KaponoFor3: Nabb1: Dude... I mean... DUDE. Your personal cell phone?

I've given it to only two clients so far in my career. They both call me regularly but I generally don't answer calls if they are after 7pm.

Have a look at Google Voice: that way you can give them the Voice number, it'll forward to either your work or cell according to your secret scheduling, including custom voice mail messages, voice mail transcription, etc.

Very well said, Obdicut.

DamnYankees: Even if you think this guy is a douche, this is still a stupid decision. How the hell is he supposed to repay those loans if he's barred from from doing the job which would give him a salary?

I've known a lot of douchey lawyers that are worse than this guy...and they are still allowed to practice.

I don't get this:

FTA: In April the judges rejected the committee's recommendation and ruled Mr. Bowman could not be a lawyer. Michael J. Novack, the clerk of the court that handled Mr. Bowman's application, declined to comment specifically on his case.

"Generally speaking, if the committee on character and fitness recommends admission of an applicant, the court approves of it," Mr. Novack said. "But not always."

So did the Committee on Character and Fitness recommend he become a lawyer but some judges that look over the case deny it? That's what this sounds like.

Nabb1: They guy didn't pay a freaking dime in 26 years. Not one.

Details are missing. Has he been a professional student?

If you know how to work the system, you can keep your student loans in good standing and in forbearance for a very, very long time.

Twenty-six years sounds like a long time, but with forbearance periods in there, it's easily doable for a bachelors, masters, and JD.

There is nothing in the article that says his loans aren't in good standing. That's the kicker. WE NEED DETAILS!!!!

what_now: No. No it isn't. This guy is in default of a federal loan.

Where does it say that he's in default?

SchlingFocker: Nabb1: They guy didn't pay a freaking dime in 26 years. Not one.

Details are missing. Has he been a professional student?

Professional students should be barred from the profession. If you are a student for two and a half decades, you should have tenure somewhere.

Nabb1: SchlingFocker: Nabb1: They guy didn't pay a freaking dime in 26 years. Not one.

Details are missing. Has he been a professional student?

Professional students should be barred from the profession. If you are a student for two and a half decades, you should have tenure somewhere.fark, he should be selling his own textbooks at that point. though i don't know if Con Law I by "Guy who took the bar 4 times" is going to sell all that well.

Nabb1: Professional students should be barred from the profession. If you are a student for two and a half decades, you should have tenure somewhere.

I've seen quite a few people who have stretched their educational career into the decades without going into default on their loans. They go to school for a semester or two full-time, get their forbearance period renewed, work full-time, go back for a semester or two, rinse and repeat.

I think it's kind of a waste of life, but my main disagreement is with the people here who are saying that he's in default when nothing in the article says that he's in default.

If he's been going to school off-and-on full time for the past 20-something years, that's one thing. If he simply hasn't paid, that's another.

The article doesn't state what the case is.

SchlingFocker: what_now: No. No it isn't. This guy is in default of a federal loan.

Where does it say that he's in default?

Why would it be in collections if he didn't default?

Obdicut: However, I don't think you can argue that there is any realist set of standards whereby defaulting on loans is morally neutral.

Considering that health insurance companies have armies of lawyers whose job is to figure out ways to weasel out of contracts with their customers, I don't think the legal profession can hold much high ground in the realm of fulfilling contractual obligations.

Ryan2065: Why would it be in collections if he didn't default?

Nowhere in the article does it say that it's in collections.

SchlingFocker: Ryan2065: Why would it be in collections if he didn't default?

Nowhere in the article does it say that it's in collections.

You have to follow the nondescript link at the bottom of the Kos piece to find out that little detail that is oddly missing from the Kos article.

SchlingFocker: Ryan2065: Why would it be in collections if he didn't default?

Nowhere in the article does it say that it's in collections.

At the bottom of the Daily KOS article there is a link to the real article. In the real article:

Sallie Mae transferred Mr. Bowman's private student loans, the ones not guaranteed by the federal government, to a collection agency, which tacked on a 25 percent fee. That agency transferred the loan again, and he said the next collection agency tacked on another 25 percent fee. Sallie Mae denied this, saying he was charged the fee only once. But suddenly, Mr. Bowman found that he owed more than $400,000.

Come on, most blogs link to the real story that is full of the information they leave out. This isn't anything new.

