| Tuesday, March 26, 2002 - 02:29 pm In Housing Court, more than in any other venue, there is a crisis of representation. Over 90% of tenants (some estimates put the number at 99%) are unrepresented. Abuses of pro se tenants by judges and landlord attorneys are rampant. There exists a complete lack of ethical enforcement among both the bench and the bar making the Housing Court little more than a thinly veiled eviction mill. In a court that can make a person homeless in one day, shouldn't tenants have a right to representation? Except for a handful who can afford a private attorney, few have this option. Too many tenants are left reeling from the fast pace of the Housing Court and confused by the legal jargon. But the courts and legislature, soaked in Slumlord bribes have every incentive to keep tenants from mounting adequate defenses and would certainly not agree to a plan to subsidize legal representation for tenants. In this environment of absolute corruption, what can be done to give tenants their fair share of equal protection and chance at a fair resolution? Here are some proposals, let me know what you think of them, and share your own: 1. Allow non-attorneys to represent tenants in Housing Court (perhaps under tenant attorney supervision). While nothing can equal an experienced dedicated attorney, too many people need some form of representation desperately. Currently the landlord bar uses non-attorneys in traditional lawyer roles to address the court, give legal advice to unrepresented opposition, and to negotiate stipulations. 2. Award tenants treble damage legal fees and/or lost days of work reimbursement (for pro se litigants) if a landlord is unsuccessful in a non-payment proceding (for unemployed or disabled reference the daily rate for jury duty). 3. Provide a third-party lawyer to monitor each pro se case and report on any ethical violations and abuses by the court or the landlord's attorney. The floor is open for debate. Please share your opinions as to the pros and cons of these proposals.
| |
| Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 12:23 pm Don't make me laugh! Tenants would be better off on their own than with incompetent paralegals. No offense Ronin, but trash that idea. Your fellow paralegals are a pathetic bunch.
| |
| Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 03:08 pm Only an attorney has the skill and experience to help tenants in court. Paralegals are nothing more than snooty incompetent glorified secretarys. They do lousy research and they foul up even the simplest tasks. Tenants are better pro se than represented by a paralegal. Tenant advocates are worse than that. They add a conflict of interest because their advice will always be to serve their greater political interests at the expense of the tenant.
| |
| Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 04:00 pm Pathetic is too kind a word for the paralegals I've seen. They all know just enough law to mess things up. The research they do is useless. They are a waste of money. I get by with just a secretary. Don't hire a paralegal when you can get a young attorney for less money.
| |
| Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 04:01 pm I mean't except except for Ronin. But he's an exception.
| |
| Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 05:11 pm Ronin: First of all I apologize on behalf of my fellow colleagues for the previous responses received concerning your inquiry. It was not the most professional of receptions/responses considering that you were looking for input by paralegals on what appears to be a very serious topic, the lack of representaion of tenants by attorneys in eviction cases. I took a look at your original post again and felt the need to copy the most relevant portion which pertains to us as paralegals. Here it is: "This month we are addressing ways to ease the representation crisis for over 90% of tenants who appear in Housing Court in New York City without any representation. One estimate is that only 2% of Landlords are unrepresented. Many of these unrepresented tenants are subject to a great deal of abuse and fraud by unethical members of the bar. One of the suggestions was to allow non-lawyers to assist and represent tenants. I figured you guys would like to be heard on this issue (some attorneys have already vehemently demanded that we remove the forum topic!!) So please feel free to come and add your perspective to the discussion." I went to the website and took a look around. I started with "About Rent Wars" and was able to understand a bit about your organization. I also went to your forum discussion and saw your posting complaining about the plight of tenants in eviction cases and I also saw your suggestion about paralegals being permitted to represent tenants in these proceedings. Please note, his idea was merely a suggestion, not a statement of fact. I suspect that you were thinking of a system similar to social security administrative proceedings. I gather you were looking to see if paralegals would support such a plan if it were to be introduced in the legislature or such other governing body which would have control over this type of issue. For me, I think it would be an excellent idea if said paralegals had the proper credentials and training. I would definitely support such a measure. Now to the other matter at hand, while I understand we were initially rude to you after your inquiry, I will take your posting which rudely took us to task for being rude as blowing off a bit of steam after the end of a long day. So, two wrongs don't make a right as my Mother used to always say. Furthermore, I will chalk it up to the fact that landlord/tenant issues are often emotional and draining. Your dealing with families who are in the process of losing their homes, sometimes through unavoidable circumstances. To my fellow listserv members, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If someone posts something that maybe we don't understand, we can very politely and professionally ask for clarification rather than take a superior tone or dismiss it as if it is beneath us. Take a look in the mirror, have we not been posting all day about office stories on how we are perceived and asked to do certain tasks that may not fit our job description? We dismissed this inquiry very quickly in a way that we all often complain about how we are dismissed quickly for the same reason.
