Jordan Fogal was heartened to see our post on her story and read your comments. Here’s her response to some of your questions.
Thank you Ben! Now how do I respond to these comments … they are the ones I usually get.First: We did use a licensed realtor.
Two: We did not understand the true ramifications of arbitration, or it’s unfairness. No one who has not been caught in this snare does. We did not know that almost always big business wins. We thought it was like, OK kids lets sit down and not argue and fix this situation. We did not know the system was rigged. We did not understand the builders were repeat clients and the arbitrators meal tickets. No one understands arbitration companies are just the middle men. You still have to put on a trial and have all the costs associated: witnesses, subpoenas, expert testimony you even have to pay for the room to hold the arbitration in… We would not have had to pay a judge as we did an arbitrator or room rent or the astronomical fees charged by arbitration companies. Our arbitration fees alone were $9300. dollars. That does not include going to the kangaroo court where the rules of law no longer apply behind close doors. That was nearly $30,000 dollars…
3) We did have an inspector. Without invasive testing, he could not have know what was behind the freshly paint walls. Ask you builder if you can do a little destructive testing before you buy the house and see how far you get.
4) We did get legal advice. We are on our third set of lawyers. One advised us to go into foreclosure and bankruptcy and get on with our lives because in the state of Texas we would never receive any ration of fairness or justice. The builder’s lawyers know how to eat up your retainer before your check clears.
People make these comments because they still just do not understand. The public cannot accept that this can go on the this county and they have no recourse. The court house doors are blocked.
Those who run from trial prove their guilt.
If arbitration is so fair why is it mandatory?
Thank you for trying to help us all and informing the public.
Jordan Fogal
PREVIOUSLY: Tremont Homes Sells Rotten Lemon, Provokes Victimized Homebuyer Into Five-Year Consumer Crusade
More From Consumerist
-
This Jug Of 20-Year-Old, Michael Jordan-Branded McDonald’s BBQ Sauce Can Be Yours For $9,995
-
Teens Who Cut Hole In Mall's Roof To Steal Air Jordans Might've Watched Too Many Spy Movies
-
Target, Where A Flash Drive Is A Good Substitute For A Flash Bulb
-
Snake On A Plane Causes Emergency Landing, Samuel L. Jackson Reportedly Not Involved
-
Southwest Raising Bag Fees, Will Start Charging For No-Shows
@BlueModred: Arbitration speeds up the process, but at what cost? So that the big company – who has most if not all key witnesses, smoking-gun documents and relevant information at their disposal – can rush you through the process with inadequate time to prepare? So that you can be forced to pay fees of up to $5,000 a day in arbitration costs?
Consumers are usually on the losing end of every arbitration proceeding. In theory, it should work; but for now, it’s just not a process that is equipped to be fair to the little guy.
Arbitrations are good for two parties that are dealing at arms-length, like two businesses. Notsomuch for the consumer.
If only they checked in on the construction progress. If only they had checked the plumbing a little more intensely. If only they had hired a better inspector…People saying these things are just deluding themselves into thinking they are so damned smart this sort of thing would never happen to them.
Face it: even if you are a diligent and educated purchaser it’s next to impossible to cover all your bases when it comes to complex transactions like buying a house.
I wouldn’t blame the inspector either. If a builder is determined to pass off shoddy work it’s not difficult to keep things looking good long enough to get by the building officials and inspectors.
True story: A builder in my locale would lay the rebar for footing reinforcement, and call for the structural inspection. Inspector would come and sign off. The builder would then take the rebar out of the hole, pour the footing without it, take the rebar to the next job and repeat the process. The builder completed about 15 houses like this before he was caught in the act.
The moral of this story is that there’s not an inspector in the world who could tell there’s a problem with that footing after the concrete is poured. No one would suspect anything until 3-5 years down the road when the house started to shift. Same with the pipes in the walls or the flashing tucked under the roof. If someone is bound and determined to cheat on these things there is no way to tell unless you catch them in the act.
For those defending arbitration, the solution is simple: ban mandatory arbitration, and if arbitration is such a great alternative, the parties can agree to use arbitration rather than the courts.
See? Simple and everyone is happy.
Odd, though, but I find it unlikely that Ms. Fogel would voluntarily choose this route.
