Here is my question: I read where some companies are fined for whatever reason....falsifying documents, faulty assembly etc. Where do the monies go that the Feds or State collect from these companies? Let me be more specific: Let's say a company put out a product and the product was recalled causing potential harm to the consumer. That company was found guilty and fined millions. Where do the millions go? To the Feds, State or does any of it go back to the consumers who purchased the product? It seems to me I have never heard of these monies going to the consumers who spent their money on the products in question. Shouldn't the monies go to where the harm was or potentially could be....not the Feds or State. I am I wrong here?
2001 Chev. 3500 CC Duallie, D/A, 20.5 Pullrite Super 5th, Roll n Lock, StarBoards, Firestone Air Bags, TTT Mirrors, BrakeSmart.
2004 HitchHiker Discover America 33 1/2 CKQG, Disc Brakes, Mor/Ryde IS
Garmin Nuvi 350
If the monies collected were the result of a judgement in favor of the plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit (common with product defects, false advertising, investment accounting falsification, etc) the money goes to the plaintiffs' lawyers, and what's left over goes to the plaintiffs. Usually it doesn't amount to much on a per-person level. The total judgement may be many millions though.
Fines are a different matter. These are fees levied by the government for breaking certain rules. They are payable to whichever branch of the government issued the fine.
If breaking these rules resulted in 'damages' to any group of people, that group of people are free to sue the offender in a class-action lawsuit. They may win or they may not. Usually a law firm will not take the case unless they know they can win, as in most class-action lawsuits, attorney fees are not paid on retainer, only on judgement in favor of plaintiff.
The fines reported are normally fines and court costs combined
This includes the Judicial retirement fund, Actual money used to pay for operation of the court and the real fine.
The fine, Usually goes to the state, county, city or National general fund
However in some cases the law which was violated may set aside specific fines for specific programs. (This is fairly rare but becoming more popular)
A lawyer could give you more accurate information.
But that's where most of it goes
There may be other monies reported as "Fines" as well.. Example would be a headline something like "Wall-Mart fined 10,000,000 for labor violations"
Well, 5,000,000 of that may be paid to the victims of the violations, a million or two in court costs, a percentage for the judicial retirement fund, and the government gets perhaps 1 Million.
But to make it sound bigger, the reporter bundled ALL the money into the word "FINE"
Moral of this: Do not trust reporters.
Nothin adds excitment like something that is none of your business John is Near Kenwood TS-2000 housed in a 2005 Damon Intruder 377
I had a discussion about this with a judge when I was trapped with him on an elevator (had to make some sort of conversation). In my case, I wanted to know about "punitive" damages in a civil case. I can see how "compensatory" damages should go to the person who was wronged, but why should they also get the "punishment" $$$? He thought I had a good point, but that it was simply the way the laws were set up.
For example: Let's say someone runs over my flower garden while drunk and I sue them for damages. If I can show the person did $500 in damages to my garden, the person will have to pay me $500. Now I can (in some cases) also get "punitive" damages (to punish the drunk for being a drunk) of 3X my actual damages (i.e., $1500). I think that I should not be able to get that extra $1500 as my 'damage' was paid for by the first $500. That extra money is just "free money" and almost seems to to encourage me to file lots of lawsuits to see how much punitive money I can get. However, I feel the person should still be 'punished' for being a drunk and have to pay the extra $1500. That extra $1500 should just not go to me, but to some state fund or something.
Doug4.7 wrote: I had a discussion about this with a judge when I was trapped with him on an elevator (had to make some sort of conversation). In my case, I wanted to know about "punitive" damages in a civil case. I can see how "compensatory" damages should go to the person who was wronged, but why should they also get the "punishment" $$$? He thought I had a good point, but that it was simply the way the laws were set up.
Different court... FINES are levied in criminal court, though thanks to something called "De-criminalization" we now have civil Fines too
But in the case you cite, the jerk who tears up your lawn is not, at least not in the court you cite, fined. Rather he is ordered to pay you damages to make you whole. and perhaps then some. This is NOT a fine
Now, when he goes to criminal court to answer for driving drunk and tresspass... (Yes you can be charged twice for the same offense) THEN he will be ordered to pay a fine
But you don't see that money.. You only see "Damages"
Different pile of cash
And, by the way, you make a good suggestion.. When some Drunk damages your property (Or worse yet your life) SUE THE BOOZE OUT OF HIM.
Thanks for all your replies folks. I've learned something today. In the example of the 10,000,000 Walmart fine, can you explain how court cost could be 1-2 million? Maybe I am not getting this part but I thought the Proscuting attorneys representing the States, Feds or whatever as well as the judges were on the taxpayers payroll if they are the ones doing the fining? How could they ring up those kinds of numbers for court costs? That is a huge number. Just curious. Take care.
Offline
Online