| |
| Friday, March 29, 2002 - 01:05 am Hi everyone and thank you for participating, including those of you who are sending email instead of posting (please post your responses! you can do it anonymously). I did get a few inquirys via email wondering if I was planning to be such a representative. I want to make it clear that I have no such intention. It would hinder, as I see it at this point, my advocacy and journalistic work. Also, to be honest, I have seen and been in contact with tenants and other pro se litigants who have not appreciated the hard work of some dedicated, excellent attorneys. While some I have seen dealt with lousy attorneys and con men with law licenses, what bothers me the most is when an attorney has worked himself to death for next to nothing, and because the judge rules against him, the client becomes hostile to the attorney and doesn't appreciate the sacrifice. I have no stomach for dealing with such ingratitude. And I tip my hat to those who put up with it without going to the dark side (and joining the ranks of the shysters). I greatly prefer working on an independent basis on projects for ethical attorneys who respect and appreciate my work. This topic is all about addressing the representation crisis, and I can do that best as a media outlet. To Tortmaster and anonymous 1- I agree that there is nothing better than a seasoned, ethical, tenacious attorney, but the topic here is the fact that people cannot find ANY attorneys to assist them at a price they can afford. As a result, they are being mowed down like grass by tricky shysters. Given this giant gap, I am asking you and other readers to consider alternatives that can help even the odds. Please consider the pros and the cons. Something must be done. To Esquire- Consider what you are saying. Why is it that you can find these young attorneys, but tenants can't? It is about volume and apprenticeship. You have something to offer these young attorneys that almost no tenants do- your experience as an attorney. To anonymous2- Please consider the dust up water under the bridge and thank you for adding your opinion. It's just that paralegals have a possible role to play in making the Housing Court fair to tenants. I wanted you and your list-serv collegues to input into this discussion. So please feel free to come back and bring your friends. We need a wide range of input. As an experienced paralegal myself, I wanted to make sure that paralegals were not overlooked in this debate. Ronin
| |
| Friday, March 29, 2002 - 01:14 pm WOW! What hostility from attorneys. Apparently they have not had a competent paralegal work for them or maybe it is the region they live in. I have NEVER seen such hostility from attorneys towards paralegals in my measly 10 years of experience as a competent paralegal. I would be VERY interested in hearing your reasoning behind your hostility towards us, privately of course so as not to take up space here on the list serve. Please feel free to email me at KaPat@yahoo.com if you would like to share your stories. As for Ronin's question: I think it is a wonderful idea, providing appropriate training is given to the paralegals that represent the tenants. Such representation should be done on a limited license bases, such as closing officers and so forth. In Washington State Landlord/Tenant law is straightforward and the paralegals I know have a good grasp on it. Possibly paralegals could represent with the supervision of an attorney in their preparation for the hearings (like in an administrative proceeding).
| |
| Friday, March 29, 2002 - 03:38 pm In my opinion, all three proposals are worthy of consideration and further investigation. If there is some other metro area that has or has had a similar problem, perhaps the way it was handled there would be useful background information. I do think it would be important to provide some kind of attorney supervision or oversight for nonlawyer representatives - either the "third-party" lawyer described in proposal 3 or by some other means.
