Princess Art Auction Lawsuit

[Tom O.]

I don't know if someone has posted this yet - the Cruise Critic search engine is down - so I will post it and take my chances.

 

This article is actually about a lawyer who regulary sues Princess, but at the end of the article he actually has some good things to say about Princess. There are details of an interesting story about an alleged case of fraud concerning an art auction. Very interesting reading.

 

Here is the link to the story:

http://www.presstelegram.com/ci_8895450?source=rss

[chasetf]

It is not just the oil prices driving prices up. :mad:

 

This guy is a good example why Lawyer jokes are so popular. :rolleyes:

[SingerEsq]

It is not just the oil prices driving prices up. :mad:

 

This guy is a good example why Lawyer jokes are so popular. :rolleyes:

 

Interesting ... he represents people that have been defrauded, he represents people that have been injured, Princess's attorneys do not seem to suggest that the claims are frivolous and/or that he is a disreputable attorney. He generally has good comments to say about Princess ... and he's the bad guy. Everyone hates attorneys ... until they need one. :)

[Traveling Bob]

Thanks for the link Tom. Interesting story.

[bdjam]

I would imagine that Mr. Sacks’ business would be just as lucrative if he had an office in Anaheim or in Las Vegas and waited for people to “trip and fall” at theme parks or on the Strip. Except for the art-auction case, he’s obviously an ambulance chaser.

[bhopal21]

This story has been posted several times over the years; but maybe is finally settled.

 

I have purchased art at the auctions before; but NEVER by a living artist.

 

There are many stories today of artists whose whole family is involved in the prostituion of their paintings, so be careful.

 

Mike:)

[Colo Cruiser]

Thanks Tom. :)

[Julia’s Journey’s]

I find it funny that he would comment about the cruise lines when he has never cruised and doesn't intend too:D :rolleyes:

[iancal]

I really do not understand how this could happen. My understanding was that the art, for the most part, was original work and was sold for well below wholsale. Glad I did not make that so called 'investment'. Thanks Princess.

[taxatty]

$71,600 for art on a cruise ship? Come on. I spent $1300 and I thought I was crazy.

 

The reason this lawyer is filing so many cases against Princess is that (1) he's located in the right area to file them; (2) he knows how to go after Princess; and (3) he has obviously developed a reputation of success in getting decent settlements. Bdjam--that doesn't make the guy an ambulance chaser--just someone in the right place at the right time who performs a service that people want. If you slipped on a wet spot in the Horizon Court that a Princess employee hadn't cleaned up 20 minutes after having knowledge of it and broke your leg or hip (which I'm guessing may very well be what a lot of Sacks' cases are like) you may feel differently.

 

Les

[Toto2Kansas]

I really do not understand how this could happen. My understanding was that the art, for the most part, was original work and was sold for well below wholsale. Glad I did not make that so called 'investment'. Thanks Princess.

 

Lots of reports on TV, such as Dateline, news show report and others have run stories on the art auctions at sea. They have purchased art and then had it appraised, from what I have seen, usually the appraisers laugh when they see it.

The art auctions are ridiculous, but there is a sucker born every minute. IMHO of coarse!

[chasetf]

Interesting ... he represents people that have been defrauded, he represents people that have been injured, Princess's attorneys do not seem to suggest that the claims are frivolous and/or that he is a disreputable attorney. He generally has good comments to say about Princess ... and he's the bad guy. Everyone hates attorneys ... until they need one. :)

No... we hate ambulance chasers. He also chased the Star and Crown "ambulances". It has nothing to do with representing the little guy.... it has all to do with how much he can hold up the cruise line for. What is a "trip" in the hallway worth these days....5 grand :confused: :( 10 grand :mad:

 

He seems to be the type of lawyer that makes everyone a victim. Those people that bought the 70K painting were happy until they found out someone bought their own original for 20K less. Just a case of Buyer's Remorse and Buyer Beware.