As for scratching out arbitration agreements, I’m assuming those of you who do this don’t have a credit card, cellphone account, internet account, cable or satellite tv, don’t fly, don’t go to the hospital, don’t get treated by doctors, haven’t interviewed with a larger company recently, not been offered and accepted a job, or bought a computer online. No matter how much you think you have control whether you’re covered by a mandatory arbitration agreement, trust me: you’re not.
The only way you know for sure? Tell your congressional representatives to support the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007.
Sorry, should have read:
No matter how much you think you have control whether you’re covered by a mandatory arbitration agreement or not, trust me: you don’t.
@E-Bell: I agree — they both had lawyers, so this wasn’t a “poor little guy” getting screwed over by the big company per se. Having a lawyer can really level the playing field, as consumer attorneys are usually members of large lawyer organizations that can blacklist unfair arbitrators (the same way insurance companies blacklist arbitrators).
But, courts typically have very little oversight over arbitrations. You can’t usually “appeal” to the courts if you don’t like how your arbitration turned out.
People need to know and understand that contracts can be modified, as long as all parties agree, before they are signed and become binding. In other words, take your pen and draw big Xs across any clause you don’t want in your contract, including arbitration clauses. Then initial to the side. If the other party doesn’t accept your change, there is no contract. You are free to add and subtract whatever you like. Everything’s open to negotiation until all parties sign and the contract becomes binding.
@nequam: “Winning” doesn’t mean getting back less than you paid to “sue” them in fake court. Winning would be an apology, a full refund or mortgage payoff, and a replacement home or at least a down payment on one. At least.
Time to go outside the system here.
*Post a walk-through video of the house showing all of the defects on YouTube.
*Make a HUGE banner sign saying “This Tremont Home is a LEMON. Call xxx-xxx-xxxx” and put it on the roof. Set up an answering machine at that number with a message about your problems.
Those ideas should get your situation some press attention, which is exactly what Tremont doesn’t want.
If you need more than that, I’ll cogitate on it for you.
Did anyone mention a Home Warranty while you were buying the house?
the problem as i see it is that this is not really a case for arbitration. arbitration generally seeks a middle ground – a compromise in cases where responsibility is convoluted. by weighing responsibility, an arbitrator will consider the parties’ requests for compensation & make a decision that benefits both parties in some way. this is how arbitration differs from the court system where rulings are generally weighted to one party or the other.
with that in mind, how can the buyers of this property truly be at fault for its condition? they did their due diligence. they are not licensed contractors & should not be held partially liable for faults of the builder.
@troublz: Here’s something I learned on my first home buying experience: Don’t rely exclusively on the home inspector. Go through the house yourself because you may find things he missed, or things he isn’t “required” to look at. For example, in my first home there was a rotten spot in the sub-flooring in the upstairs bathroom, in a corner right next to the tub, from years of water leaking over the sides and through a crack in the tile that wasn’t really visible. If you stepped in the corner, you could feel it sagging under foot (which is how I discovered it). On the next house we purchased, I went through testing ALL the faucets, windows, switches, fans, and corners!
@Skeptic:
i’ve already addressed your attempt at changing the subject.
i personally can’t do much to help the Fogal’s in there situation.
What i can do is help point out things that other people can and should do to help keep from getting in this situation in the first place.
CITOAHC you may not be aware of the problems with
home warranties! They contain an arbitration clause, too, and have so many exclusions that they are “illusory” according to some attorneys. I have personal experience with a warranty co…they’re not worth the paper they’re printed on and are just a marketing tool IMO. One warranty co was using an arbitration firm owned by a disbarred lawyer.
JRFORDS and SHELLYP I agree with what you said about builders hiding defects from inspectors, and arbitration being in everything. It’s frightening how many people think it’s so easy to avoid these problems because that kind of ignorance is how more and more people keep getting ripped off.
It can take just minutes or hours to cover MAJOR structural defects. I recommend home buyers have their experts present during construction, too, but that presents a few impracticalities, costs, and a false sense of security. The bottom line on this is that the industry has to be babysat, adding to the cost of a house despite the industry’s smarmy rhetoric about how they care about “affordability.” When the industry says “affordable,” what they appear to mean is, “shortcuts.”
To the people who said the Fogal’s inspector must have been bad or should be sued…guess what, there is an arbitration clause in most inspector’s contracts, too. Often, all you could recover is the few hundred you paid for the inspection anyway. Inspectors and in fact all in this industry are far less regulated or accountable for their mistakes than most consumers realize UNTIL they have this problem. That especially includes the people who think they’re too smart to get taken.