| |
| Friday, March 29, 2002 - 05:11 pm On behalf of all attorneys I apologize to any offended paralegals. I work with several excellent paralegals without whom I would have had to struggle to meet my deadlines. The ones that I work with would do an excellent job.
| |
| Friday, March 29, 2002 - 06:52 pm It is not possible for the legislature to grant treble damages for the tenant. It would never happen.
| |
| Saturday, March 30, 2002 - 02:15 am A well trained paralegal can represent clients in a limited manner. I am a paralegal and I have provided advocacy services for parents in the Special Education arena with great success. However, I always worked with an attorney. I attended IEP (Individualized Education Plan) meetings at school, organized records, requested evaluations, obtained and reviewed the reports of expert witnesses, and generally saw a case through a due process hearing level. I had an attorney who was always available for any questions I might have. Whenever these cases went beyond the Due Process Hearing Level, the attorneys who took the case were always extremely pleased with the work completed, the record made and the case organization. I like the general idea of paralegals supervised by a tenant attorney having an expanded role to serve a currently unserved market. However, paralegals do not study the THEORY of law . . .and we all know how routine things can turn out to be anything BUT routine. I also doubt that those who cannot afford an attorney will be able to afford a paralegal either. REGARDING YOUR WEBSITE and the hostile reception you received from LAT Forum . . .I am confident that few, if any, of LAT Forum members are at all familiar with the role playing games such as Rife's (is that how you spell it) or D & D. Your target audience who you hope to teach about the law would love it, but the vast majority of LAT forum members would not get it. In fact, they would find it disturbing. I would not get it if I did not have a now 23 year old son who was WAY involved with these games . . .and many of his friends CONTINUE to be involved even at 23. I worried that he would become the AX MURDERER when he first took it up. Perhaps that explains the hostiity you experienced . . .plus . . .while careful reading reveals your "shyster" characters are not ALL lawyers. . .but rather . . .those who represent slum lords, and the broad statements about the corrupt system . . .well . . .like I said, they didn't get it. They are not likely to have time to do more than peruse . . .and they are very concerned about people who practice law without a license. They see THOSE folks as preying on the innocent, just as YOU see the "Shysters" & "slumlords" as predators. I am from a small town in Michigan and do not believe there would be a market that could support paralegal representation here. I am appalled at what "High School Graduates" do not know about civics, their rights and legal process . . .basic things I learned in the 10th grade! This particular issue should also be a part of public school curriculums starting at age 16 as part of "survival skills" classes, taught like you are trying to teach it, so that the KIDS get it. I hope you keep trying to reach them and teach them. Marcyjcla
| |
| Monday, April 01, 2002 - 09:55 am On behalf of all attorneys Mark? Really?
