- December 03, 2011 - 10:18
One reason that dropping the fee doesn't quite cut it is that then the cost of the fund has fallen the customers that had land transactions since 2005 and not for those in the future that could have claims. Not that this should counter the argument for a revision of the fee system. How do we know that all lawyers who collected the fee have paid into the fund after all it was set up because of lawyer improper actions. I would suggest that the proper way to deal with this would be to determine a period after which claims would be no longer be valid and if a claim has not been made, to return the money to the customers. This is the way that insurance, which is what they claimed it was, normally works. Although this I believe would have to be enacted by the Provincial Government and with their inability to find a reason to open the House I would guest that this would be low on their list of priorities.