BROCKBROCKMAN, re: your comment that having a lawyer levels the playing field. Theoretically it should but not all lawyers are skilled, in fact some stink. Working for a corporate legal dept is a nice job, pays well. Working for individual homeowners going after judgment proof builders in court OR arbitration is unprofitable for lawyers and therefore homeowners are often stuck with less than stellar legal help. IDEALLY, the home buyer hires a good lawyer before they buy, to make sure their contracts are not so one-sided. But that again adds to the cost of a house because of problems in the industry that should not exist on this level. These shortcuts are profitable to builders, and arbitration clauses help insulate the industry from liability. Lawyers know that.
It’s getting ridiculous how many experts you have to hire (or become) just because this industry can’t or won’t build a house right.
while arbitration clauses may be infested into nearly any type of contract these days, it is relatively inconsequential for things like cell phones.
People trust too much.
When there is something significant on the line. Read and understand every last word or the contract. If you can’t understand it don’t just accept the honey glazed version the receiving end is trying to give you. Get your own independent counsel. It’s really not that expensive.
“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”
I don’t mean to keep sounding like I am blaming the consumer on this, but the only thing that seems to be helpful and relevant to this discussion for everyone not directly involved is how to avoid this situation from the beginning if possible.
Once you are in it, you have to address your situation specifically based on the laws and circumstances of your ordeal.
My sympathy does continue to go out to the Fogal’s. I hope that they can finally get the real restitution that they deserve.
In the meantime, let us all learn something.
Some good points were made since I last checked in…
A home inspector should have been able to find improperly installed windows (especially since it was reported that they were installed UPSIDE DOWN) and a host of the other problems this home faced.
And there is a non-invasive way to check behind walls – my buddy had this offered to him and he declined it. Essentially, I believe it relies on an infrared or heat sensing camera that can check for leaks. Surely this would have spotted some of the leaky pipes that may have been the cause of some of the mold reported.
While I am not blaming the victim here, I am starting to wonder a bit about this story – there are times when people turn to consumerist with their story and leave out big chunks of info or change the story a bit because they want to come off shiny.
Am I saying this happened here? Not necessarily. I truly feel bad for what this couple experienced. However, something doesn’t fit here. I’m not sure why, but my BS detector is signaling. It’s a weak signal, but I’m picking something up.
For instance, they knew they were bound by mandatory arbitration. However, arbitration requires that the arbiter is impartial – in other words, they cannot be a business partner of either party. And when an arbiter awards damages, they are not supposed to award amounts insignificant to the grounds of the claim. They claim over $150,000 in damages and in arbitration, which cost over $30,000, they are awared under $27k.
How does that make sense?
And they say that the builder was a business partner under contract with AAA. AAA is the American Arbitration Association. From their website:
‘Once a case is filed, parties may select from the AAA’s National Roster of over 8,000 impartial experts, or “neutrals,” to hear and resolve their cases. Recognized for their standing and expertise in their fields, neutrals, who are attorneys as well as non-attorneys, are nominated to the National Roster by leaders in their industry or profession. The collective expertise of AAA neutrals’ is wide-ranging–all have at least a decade of industry specific expertise in such areas as construction, employment, healthcare, real estate, technology and many others.
The conduct of AAA arbitrators is regulated by codes of ethics that have been jointly developed with organizations including the American Bar Association (ABA) and the National Academy of Arbitrators; mediators must comply with model standards of conduct jointly developed by the AAA, the ABA and the National Association for Conflict Resolution.
The AAA is a not-for-profit-organization with offices throughout the U.S. and in Dublin, Ireland. The AAA headquarters is in New York, New York. “
That’s right, a not for profit governed by rules developed in conjunction with the ABA.
So it’s clear that they were not under ‘contract’ with AAA. And it also appears that both parties get to choose the arbiter.
Here is an explanation of some of those rules and procedures:
[www.adr.org]
So what happened here that would cause an arbiter with a minimum of 15 years of experience to award such a low dollar amount award?
@Buran: As others have commented, there is no guarantee she would have done better in court. We don’t know all the facts and we’ve only heard her assessment of the value of things. It may very well be that what she won was all she was entitled to.