| |
| Monday, April 01, 2002 - 12:02 pm Thanks for your input marcyjcla. You make an excellent point about paralegals not learning the theory of law. However, in housing court there is very little theory at play in the average case. But again, I reiterate, I feel that there is no substitute for experienced, ethical attorneys. But when over 90% have no representation at all and cannot afford the experienced, ethical variety of attorney, we have to consider other options. This is especially true when the shysters have their non-lawyer employees negotiating stipulations and giving false legal advice. Paralegal advocates could make a huge difference. They would be much more affordable, we could even set a flat rate. But something must be done. You are absolutely correct, Shysters refers only to the Slumlord Bar (and sometimes other off stage slimy organizations). Barracudi are the lawyers who are generally the good guys. They follow a code of honor. My target audience is broader than you might imagine (or than I would have anticipated). These concepts portrayed in this manner really can teach certain concepts that would otherwise be lost in jargon. And as you pointed out, our schools and television are really failing to educate people about the law, at a time when it is more important than ever. As for the LAT Forum, I have my theories as to the hostility. In part I think that the administrators of the forum don't want paralegals to do anything more than whine about how they want respect. Any paralegals that command respect, or have ideas to enhance the paralegal profession, are subject to censorship and misrepresentation by those administrators. They have an agenda. I also think that some on the LAT forum simply follow the leader like lemmings, neither understanding nor caring where they are lead. On the other hand, some of the LAT Forum members who have contacted me or posted on this subject, like yourself, have been very astute and a pleasure to meet. Ronin
| |
| Monday, April 01, 2002 - 12:20 pm Hello Ronin. I am a commercial litigation paralegal at a large firm in Miami, and was trained through the Miami-Dade County Guardian Ad Litem program to represent children is abandonment and abuse cases, which I did for several years on a voluntary basis. Our firm encourages pro bono work. Without a doubt, any legislation enacted which would allow paralegals (or anyone other than a lawyer) to directly represent tenants in L/T cases would also mandate the education and ethics training. (You absolutely HAVE to know when you are in over your head and an attorney has to get involved) and provide for appropriate funding in some manner to support the administrative framework. With the appropriate training and framework, there is no good reason why competent tenant advocates could not represent tenants in these situations. I think the rub is that its not just a question of 'OK, its alright for paralegals to do this' - there needs to be an administrative system in place that would ensure protection of the public's interests appropriately. I just got through reading a digest of the LAT Forum posts, and I think everyone got off on the wrong foot. I truly believe that many did not understand what you were doing or asking, and I firmly believe most don't understand what you're up against. I do know just a very little bit about renting in New York, and your description of this situation being a war is very true, there are some awful abuses. People in other parts of the country are not aware of what can and does happen in New York. You are dealing with a human, hyper-adversarial situation, and most paralegals typically don't live with the situation you are addressing. I wish you success in stirring up some positive action on this issue.
| |
| Monday, April 01, 2002 - 03:23 pm Hi Masters, Thanks for the vote of confidence. You make an excellent point. I would agree that some form of testing should be done. But I think that a supervision by attorneys requirement would be the best way to determine when an attorney would need to step in. It would be a determination that only an attorney can realistically make in my opinion. As for the LAT Forum, I agree that there was a disconnect, but I wonder at the source, I'm positive that it is much more than a simple regional viewpoint difference for it to be that venomous. It is that the list administrator deleted my account without any justification, notice, or warning. But I do think that the regional lack of understanding of the situation helped those hostile people turn off others who were not hostile, just unaware of the NYC situation. I smell a rat in that forum. I'm going to give it a good investigation before I share details of my theories with the public though. But here is an example of a fraudulent legal front group that we did a story on: http://www.rentwars.com/springsup/falserads.htm They are the only people to act similar to the LAT Forum administrator. Even the grimiest shysters have more class than that. We are working on the follow up of the False Radicals story. And much to my chagrin, this turned out not to be an evil plot by the Slumlords. But it was an evil plot! (Stay tuned for when we release our story- you'll love it). Who's to say that a group like the Coalition of Concerned Legal Professionals isn't using the LAT Forum for its own ends? But I am also inclined to believe that profit motive may have played a role in the LAT hostility towards Rent Wars. Ronin
| |
| Monday, April 01, 2002 - 04:31 pm I think the thirdpartylawyer idea is a good one. what's a LAT?
| |
| Monday, April 01, 2002 - 04:37 pm I think that allowing non-lawyers to perform any of the traditional lawyer functions is a bad idea. It creates a slippery slope that endangers the sanctity of the legal profession. First one type on non-lawyer, then another. Just look at the medical profession, full doctors are almost minimum wage workers. Dentists charge less than auto-mechanics. This proposal endangers the profession. Only attorneys have the complete training of procedure and theory that allows for meaningful representation.
| |
| Tuesday, April 02, 2002 - 01:31 pm I think that the idea to require payment of lost days work is great I lost 8 days pay fighting my eviction and even though I won I lost too much money and had real debt problems.
