Hacker News Reader

Comment by abvaw | Hacker News Reader

Contracts signed by mentally incompetent people are generally invalid. So this article isn't about that. Therefore, when the article says the courts accept the contracts as valid they can't be talking about the contracts signed by the infirm, but the article conflates both things maliciously.

View on HN

I would suggest that you read the ProPublica article that is the source of the claim, which details a years-long legal battle that then ensued, before you continue.

It's not as cut and dry as you would like it to be. The following is literally about a "contract signed by the infirm":

>After David learned of the contract, he explained to Evans that his mother had dementia and tried to cancel the sale. Instead of walking away, Evans dug in, recording a notice on the property’s title that essentially prevented a sale to anyone else, which forced the Casanova family into a years-long battle to keep the home. Along the way, Evans disputed that Casanova showed signs of impairment during their interactions.

Convenient link to the original:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35901056

Not disputing this is fucked up shit, but it's unfortunate there's not a super clear explanation of where the legal system is failing here.

In general, it seems like a huge problem that people who probably are not capable of signing contracts can in fact sign them and have no real recourse for dealing with it. Seems like a good spot for a safety net.

There is a very long history of courts having people declared mentally incompetent to enable all sorts of abuse. Being cautious in cases like this is entirely reasonable, even when it's painful.

Sure, but I'm wondering if we can come up with a way to solve this problem.

Which part did abvaw not understand?

These scams prey upon seniors who are legally able to enter contracts but do not have the mental state to know what they are doing. Many of them are too scared or embarrassed to get help afterward as they fear they’ll be a bother or have what’s left taken away.

The lesson here is to marry someone much younger so you have someone to take care of you in your twilight years. Also good to have lots of kids and raise them right. Statistically at least one of them will be able to take care of you.

That's what makes this so brilliant, isn't it?

The buyer has the signature on paper and can proceed with taking the house.

The person who just sold their house _could_ contest it in court... except that they're not mentally competent so by definition they won't be able to mount a defense (i.e., realize that they just got scammed, hire a lawyer, put together a strategy, etc, etc). Brilliant!

If the elderly, mentally incompetent person has _someone_else_ in their life who notices this early and jumps in to clock a lot of hours to stop this from happening, then sure - everything will be fine.

If not, well, the bad guys win.

The linked examples literally contain cases where the signer had diagnosed dementia or was tricked in an extremely dubious way (e.g “oh this is the exact same contract as last time just sign it”). And the contracts were upheld.

Idk if it warrants a story beyond “existing laws not being upheld in some cases”, meaning I don’t know how much these cases apply to the whole market or most courts, but it looks like there are a fair number of seriously messed up contract scams getting through in this industry.

How anyone these days can have any faith in the legal system and not see the ways the courts favor money over justice is beyond me.

> Contracts signed by mentally incompetent people are generally invalid.

Yes, that's why the houses are considered stolen.

The buyers do not approach those who have been legally deemed incompetent. As you say, such a sale would not be valid. But then again, can the isolated mentally incompetent even bring such cases to court? Vulnerable people who break a hip and can't afford surgery also don't deserve to lose their homes, especially not at a fraction of market value. There are clear gaps in the system which these buyers are exploiting and which you are repeatedly and willfully excusing. There's a chapter in the Bible about this type of behavior involving whips, overturned tables and an angry Jesus.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com