Calling arbitration “fake court” doesn’t advance the discussion. It is enshrined in federal and state law as an appropriate and enforceable way for parties to choose to resolve their disputes. It’s what she agreed to, which is why the court ordered her to pursue her claims there. We can argue all we want about whether arbitration is fair (always or ever) to a consumer, but you cannot sign something and then later claim you didn’t read or understand it. The tragedy here is that the woman hired a builder that turned out to be crappy, not that her contract required her to submit to arbitration.
A point people are missing here is that she could have struck first by demanding arbitration for her claims against the builder. And it’s probably time to call bullshit on her claim that the builder has a contract with AAA. It doesn’t work like that. (oh, I see KILLAVANILLA just made that point very well).
I disagree with the statements that the American Arbitration Association is going to provide neutral arbitrators simply based on their org’s website claims. If website claims were all true, then these builders that advertise things like “100% Customer Satisfaction!” etc, would not have unhappy customers, but they do.
When you are choosing from a pool of arbitrators it’s still a pool of people who do repeat biz with the industry…they don’t do repeat biz w/the consumer. Arbitrators are paid as that is their living…they are not in it for charity. Arbitrators/firms do court corporations for their business and I’ve personally seen documents on arbitration firms’ own websites touting how they protect the corporation. They compete for this business.
Arbitration firms may call themselves a non profit but so does the Nat’l Assoc’n of Home Builders nahb.org and they clearly advocate for profits for their members and rake in lots of money for themselves. I am a volunteer for a non profit org. There is a world of difference between some “non profits” and it’s a shame the IRS doesn’t look into what some of these very well funded org’s do, such as spend millions on lobbying in Wash. D.C. every year. Some other non profits the IRS did look into were down payment assistance programs that essentially laundered money for sellers/builders when the buyer couldn’t afford it. The buyer ended up paying for it one way or another and the loans often went into default. The loan of course was sold before that happened, and that whole mess is now in the news daily, (foreclosures, subprime loans, etc). Don’t beleive all you read on these org’s websites as they are just promoting themselves like any advertorial text does. Dot-org or not, non profit or not.
Re: my previous post about down payment assistance programs as non-profits and the foreclosures that often result…I should add that I don’t condone buyers making foolish choices on home purchases they can’t afford. but really, the industry knew what it was doing even if the buyer didn’t! My main point was that as a “non-profit” arbitration org’s are more trustworthy as that term can be very misleading as can the arbitraiton site’s own text of course.
Good grief…meant to say “As a non-profit, arbitration orgs are NOT more trustworthy, as that term can be very misleading…”
@Keter: I have to agree that buying an older, solid house is the only way to avoid this mess. If it’s been there for 50, 75 years and hasn’t fallen down yet (but needs a little bit o’ TLC & updating), then it will be enjoyable by you and yours for another 50. Again, thorough inspection by a neutral party is key– find out about asbestos, aluminum or knob wiring, where the lead paint is, how old the plumbing is, neighborhood flooding history, etc, and at least you’ll feel secure in knowing 99% of the story of your investment.
I’ll take the quirks and well-documented possible issues of a quality pre-existing home, than the complete unknowns (mold? no rebar? weak floor joists? bad PVC plumbing joints? Built over a recently filled-in wetland that may flood during the next month of rain?) of whatever passes for new construction today.
IMO, one of the great coverups of real estate is the underestimation and under-disclosure of the real risks in buying or building a brand new home. I’d say about half of all builders, developers, and RE agents are slimy and could care less about quality, then are in it for the quick $, and the next deal. Don’t fall for it.
Jordan needs to call Mike Holmes and talk him into moving down to Texas.
@CSchnack: I agree with you that non-profit status does not equate with good intentions. However, you are confusing the AAA with the arbitrators themselves. The AAA merely facilitates. The parties select the arbitrator. This is an important point. In other words, Ms. Fogal here had to approve the particular arbitrator. This arbitrator apparently found that the builder had committed fraud. That is a serious finding and sort of undermines Fogal’s insinuations of unfairness. She might disagree (and you might as well) with the amount of the award, but there is absolutely no suggestion in anything she has written that the calculation was the result of anything improper.
@CSchnack:
You are incorrect in saying that AAA is in any way shady.
They are a not-for profit oversight agency that assists both parties with finding and retaining arbiters.
Additionally, arbiters are NOT in the business to repeatedly work against the consumer for one particular company. Doing so would violate the statutes and regulations requiring that arbiters are non-partial.
Arbitration firms are definitely for profit, but the AAA is not an arbitration firm. Plus, both parties have to agree on the arbiter, hence your argument is off a bit.