...a good start?

thomps: anyone that is willing to disregard almost a half a million dollars worth of loans for a quarter of a century probably doesn't have the strongest ethics with regard to financial dealings.

A lack of ethics and experience farking someone out of money for decades? Sounds like he'd be perfect as a lawyer for a big insurance company.

Lamune_Baba: thomps: anyone that is willing to disregard almost a half a million dollars worth of loans for a quarter of a century probably doesn't have the strongest ethics with regard to financial dealings.

A lack of ethics and experience farking someone out of money for decades? Sounds like he'd be perfect as a lawyer for a big insurance company.

Hey-OH!

that is stupid. if anything they should let him get to work ASAP.

Nabb1: Nabb1: I kind of feel sorry for the guy, but maybe you chose the wrong vocation, pal.

Wait...

"The size of this account is extremely unusual, but not surprising given that the customer took out 32 loans to pursue undergraduate, law and masters of law studies and has not made a single monthly payment over his 26-year student loan history."

Okay, I retract any semblance of pity.

You guys are making it sound like he is a deadbeat. The way the loans work is that you dont have to pay them back until you are done with your schooling.

Now here is this man who has gotten through law school and they are preventing him from doing the very thing that could allow him to move forward and clear these debts?

Did you forget about the "four tries" part? Didn't someone pass this exam on their first try without going to law school after just studying for two weeks?

mattharvest: DamnYankees: mattharvest: A fiduciary duty is a pretty commonsense term, and it refers to whenever you have contractual obligations pertaining to finances.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong about this. That's not what a fiduciary duty is from everything I've learned.

You can be pretty sure all you want; you're mistaken. In the context of character and fitness, you have a fiduciary duty to your debtors to make reasonable efforts to satisfy your debt. It's a contracted-to element of your loan.

You're flat-out wrong.

A debt arising from a loan is not a form of fiduciary obligation.

Thus, the failure to repay a loan is not a breach of a fiduciary duty.

Suck it.

TFA: Applicant has not presently established the character and general fitness requisite for an attorney and counselor-at-law.

There are ethical requirements to becoming a lawyer? Huh... I guess all those shark jokes are just a terrible misrepresentation of the community.

/snerk

Amerika. Where we worship money.

As someone who grades the bar exam, I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.

It is an easy case for me. Of course he should not be admitted to the bar.


/proud of my profession

kronicfeld: DamnYankees: Even if you think this guy is a douche, this is still a stupid decision. How the hell is he supposed to repay those loans if he's barred from from doing the job which would give him a salary?

In 26 years he couldn't have bagged groceries or dug a ditch to make payments?

Bingo.

I paid back every undergrad and law school student loan within five years of passing the bar, but to be honest, I really went to law school to get laid.

Gyrfalcon: kronicfeld: DamnYankees: Even if you think this guy is a douche, this is still a stupid decision. How the hell is he supposed to repay those loans if he's barred from from doing the job which would give him a salary?

In 26 years he couldn't have bagged groceries or dug a ditch to make payments?

Bingo.

those jobs dont pay enough to make payments. maybe you could pay off 1500 a year or something, but thats a drop in the ocean.

To those of you who believe he should be allowed to work so he can pay off his debts: If he'd been disbarred for embezzling funds from clients, would you argue that he should be allowed to practice law again because that would be the best way for him to earn enough money to repay his victims? Same principle, really.

WTF? They're pretty determined about getting their money. How the hell did he get 32 loans without paying a cent?

DamnYankees:
Sure. He sounds like a douche. But lots of douche's practice law.

All that schooling, and still the grocers' apostrophe.

cfish78: Gyrfalcon: kronicfeld: DamnYankees: Even if you think this guy is a douche, this is still a stupid decision. How the hell is he supposed to repay those loans if he's barred from from doing the job which would give him a salary?

In 26 years he couldn't have bagged groceries or dug a ditch to make payments?

Bingo.

those jobs dont pay enough to make payments. maybe you could pay off 1500 a year or something, but thats a drop in the ocean.

I think the point is they want to see some effort on his part to show he recognizes his financial obligation. No payment for 26 years is a pretty good sign you don't intend to attempt to pay back any of the loan.

Nutsac_Jim: You guys are making it sound like he is a deadbeat. The way the loans work is that you dont have to pay them back until you are done with your schooling.

Okay... he's not a deadbeat then, he's just a retard.

I can work with that.

TFA: ...which tacked on a 25 percent fee...