[Times Prince]

Interesting story. The people who bought the art could have returned it and gotten their money back. That's the Princess Art guarantee, and they stand by it. Every penny of the picture price you paid, but no more (e.g if you bought a limited edition Martiros for $2400 that now is selling for $3600, you would get the $2400 back, but not the auctioneer's commission).

 

So considering lawyer's fees they must have sued for a LOT more than the $70K, just to break even.

[custompcsys]

Interesting ... he represents people that have been defrauded, he represents people that have been injured, Princess's attorneys do not seem to suggest that the claims are frivolous and/or that he is a disreputable attorney. He generally has good comments to say about Princess ... and he's the bad guy. Everyone hates attorneys ... until they need one. :)

 

Let me start out by saying my father was an attorney, my brother is an attorney, and his DD, my neice, was just accepted into law school. I agree there are times when attorneys do provide a valuable service to their clients, helping them navigate what at times are very complicated issues and honestly representing their interests. There are also times, however, when its all about making a quick buck. Personal injury law is all about that - attorneys know that 95% of those cases never go to trial, because defendants realize its more economical to settle for $10,000 or $15,000 than to defend the suit. The majority of the actual legal work for these cases is handled by paralegals and secretaries so the firm can maximize their profits, as their time is less valuable than an associate or partner, and the PI firm needs to handle these cases in volume to make money. The guy in this article is obviously one of those type of lawyers. You and I pay the price for his livelihood in our cruise fares, higher medical costs, and higher prices in every store we go into. What we need is to pass serious tort law reform legislation - but that will never happen, since the majority of our state and federal legislators are lawyers.

 

Laugh if you will, but the next time you make a final payment on your cruise, remember that you just gave a few bucks to Howard Sachs :)

[Coral]

Thanks for posting the article! I found it interesting that Princess has art VIPS that they allow to sail for free. I guess I expected this for gamblers but was surprised at this.

[SingerEsq]

Let me start out by saying my father was an attorney, my brother is an attorney, and his DD, my neice, was just accepted into law school. I agree there are times when attorneys do provide a valuable service to their clients, helping them navigate what at times are very complicated issues and honestly representing their interests. There are also times, however, when its all about making a quick buck. Personal injury law is all about that - attorneys know that 95% of those cases never go to trial, because defendants realize its more economical to settle for $10,000 or $15,000 than to defend the suit. The majority of the actual legal work for these cases is handled by paralegals and secretaries so the firm can maximize their profits, as their time is less valuable than an associate or partner, and the PI firm needs to handle these cases in volume to make money. The guy in this article is obviously one of those type of lawyers. You and I pay the price for his livelihood in our cruise fares, higher medical costs, and higher prices in every store we go into. What we need is to pass serious tort law reform legislation - but that will never happen, since the majority of our state and federal legislators are lawyers.

 

Laugh if you will, but the next time you make a final payment on your cruise, remember that you just gave a few bucks to Howard Sachs :)

 

I don't disagree with you and I am in favor of tort reform. Moreover, I am a business attorney, not a PI attorney, so I understand the cost to everyone for the nefarious attorneys out there. However, the point I was trying to make is that the article does not delve into the nature of the injuries of the people who were allegedly injured. So you cannot assume Mr. Sachs is "obviously," as you say, an ambulance chaser. And, while I agree that the "art auctions" on board are for the gullible (IMO), if people are told they are getting a one of a kind and it's not, that's a problem for Princess.

 

In addition, the attorney quoted from Princess made no mention that the lawsuits were frivolous and made no derogatory reference to Mr. Sachs.

 

And, I don't think Mr. Sachs' lawsuit for the art fraud has anything to do with the inflated prices Princess is able to command for the so-called "art" on board (for which Princess receives a commission).

[blindrid]

And, while I agree that the "art auctions" on board are for the gullible (IMO), if people are told they are getting a one of a kind and it's not, that's a problem for Princess . . . . . .

 

And, I don't think Mr. Sachs' lawsuit for the art fraud has anything to do with the inflated prices Princess is able to command for the so-called "art" on board (for which Princess receives a commission).

