos Ferlini made a decent living installing and repairing gutters, but not enough to afford health insurance. Then, last February, Carlos fell off a roof while on a job in suburban Los Angeles.

He was rushed to Providence St. Joseph's Medical Center, a Catholic-run, non-profit hospital in Burbank, Calif. Carlos' wife and daughters knew it would be expensive, but they weren't thinking about costs at that time.

"We thought he was gonna die. I mean, at that moment, you're terrified. You're just - you don't even care about anything. You don't care about the money," Peggy explains.

Ferlini was seriously injured; he fractured his skull and ribs and punctured one lung. He spent

18 days in St. Joseph's, 14 of them in intensive care. He had no surgery and was sent home. Then he got the bill.

"We knew we were gonna owe a large amount, and we know we have to pay it," recalls Peggy.

Carlos remembers first seeing the $246,000 bill. "I showed my daughter, 'This is the bill?' And she say to me, 'Oh, my God."

The Ferlinis didn't know what to do until Carlos heard KB Forbes on a local Spanish-language radio station, saying that many hospitals don't give uninsured patients a fair break.

They contacted Forbes, a community activist who has been waging a nationwide crusade on behalf of the uninsured. He says what happened to the Ferlinis is all too common.

"Basically, hospitals charge uninsured people four or five times more than what they would accept as payment in full from an insurance company. Simply put, it's price-gouging," says Forbes.

Forbes and his staff analyzed Carlos Ferlini's bill from St. Joseph's, using figures that American hospitals are required to submit to the federal government each year. Those figures are a matter of public record.

The bottom line: Forbes found that, while St. Joseph's was billing Ferlini almost a quarter of a million dollars, it would accept just under $50,000 as full payment from an insurance company for the same treatment.

The hospital charged Ferlini more than $5,800 a day for intensive care, nearly

2½ times more than what an insurance company would pay.
Reply to
Helen

You call that going to Canada??? :-)

In that case I first visited Canada in 1973, when the Maid of the Mist stopped at Niagara Falls, Ont, and I stepped off the boat for a minute (so I could say I had stood on the ground in Canada).

Usually I date my firsttrip to the early nineties when I spent a few days in Montreal {(ok, we can now start an argument whether that's in Canada...;-).}

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

LOL! Very good.

Reply to
Martin Joseph

Well, a couple of years back my wife had a business trip that took us to Toronto. I absolutely loved China town and couldn't wait to find some vietnamese hole-in-the-wall small eatery off the main drag serving dim sum out of things I would never confess to my wife. I would walk the six blocks there every day while my wife was taking her classes....by the way, those have to be the longest damn blocks I have ever seen!

Reply to
wolfpuppy

As most liberals, you are extremely selective in what you want to bring to the table, and ignore facts, which I took a bit of time to lay out for you. You ignored 90% of my post and took a snippet out of context. To try to get me and others to believe that someone would pay a bill four or five times what it would cost to have the insurance in the first place is, well, just damn silly. But, it is not my job to educate. I mean, if someone wants to listen and discuss facts, not liberal talking points, then I'll go there. But you don't believe me and that is your right.

Wolfpuppy is done with this issue.

Reply to
wolfpuppy

I don't need to google it; I live here. It was nearly local news. And, yes, it was frivolous. The lady in question had the cup between her legs and it spilled. Ok, sorry about that, but that doesn't justify huge sums of money. They serve hot coffee because those of us who drink hot coffee want it that way. You know it's hot when you order it, and you know it will burn you if you spill it on you. And if you are going to put it between your legs and try to drive, well, you are asking for it. Furthermore, it was not an intentional act on the part of McDonalds...it was an accident brought about by the negligence of the woman.

Come-on, for christs sake, can't we, for once, start treating adults like adults and hold people accountable for their own actions?

Reply to
wolfpuppy

That would be nice, Bush and Cheney in prison.

Reply to
Martin Joseph

ALL this is UNTRUE and exemplifies the epitome of ignorance! You should learn how to do legal research and learn FACTS before you go spouting off falsity, but then most people believe the MYTH of the movie "Inherit the Wind" too! SHEEP!

THE ONLY thing about this lawsuit that should be changed is the FACT that the elderly 83 year old nearly burned to death woman did NOT receive a fraction of the highly publicized verdict! But of course the PROPAGANDA that passes for News did NOT bother to inform you of that FACT! Of the less than half the amount she received, the attorneys fees, court costs, etc., were deducted. She had to SUE to get part of her medical bills paid!

FWIW, rarely do people receive the amount of these big mega-million dollar verdicts against corps. The bottom line is: do the crime if you can pay, and THEY do! They settle out of court and recoup their losses from their CUSTOMERS! The verdict in the McDonalds Hot Coffee case was a mere fraction of a drop of water in the ocean to them.

One day you will be older (if you're lucky) and perhaps you will then begin to have some degree of understanding about life and people. As it is, you appear to be a young ignorant teeny-bopper who has been spoiled with his parents paying all his expenses, thus he remains a helpless ignoramous, totally oblivious to others' and REAL LIFE!

Reply to
Helen

There are some facts you are unaware of. But I can't make you learn them.

I had the same atitude you do until I read more.

Reply to
Richard Sexton

You are a raving lunatic.

Reply to
wolfpuppy

Your Sin-City mirror is reflecting you. Being from Cincy, puts all this along with your moniker in its proper perspective! McDonald's Hot Coffee Lawsuit should have resulted in the permanently disfigured lady receciving a hundred times the amount she received. Down with ceilings on torts! Up the ante on punitive damages to include a sign around the neck at noon in the courthouse's public square and a ten year sentence of working for minimum wage for the CEO and corp. mgrs.

Reply to
Helen

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.