The part I'm wondering is how the plaintiffs were able to prove they were misled. Usually, the developers and their sales puppets use the defense that what is verbally stated by the sales person(s) is not binding but, rather, what's in the written contract.
The other thing I'm wondering is if this is going to set a precedent and a lot of lawyers (whether legit or phony) will start coming out of the woodwork looking for TS owners who bought at sales presentations and claim they can help owners who feel they have been misled.
According to the article, the resolution of the claims came by way of "agreement", which would indicate that the claimants didn't "prove" their case.
If an AG has numerous nearly identical complaints from unrelated residents, just the threat of a major enforcement action can cause a wrongdoing corporation to seek a quick resolution. The $270k that it may cost Welk would likely be less than their attorneys' fees to fight. That doesn't count the hit to their brand.
A legal "precedent" is a prior reported
opinion of an appeals court which establishes the legal rule (authority) which is applied to the same legal question in subsequent cases. It is a rule of law, not a judgment of the facts.
No rule of law established through a settlement agreement.
Is there something unethical for lawyers to seek out people who have been wronged and may not know their rights in order to offer them a chance at redress? Seems like good lawyering to me.
Yes, I am a retired consumers' rights lawyer.