| |
| Wednesday, April 03, 2002 - 08:47 pm I second Ronin's motion. I enthusiasticaly support those concepts. Especially since I am a tenant who has been dragged through and subjected to housing court proceedings by the slumlord of the building where I live.He's taken me for six non-payment and four property damage actions in four years. I have spent so much time in that courthouse that I am just about to ask where do I pick up my paycheck? Was I able to access an attorney? No. But, if I injured or murdered someone I would be given legal representation, but not to protect my home. What happened to "no taxation without representation"? I have to pay all kinds of taxes but I get no representation. Much of my time and the Court's time was wasted by this landlord. But then, the judge and lawyers do get get paid. The court officers get paid, the clerks get paid. Why not me? Why do I bother? Because I have a rent controlled affordable apartment. If the landlord succeeds in evicting me he will most likely triple the rent for the next tenant. The apartment would no longer be rent controlled. Perhaps those people who don't think Ronin's suggestions on this are any good might want to take a walk through Penn Station at 3:00 am on any given night. You will see many homeless people there sleeping on cardboard and the hard, cold floor. You will see homeless elderly women with their possesions in shopping carts. And this is America. I am ashamed and outraged that fellow citizens are deprived of shelter. This is a third world country right next door. The horror of it is that there are people who make a living, good money,putting other citizens into these horrific conditions. If that isn't enough to convince you that something is terribly remiss with the Housing Courts of NYC try the E and the F trains. A good many people sleep on them because of the long runs. Around 1:00 am on every single car you will find five or six sleeping figures. Don't bother escaping to the next subway car, you will only find even more very tired people. What happened to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for these Americans? It's been replaced with the pursuit of a safe place to sleep for them. Has anyone ever done a study on the sexist bias that is routine in housing court? How many woman housing court judges,clerks, court officers, are there? How many housing inspectors are women? I have never seen one single woman housing inspector ever. Not to mention that there are not enough housing inspectors. Ronin forget to include this: My suggestion is if a judge orders repairs and the repair people don't show up to do it, as in the landlord ignoring orders from the judge, the time that the tenant sits at home waiting for the repairs will be compensated to them double. For example, if I lose $200. in wages that day I would be awarded $400. in damages. If the repair people only partially do the repair and then disapper at 1:25pm and allege that there was an emergency some place else where they don't have phones and where they haven't invented phones yet, the tenant would still be awarded damages. The landlord last year ignored many, many court orders. I was left sitting in the house, no phone call, no explanation from anyone. As if my time is not valuable! He was not only merely doing what the slumlord does in his natural habitat but disrespecting the very court that he sought (alleged) relief from. My other suggestion is that there are criminal and civil penalities to a landlord for a mother with a child or children to be evicted and made homeless. Also for a pregnant woman and for any disabled or elderly. Remember you too will be old one day and you could become disabled even if you are well today. If any of these catagories are made homeless they should be awarded immediate damages. A moratorium on all evictions would be a really good idea until NYC (all boroughs) have recuperated from 9/11. However, I am so very glad that because of me one less attorney,paralegal,legal secretary and process server will be kept off the unemployment line. When I first saw it posted, a few days ago, no feedback had come in yet. When I looked at it today I was suprised by the hostile feedback including the affirmation that treble damages would NEVER be awarded. What's that old saying? Never say never? Remember what they said about the earth being flat? Remember what happened to the Berlin Wall? They said it would never come down.