 

I agree. As with anything, it is buyer beware and have always treated any art purchases as a personal decision and certainly not an investment. I saw some art I liked a few weeks ago but would never consider purchasing art items on a cruise, unless I like it and the price is low.

 

As to the people paying over $70K for art and then finding a similar piece: I deal with some artists that routinely do something similar and do consider if their hand did the work it is an original. I know it's semantics but really think the lawsuit in this case was a bit frivolous but that is the nature of the beast these days. I wonder how much of this was buyers remorse?

[custompcsys]

I don't disagree with you and I am in favor of tort reform. Moreover, I am a business attorney, not a PI attorney, so I understand the cost to everyone for the nefarious attorneys out there. However, the point I was trying to make is that the article does not delve into the nature of the injuries of the people who were allegedly injured. So you cannot assume Mr. Sachs is "obviously," as you say, an ambulance chaser. And, while I agree that the "art auctions" on board are for the gullible (IMO), if people are told they are getting a one of a kind and it's not, that's a problem for Princess.

 

In addition, the attorney quoted from Princess made no mention that the lawsuits were frivolous and made no derogatory reference to Mr. Sachs.

 

And, I don't think Mr. Sachs' lawsuit for the art fraud has anything to do with the inflated prices Princess is able to command for the so-called "art" on board (for which Princess receives a commission).

 

My assumption was based on the statement in the article that Mr. Sachs has filed "thousands" of suits against Princess and basically makes his livelihood from them. This just smacks of a maritime PI mill to me. Do the people injured in the Crown "Tilt" incident deserve compensation? Absolutely - no doubt of the cause of action or actual damages. Does every slip-and-fall deserve compensation? Some do, but not all, and unfortunately in today's environment its more cost effective to pay than fight, even if they don't have merit. PI attorneys know this and take advantage. It doesn't surprise me that the Princess attorneys have nothing bad to say about Mr Sachs publicly - that is acting responsibly and professionally and in the best interest of their company, regardless of what they may think or say behind closed doors.

 

Fortunately none of my family does PI work either, or I would have to smack them :) I only hope that California has a good, strong frivilous claims statute! :)

[nancy315]

I am a little bit puzzled by this statement:

 

Then there were 150 people injured - and one killed - on a Crown Princess cruise in July 2006 when the ship violently tilted, apparently due to a helmsman error. Sacks represents 10 of the plaintiffs.

 

I never read anywhere that someone was killed in this incident. Is that true?

[Atomica]

I am a little bit puzzled by this statement:

 

Then there were 150 people injured - and one killed - on a Crown Princess cruise in July 2006 when the ship violently tilted, apparently due to a helmsman error. Sacks represents 10 of the plaintiffs.

 

I never read anywhere that someone was killed in this incident. Is that true?

 

I know there was a gentleman who unfortunately suffered a heart attack and died as a result of the Star Princess fire, but this is the first time I've heard of someone who died in the Crown tilt.

 

A quick Google search brought up multiple articles, none of which said anything about a death.

[Colo Cruiser]

I find it funny that he would comment about the cruise lines when he has never cruised and doesn't intend too:D :rolleyes:

 

 

Why should he?? :rolleyes:

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[woodofpine]

A law school professor very aptly explained the tort liability system as, "The rules wherein society allocates the economic burden of risk and injury."

 

That's it. Business aren't good guys and victims bad, or vice-versa.

 

Injury attorneys seek compensation for the injured often against commercial entities that will gladly take one's money but won't significantly compensate someone injured during that process.

 

Americans are loath to allow government to take a role in their affairs ('Don't tread on me!'), we don't historically support government standardized compensation or welfare systems, and we cherish the freedom represented by 'his day in court'. The US economy has proven historically that this has been pretty darned good for business too. After all, when its me vs. big business, who's got the bigger hammer?

 

You don't hear Princess whinning. They're making $$ hand over fist peddling 'art' (after paying the periodic settlement). When someone is physically injured on ship, it occurs during the process of vacuming out the injured's wallet. It's a cost of doing business, and a profitable business it is.

