However, even if the defendants did not serve as the plaintiffs' attorneys, this does not exempt them from the general obligations that the law obligates them to perform. As the parties that drafted the agreements, they should have made sure to ensure full disclosure regarding the basic characteristics of the transaction at hand and its risks. In my opinion, they fulfilled this obligation.
A reviewer of the various agreements could have discovered that this was a dangerous deal. that it involves a complex cooperation with the adjacent lot, Lot 104; that it is subject to planning approvals; Because it does not include a commitment to the date when the project will be built. Because the number of housing units that will be built is also unknown, and there is a possibility that certain members of the group will be evicted, taking into account the feasibility of constructing the housing units for which they have entered into agreements. The agreements also included clear provisions according to which there is no validity to previous representations made along the way.
The argument that the plaintiffs did not have the opportunity to review these agreements, or that they were occult, should not be accepted. The risks of the transaction were reflected in the documents, most of which were short in length and clear in their content. In this regard, those who wish to join a purchasing group are also responsible. This is a very significant transaction in a person's life. He should take the time to review the agreements he signs. Understand what's on the agenda. This responsibility cannot be avoided on the grounds that the agreements were not read or that those who joined the group were satisfied with a quick examination of them.
- The state of affairs changes as we move on to the next stage, which is the stage of promoting the interest of the purchasing group after it has been established. Here, the defendants' attorneys served as the group's lawyers. They owed her a duty of trust to her friends. They served as their faithful . This responsibility is particularly heavy given the inherent power disparities between the group members on the one hand and the group organizers on the other.
These duties are cogent at their core. It is not possible to release any of these by contractual exemption clauses. The aforementioned cogent nucleus exists in any relationship between a lawyer and a client; And it is broader when there are purchasing groups on the agenda, which reflect the inferiority of their members vis-à-vis the centers of power that manage their affairs and their money, and given their inability to influence decision-making.