Yes, some non-profits are shady. However, the AAA is not one of them. They are like the ABA for arbiters. Or like the ‘ama’ for dcs. or the Real Estates Association for realtors. They enforce policy and ensure that arbitration is done according to a certain set of standards.
The reality is that something here isn’t being mentioned. Why would the arbitration result in a finding against the builder without awarding proper damages? What motivation would the arbiter have to undercut their ‘well documented’ damages unless he had a good reason to do so? Arbiters are paid for their work and do not (they are not allowed) to get a kick back from either party. Why wouldn’t they have every motivation to award full damages if they found for the homeowner?
I’ll say it again – the more I think about what I’ve read and research on my own, the more the foul smell of BS creeps in.
Something is being left out. Did the arbiter find the damage claims to be fraudulent? Was the builder able to show that some of the damage wasn’t due to faulty building, but rather improper usage?
I just looked it up – the average bathtub hold 52-54 gallons of water, yet in the original post the couple stated that ’100 gallons’ of water crashed through the ceiling. How did that happen? Is there bathtub twice the size of a normal bathtub? Most jacuzzi tubs top out at 70 gallons or so. HUGE jacuzzi tubs (not exactly standard fare for third floor new construction done by ‘shoddy’ builders) hold over 100.
Water weighs 8.3 pounds per gallon, meaning that her 100 gallons of water weighed in at 830 pounds. Add a 200 pound man and you are looking at a weight over half a ton.
That seems like a bit much to put on a third floor, no? Recommended safe load on flooring is around 40# per square foot live load. A 6*2 tub works out to an acceptable load of around 480#
@CSchnack:
When you state “you may not be aware of the problems with home warranties!” I believe you are talking about a purchased warranty on an existing home. I am a small builder in Louisiana. I am also licensed in Florida. In both of these states the legislatures have enacted new home warranty laws that protect both the buyer and the builder. Here is a link to the LA statute [66.0.100.36]
Notice that it states that:
“The parties may provide for the arbitration of any claim in dispute. Any arbitration shall comply with, and may be binding only to the extent provided in R.S. 9:4201 et seq.”
It does not require arbitration. I do not have an arbitration clause in my contracts.
I also do not appreciate your generalization:
“The bottom line on this is that the industry has to be babysat, adding to the cost of a house despite the industry’s smarmy rhetoric about how they care about “affordability.” When the industry says “affordable,” what they appear to mean is, “shortcuts.”
I do not have to be “babysat”. I build affordable housing for first time home buyers. I sell houses that appraise for $3-5 per SF over the sales price, thereby giving buyers built in equity. I was installing hurricane straps and 130 mph windows in these starter homes here along the coast before code required it. And my homes are selling between $165k – $200k depending on square footage. I’m not getting rich, but I living comfortably and am building a loyal customer base.
The NAHB represents the industry, just as many other trade associations do. My dues go to pay the salaries of the officers and employees and pay for lobbying efforts on their (my) behalf. After all the bills are paid there is no “profit”. Hence the term “Non-Profit”. So I am not quite sure what you meant when you stated they “rake in lots of money for themselves”. They are not a charitable organization. But then again not all charitable organizations are very “charitable” either. And the membership of the NAHB consists of more small builders like me than large corporations like Tremont or say K & B and their ilk.
The bottom line is home builders are just like the general populace. There are some nice ones and there are some jerks and assholes. You don’t have to babysit your builder. Just do some research, like checking with the Contractors License Board in your state or the BBB and avoid those builders that have actions pending against them. Search county records and find people that bought homes from them and ask those people how they like their house. You don’t have to become an expert, just do some homework. I just googled “Tremont Home” and found this site [www.hobb.org] along with links to this story.
Like everything in life, all it takes is a little due diligence.
just for ther ecord, there is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE between a NON-profit organization & a NOT-for-profit organization.
please do not use them interchangeably. NON-profit tax designation is reserved specifically for charitable organizations, religious groups & such. NOT-for-profit simply defines an organization as not FOR-PROFIT (as the term implies). typically, industry organizations are not-for-profit as their members pay dues to cover their operating expenditures, but the organization itself does not generate a profit for owners or shareholders.
famous example of a NOT-for-profit organization: RIAA.
incidentally, neither distinction mandates that a party should be trusted. philanthropy scams are as old as charity.