 

That's the way it is. The lawyer bashing about companies rolling over and writing checks to whomever makes a claim is a hoot. That's exactly what insurers want you to believe. Business gives away nothing. The truth is, in the garden variety auto accident case (for instance) the following economics apply:

 

Company and PI attorney both know that the plaintiff injury = $25-50K and that defendant-insured is liable.

Company and PI attorney both know it will cost the PI attorney $25,000 minimum - almost certainly more - to try the case (with 1/3 atty fee).

Company and PI attorney both know that maximum attorney return is $10-15K (at $30-45K verdict) and thus injured (PI) can't afford to try case.

Company knows that injured must settle for $15-20K very early in suit to effect prompt recovery and avoid dismal litigation economics of trial.

Company very predictably pays 50% of economic loss incurred and insured.

 

The insurance industry takes part of the gain and applies it to convincing the public that all claimants are malingerers and that IT is a victim (boo hoo), instead of the reality that for every infrequent questionable verdict touted (reversed on appeal - SHHH!) there are 50,000 of foregoing 'realities' buttering the bottom line day in day out.

 

Another Example: Medical Malpractice (Doctors NEVER make mistakes!) Med Mal insurance premiums pretty much by definition cover the total of the following: the insurer's defense costs (as an expense), its payouts to plaintiffs (as an expense; PI atty get 30-40% of this subcomponent), oh yah and its profit on the policy.

 

Medical malpractice premiums make up about 1% of the US health care system. So the argument that this componant is a 'crisis' that affects your personal health care costs is true... to the extent of 1%. Would it be a major savings to deny all victims incl. botched surguries ('we were supposed to aputate the LEFT leg?') all recovery in order to save the industry 1%?

 

Best way to stop a physician med mal conversation in its tracks: When a physician exclaims that he pays $40 or $50K (or whatever) a year for med mal insurance, ask him what percent that is of his personal income? (Its rarely more than about 7%) :D

 

Back to Princess: It sounds to me like they're pleased to have such a practical minded PI guy as the adversary. Anyone that feels that they are severely hurting on account of injury claims: help them out, buy some art!

[hillslife]

We were on the Crown 'tilt' cruise and yes, hundreds of people were injured - many very minor - but still added up into the count. It was a very scarey event and there were many people with panic and anxiety attacks. I am a nurse and worked in the Medical Center on the ship after the event and have first hand knowledge of this.

 

I have never heard of any 'deaths' related to this event. There were a couple people that were seriously injured, but with that statement about a death, it makes me wonder about the validity of the rest of the so called 'accusations' the article mentions.

[Nancyquilts]

Thanks for posting the article! I found it interesting that Princess has art VIPS that they allow to sail for free. I guess I expected this for gamblers but was surprised at this.

It's not just Princess. There was a thread on the HAL board some time ago about the art auctioneers taking over the Crows Nest Bar for almost the whole cruise for their VIPs to use. No one else was allowed in, I read. I never mind groups using facilities for cocktail parties, etc., for a limited period of time, but using the best (IMHO) public room for almost the whole cruise is way too much.:eek: Nancy

[smoosh21]

It's not just Princess. There was a thread on the HAL board some time ago about the art auctioneers taking over the Crows Nest Bar for almost the whole cruise for their VIPs to use. No one else was allowed in, I read. I never mind groups using facilities for cocktail parties, etc., for a limited period of time, but using the best (IMHO) public room for almost the whole cruise is way too much.:eek: Nancy

 

Wow, no wonder they keep pushing the auctions. I would love to get my hands on some ledger books to see how much is made from the art sales. I wonder if any of it is listed in the 10k and 10q.

 

Anyway, we have bought some small things at the auctions, but only because it was something we actually liked and were willing to pay the price. We were under no illusions that we were getting some sort of bargain or obtaining some sort of valuable collectors item.

 

But I love how the auctioneers love to point out the people who actually are buying all the art. There were two groups of buyers on our last Royal Caribbean cruise who each spent over $25,000. One woman bought over 25 different pieces. I don't even know where someone could put all that art, except in storage.