| |
| Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 12:00 pm To anonymous4 a LAT is a listserve for paralegals. Many of the participants are from other states and some have a myopic view of paralegal work and have no clue about New York City. Some LATs have also criticized our forum because many posters use a first name, handle, or anonymous. Many of the LATs list their full name, firm with address, phone numbers, and fingerprint scans (only joking about the fingerprints). Here in New York that sort of thing could get people fired! To FullPartner: I think that your comparison to dentistry and medicine has some merit. But law is just like dentistry, no dentist wants to be bothered doing a cleaning anymore so now we have dental hygenists. Doctors don't have time to handle bloodletting so now we have nurses. Just as law has developed as a profession in a society that is more impacted by legal process than ever before, we need to increase the availability of service to the public. You can either embrace the change as the medical professions have or fight it. Embracing gaurantees your profession the dominant position over the junior professions, fighting leaves open the possibility of losing and having people question whether the profession has outlived its usefulness. An example close to home is the Notary Public. There is a need for representation that must be filled. To Yarrow: Thank you for your note of support. I think you have made good points and a great suggestion- paying for days of work lost from a LL no show on a repair appointment. Right now there is no incentive for the LL's to show up, no penalty, no nothing. The current setup encourages LL's to not show until the tenant gives up and goes to work, then the LL can run to court and cry crocodile tears that the tenant wasn't home and won't provide access. I think I would go one further, that if a LL doesn't show for a repair appointment he reimburses for the day lost, if he misses two appointments the second one costs the day lost times 2^1, and so on 2^x being the penalty (x being the number of appointments missed). Even the richest LL would take that seriously. I feel that this should be added to the regular civil penalties and that a judgment lien on the property should be available.* Ronin *To those of you who attended an HP training with me last year, you know that I've already found a way to get a judgment in these situations. I can share the info again if you need a refresher.
| |
| Friday, April 05, 2002 - 11:28 am Yarrow added an excellant point: tenant work time lost waiting for no show repair people should also be included in compensation. Of course we're speaking of a perfect world, since it would be difficult to prove. Court appearences leave a record. But while we're talking utopia how about quadruple compensation when a shoddy or totally cosmetic "repair" (such as painting over a leak) requires the tenant to repeat the whole process of holding back rent, apearing in court and waiting for repairs? And speaking of people sleeping in subways, the New York Times recently ran a column by someone (sorry the name slips my mind) citing a study that proves-yes-proves that gentrification does not cause displacement. In fact, folks love the new improved nabe so much that they move even less! Since this would seem to cause a density problem (what with the addition of the gentrifiers) my theory is that the old, seemingly missing in action residents have moved to vast underground cities. If you listen carefully (difficult due to car horns and drunken gentry) you can hear them tapping faintly underneath the pavement of sidewalk cafes. They call themselves the Morlocks...
| |
| Saturday, April 06, 2002 - 01:17 am Sorry your experience on the LAT Forum was so negative. Please understand that the Forum is not a social forum but is there thanks to the efforts of LAT Magazine. Forum rules specifically state that one must post without anonymity for obvious reasons-- it is a professional forum. Many of the members have received permission from their firms to post and receive messages on the firm computers during working hours. The vast majority of posts in the forum are forum member's work related questions. The forum's main purpose as I see it is to bring together paralegals from all regions of our country and even Canada to a place where one can find paralegals in every known legal specialty. The LAT Magazine regularly monitors the forum in order to keep abreast on issues of importance to today's paralegal. There is a very low tolerance for any topic that addresses subject matter that unrelated to our field. For most of us, the forum serves as a very important informational resource. Unfortunately you swooped into our work day and did not quite understand what our forum is about and how it functions. We have at times had flamers or trolls come in and attempt to disrupt the ebb and flow of the forum's normal day-to-day happenings. You sort of landed in the middle of things without warning and caused some folks to jump to the wrong conclusion based on their inability to take the needed time to browse your website and find out what you were about. You did not help matters at all by your rather abusive and insulting remarks about paralegals. You may say many things about the posters on our forum but implying that we are ignorant and incapable of reading is out of line. If you had taken the time to investigate the forum at all, this would have been readily apparent to you. The majority of people that post to the LAT forum are highly intelligent and very effective and successful as working paralegals. You caught many of us by surprise in the midst of our work day. It was most likely your scathing remarks about the intelligence of the forum members that got you summarily booted. Things not kept on a professional level are just not tolerated by many forum members as well as the LAT moderator. The magazine makes the rules and sponsors the forum. The atmosphere is quite formal and courteous. Had you taken the time to further explain yourself without the insults, you would most likely remained in there until you chose to go. Having said that, I have taken some time to look over your website and have a better understanding now of what you are about. I think you are doing a pretty cool thing. You have chosen an unusual but interesting method for educating folks on the legal aspects of landlord tenant law- New York Style. That so many tenants are being given short shrift due to their inability to pay for proper legal representation in landlord/ tenant issues is appalling. Obviously,this is an area where paralegals who have been trained in landlord/tenant issues could possibly be utilized and help even the playing field a bit. One of the other paralegals did mention, however, that perhaps the tenants wouldn't be able to afford paralegals either. Paralegals are already allowed in some areas to represent clients in administrative hearings, another area in which the majority of attorneys have little or no interest. This is definitely something that could possibly work in a limited scope. Most attorneys obviously aren't interested in and aren't representing poor tenants. As long as attorneys won't-- then someone else should. Why not specially trained paralegals?