Yeah, I don't care how good your collections practices are, your administrative services aren't worth $50K-$75K.

These farkers buy the loan for about half its face value, then tack their fees onto the front, so they get their profit and then some off the top before transferring your account to another agency, which tacks its fees to the front. Once you get caught up in this cycle, it's a biatch to settle things.

So if we apply Colbert's transitive property to this argument, ANY lawyer who has ever been more than 300k in debt for any specified period of time should be disbarred. Right?

bbickel: To those of you who believe he should be allowed to work so he can pay off his debts: If he'd been disbarred for embezzling funds from clients, would you argue that he should be allowed to practice law again because that would be the best way for him to earn enough money to repay his victims? Same principle, really.

You torched your staw man! Good work!

/six times the charm!

The_Gallant_Gallstone: Nutsac_Jim: You guys are making it sound like he is a deadbeat. The way the loans work is that you dont have to pay them back until you are done with your schooling.

Okay... he's not a deadbeat then, he's just a retard.

I can work with that.

He graduated law school 26 years ago and never paid his loans.

bbickel: To those of you who believe he should be allowed to work so he can pay off his debts: If he'd been disbarred for embezzling funds from clients, would you argue that he should be allowed to practice law again because that would be the best way for him to earn enough money to repay his victims? Same principle, really.

in this case, i cant see how it could hurt. you're saying he is a criminal because he was not able to repay his loans.

what I learned from this thread:

lawyers are really full of themselves

"Applicant has not made any substantial payments on the loans,"

so he has made smaller payments? substantial on a 400k loan is what? 10k? 20k?

RembrandtQEinstein: what I learned from this thread:

lawyers are really full of themselves

What else would you be full of? Since you have to be filled with something and you are yourself, I think that is the only way it would work. Right?

DamnYankees: It wouldn't be very hard for the bar to admit him saying his license is contingent on financial compliance with all loans.

Sure. Fix all your past loan issues, and you can be admitted to the bar.
But fix them first.

Don't worry Obama will bail him out and make the world right again.

FTA: Mr. Bowman concedes that he has never made a payment on his loans, partly because of medical and other deferrals and problems with his lender. But he says he intends to make good, adding that his only hope is to begin practicing law

So the guy admits he's NEVER paid a dime on his loans. In 26 years. I've got a hefty debt with Sallie Mae myself, but I've found them incredibly reasonable to deal with over the years; in the past, when my first round of student loans came due, I was in fact able to make token payments of $20-50 a month when I wasn't able to pay more. Normally they don't care how much you pay, as long as you keep in touch and try to pay something.

While it's entirely possible there was some error in transferring his private loans over to Sallie Mae, that hardly excuses him from not paying all this time.

Memo to self - never hire DamnYankees as a lawyer. Even if it's just for a parking ticket.

vroomazoom: RembrandtQEinstein: what I learned from this thread:

lawyers are really full of themselves

What else would you be full of? Since you have to be filled with something and you are yourself, I think that is the only way it would work. Right?

You should ask your mom... I'm sure she has some alternative theories.

RembrandtQEinstein: what I learned from this thread:

lawyers are really full of themselves

are you kidding? we're in the service industry, paid by the hour.

discussing holding our ranks to a certain ethical standard doesn't make us full of ourselves. read the rules of professional conduct, i think you'd agree with them.

budsterr: Don't worry Obama will bail him out and make the world right again.

i don't think that's grounded in history or reason.

/don't worry, someone will think you're clever

budsterr: Don't worry Obama will bail him out and make the world right again.

i think you're clever.

DamnYankees: kronicfeld: In 26 years he couldn't have bagged groceries or dug a ditch to make payments?

Again - so what? This is stupid moralizing on the part of the Bar.

No, it's not. The fact that he has a massive amount of personal debt means he has a massive incentive for him to steal from his clients. Stealing from clients (whether by embezzlement or by billing for work not performed) happens to be the most common reason that attorneys get permanently disbarred.

Add to that the fact that he has no regard for his own contractual relationships, and you get a guy who has no business being in any sort of fiduciary relationship where he is given charge of a client's funds.

If you ask me, this policy is not only a sound one, but it also prevents clients from being adversely affected.

Plus the dude took 4 tries to pass the bar exam. He's MINIMALLY competent on his very BEST day, which was probably the day he took the MBE the one time he actually passed it.