& one final note: usually mandatory arbitration clauses reserve the right of “arbitrator choice” for the party mandating arbitration.
NON-profit =/= NOT-for-profit. please do not use the terms interchangeably as they are not interchangeable. NON-profit designation is reserved for charitable & religious organizations (& the church of scientology). NOT-for-profit just denotes a business as not generating profit.
example of a famous NOT-for-profit organization: RIAA.
even so, the AAA’s tax distinction says nothing about whether it truly is a fair industry organization.
& arbitrator choice is usually reserved for the party that concocted the mandatory arbitration clause in the first place.
sorry for the dp.
@killavanilla: First of all, it doesn’t really matter whether there were 50, 70, or 100 gallons of water in the tub. The article states that the tub drain wasn’t connected. I’m sure what happened is that the water filled the ceiling cavity until the weight broke through the drywall.
Second of all, when you go looking stuff up you have to be careful. ’40 PSF live load’ is actually shorthand for ’40 PSF uniform live load. That means the load is calculated over the entire span of the structural members supporting it, not just, in this case, the piece of floor directly under the tub.
A minimally-sized full bathroom is 5′x8′=40sf, ergo 40sf x 40psf live load = 1600lbs. A large master bath, 8′x10′=80sf x 40psf = 3200lbs. In reality, the floor of that bathroom likely shares members with other rooms, thereby spreading that load out much further. Lastly, live load is only one variable in a structural calculation that includes several other factors and multipliers, so it’s not like the floor goes crashing down when you hit 41psf live load.
@magic8ball: Might be common…my mom’s condo came with a crack pipe in the kitchen cabinet, and I found someone’s coke kit in my bathroom when I was installing a light.
@jrford8:
Good points all.
But why wouldn’t an inspector be able to tell that a tub drain isn’t connected?
Isn’t that their job?
I still don’t buy the story.
And I understand the whole live load thing, but the bathroom also holds people, sinks, cabinets, etc. My point was that 100 gallons is an example of possible proof of exaggeration. If someone is willing to exagerate a small part of the story, what else are they willing to exagerate?
Thanks for the info. Very enlightening.
I feel for the Fogals posistion on this. My mother purchased a house whose previous owners had hidden a VERY serious mold problem caused by a spring that had developed underneath the house near the furnace. She hired an inspector on her own whom had nothing to do with the realtor nor the previous owners. Unfortunately the inspector is only going to catch so much that’s wrong with the property. The house is uninhabitable and she’s spent an additional $15,000 getting a mobile home moved onto the property and hooked up. It was a good thing the house sat on 10 acres.
She’s never going to get a cent out of the previous owners (who skipped town) nor the guy who inspected the house. She’s stuck paying for a house she can’t live in.
The thing about binding arbitration is, if the guy you’re dealing with wants it. Odds are there’s a good reason for it and that should be reason enough for you to walk away from the deal. An honest builder shouldn’t need to tie one hand behind your back should problems with your house come up. It might take you longer to find a builder that doesn’t pull this bullshit, but its in your best interests in the long run.
I’ve gotta say that she got hosed on this deal.
That being said, she (1) signed a contract she didn’t understand (2) didn’t get a lawyer to help her understand it (3) didn’t pay the bill for arbitration (4) didn’t get comprehensive home owners insurance (5) repeatedly fired her lawyers.
I’m not saying what the builder did was right, but you have to take some responsibility for making the situation worse.
As a side note, arbitration and the AAA have been around a long time. The AAA is very well respected in the legal community. Calling it a “Kangaroo Court” and “rigged” I think is terribly unfair.
Contracts of this nature should not be so difficult that all citizens in this country need a lawyer to execute a sales agreement – and 70% of the American people cannot afford one anyway.
As far as comprehensive homeowners insurance, are few that cover the extent of the damage she experience on a ‘new property’ since the ‘warranties’ in some states are supposed to be ‘good’ for two years, at least.
And ‘privatizing’ the courts and legal system by industry attorneys really not ‘kosher’ to begin with.
It’s really sad that she’s in this situation. Best of luck.
For those of you in the comments stating that a case in court would be way more expensive than arbitration, this reminds me of the figurines from the game Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap. If you choose to pay more, you are likely to have a more favorable outcome. Not to mention she could sue for court costs too…
@nequam: Let’s see, $30k in costs and a less than $30k award. And it took how many months? Yeah, they won. Sure.