| |
| Saturday, April 06, 2002 - 10:25 pm To Carola- Thank you very much for sharing your viewpoint with the whole forum (she usually only shares her hilarious takes on RWN discussions with me via private email!). These repair appointments Yarrow is talking about are court ordered as to date and time, and landlords are given plenty of leeway. I think that the LL should have the burden to prove a tenant wasn't home. In many cases the judge's clerk can be called on the phone, so Yarrow's suggestion is viable and it could cut down on all the HP adjournments that place a tremendous burden on the court system. The Morlocks point was just too funny! Where do they dig up these researchers?? I bet the guy never spoke to PACC (Displacement Watch), the 5th Ave Committee (Displacement Free Zones), or the Harlem Tenant's Council! For those of you who don't know Carola, she is the Publisher of the On The QT on-line anti-corruption newsletter. You can subscribe by sending her an email at: ontheqt@nycap.rr.com with "subscribe" as the subject. To a/k/a Paralegal- first of all, great handle! Re the Representation Crisis- I thank you for your input to this debate and for your comments about the Rent Wars website. You didn't mention, are you a NY paralegal? I totally agree with your points about paralegals being able to assist tenants. My feel as to the price issue is that paralegal entry into other areas of law have resulted in greater affordability. For instance, Tax, bankruptcy and administrative representation have all been made more affordable when paralegals were allowed to help out. And all without hurting the lawyer's bottom line. That is what I feel would happen if non-attorneys were allowed to help out in Housing Court as well. In the end the forums benefit from less confusion and smoother operations as well. As for the LAT, it's really old hat now. I've connected with other paralegal groups. I wasn't calling all paralegals morons, but I did think that the ones who responded with extreme hostility and a busload of inaccuracies were particularly moronic. I gave specific examples of their logic lapses, and those particular paralegals would be awful advocates. But what really made me lose respect for LAT magazine and the LAT Forum is the racism and censorship. Firstly, I did not "jump" into the LAT forum. I had been monitoring it for over a month since someone from LAT contacted me about a story on Rent Wars. When I entered the forum, I gave my name, my web address, a short introduction to Rent Wars with references to the two New York Times articles about us, and my proposal- I could hardly be said to have posted anonymously. I am a prominent paralegal heavily covered in media multiple times (including the NYTimes Metro Cover), who has political leaders, high powered attorneys, and tenant advocates actively participating in his website and TV show. To have a group of paralegals ignorantly attack Rent Wars as irrelevant and try to silence me and ban me from the debate was an outrage and a demonstration of extreme ignorance and stupidity. One that I am particularly well prepared to expose in a future news article. I do not think that all of the paralegals on LAT were morons. In fact, I received a flood of apologies, and many intelligent responses like yours. These I appreciate. It is the LAT forum management itself that disturbs me, and their conflict of interest. I feel that they intentionally tried to keep me from presenting a valid proposal to the forum members because it conflicts with their imperative to keep the paralegal profession toothless. I found it particularly interesting that LAT killed the story about Rent Wars. If a paralegal is newsworthy enough for the Times, why would a paralegal magazine hide the story from its readers? The answer is simple, LAT doesn't want to inform its readers of paralegals who are creative, popular, respected, and influential. Just look at the LAT Forum, most of the posts I read were whiney complaints of the "My boss doesn't trust me to do legal research" and "I bet that guy arrested for UPL was not a certified paralegal" variety. It's pathetic. A real profession would make it it's business to know what the circumstances of a UPL situation are, and would lobby for clear rules, etc. That's how professionals act. Professionals don't whine, and professionals avoid assumptions. For them to bar me from the forum, when, as so many of the LAT paralegals pointed out, I was far less "abusive" than the racist, ignorant vitriol that was thrown at me was clearly done to keep forum members in the dark about Rent Wars. While my language may have been harsh, my criticisms of the attacks were both accurate and well-referenced. The attackers stooped so low as to attack my name because it wasn't Anglo-Saxon enough for their liking (to the credit of the forum, many paralegals took offense and apologized for those racist attacks). Moreover, many of the attackers "researched" Rent Wars, but couldn't manage to find either NY Times article, both of which are readily available on the website and linked directly to the NYTimes website URLs and include the dates, nor did they bother to look at the website. Rumor has it that Westlaw and Lexis can pull up the NYTimes! Strangely, while they had time for arcane searches about Rent Wars, they couldn't manage to even click on the press page of our site. It was pathetic! When I called them Keystone Kop Paralegals I was being accurate. I still worry the original Keystone Kops will take offense to being compared to that set of morons posing as paralegals. As a former supervisory paralegal I can say with authority that I would have fired them on the spot for demonstrating such incompetence and ignorance- especially in public using the firm's name. I would have fired them for failing to notice the set of VIP's that appear on the RWN website. No wonder their bosses don't trust them with legal research, they have no concept of relevance, thoroughness, or accuracy. It would be suicide for a lawyer to trust that bunch! And I would rather a tenant go unrepresented than represented by any of the moronic half wits that attacked me at the LAT Forum. A few LAT members even went so far as to accuse me of "cutting and pasting" the response by anonymous2 because she chose to post anonymously. They of course were exposed for the idiots they are when she verified that it was indeed her who posted her message on the RWN Forum. As a paralegal I was embarrassed that people calling themselves paralegals would act in such a childish manner. It was like kindergarten kids yelling "Nah nah nah" to drown out opposing viewpoints. Frankly, I am far too kind. Remember, these morons identified themselves and their work locations. I did not go forth and contact their bosses to show a) the complete embarrassing incompetence publicly displayed that reflected negatively upon their firm's overall competence, b) the total amount of paid time wasted by these morons in their half-witted (yet long-winded) attacks, c) the fact that I have the power to publicize the low standards these firms hold their paralegals to, and d) to question whether these morons were billing their Keystone Kops act to some poor unsuspecting client? Especially after being silenced from responding to additional attacks on the LAT Forum, I am far too kind a person and not vindictive. Nonetheless, several emailed virus attacks were received by Rent Wars after we sent a thank you note to those paralegals on the LAT Forum who took offense to how I was treated. Not to worry, the persons responsible are incompetent at email attacks as well their paralegal work. Not only are they moronic half wits, they are mean spirited moronic half wits! The paralegals that have posted here and emailed me directly have all been extremely sharp, intelligent, and observant people. I greatly welcome your input, and that is why I posted in LAT Forum in the first place. So my foray into LAT territory was not a total waste, despite being frustrating and embarrassing to me as a paralegal. I thank you again for your contribution. Ronin TO ALL READERS! This topic is so popular that it has gotten very large and difficult to open. It needs to be continued in a new topic area. To continue the discussion of the Representation Crisis issue please click here: Representation Crisis Discussion To continue the topic discussing the abuse recieved by Ronin at the LAT Forum click here: LAT Discussion
|