Lawyers letting go of expensive leases

November 19, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

According to one company, lawyers are wanting out of their car leases more frequently than they were just two years ago.

LeaseTrader.com says lawyers who utilize their service are second in the number of vehicle leases up for trade than other professions. In 2008, 26 percent of lawyers got out of their expensive car leases; in 2010, the number jumped to 51 percent.

To be included in the report, a driver had to have a car valued at $40,000 or more in the LeaseTrader.com marketplace to escape the lease contract. The website allows people to take over leases or get out of their current lease.

Who’s trying to get out of their expensive leases most often? Doctors. Of the five professions listed, insurance brokers are doing the best – only 17 percent of people in that industry want out of their leases.

What I find most interesting about this snippet of data is that women are wanting out of their leases less frequently than men. Sixty-five percent of attorneys who wanted to give up their BMW or Mercedes leases were men; only 35 percent were women. Across the board in all the professions listed, women were far less likely to want out of their lease. The exception is Realtors, where it’s nearly a 50/50 split between males and females.

Why could this be? LeaseTrader.com hypothesizes it’s because women in general aren’t feeling the pain as much as men seem to be in this current economic climate. A possibility, but I’d offer a guess that it has to do with the number of female attorneys who would be able to afford a lease of $40,000 or more. The number of female partners is low. I glanced at the websites of two Indianapolis-based firms with locations around the state, country, and/or world. Less than 20 percent of partners are women.

Women are also more likely than men to work reduced hours or part time, making them less able to afford a higher-priced lease. Perhaps it’s just that women are more likely to buy their expensive car instead of leasing it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  2. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

  3. This outbreak illustrates the absurdity of the extreme positions taken by today's liberalism, specifically individualism and the modern cult of endless personal "freedom." Ebola reminds us that at some point the person's own "freedom" to do this and that comes into contact with the needs of the common good and "freedom" must be curtailed. This is not rocket science, except, today there is nonstop propaganda elevating individual preferences over the common good, so some pundits have a hard time fathoming the obvious necessity of quarantine in some situations....or even NATIONAL BORDERS...propagandists have also amazingly used this as another chance to accuse Western nations of "racism" which is preposterous and offensive. So one the one hand the idolatry of individualism has to stop and on the other hand facts people don't like that intersect with race-- remain facts nonetheless. People who respond to facts over propaganda do better in the long run. We call it Truth. Sometimes it seems hard to find.

  4. It would be hard not to feel the Kramers' anguish. But Catholic Charities, by definition, performed due diligence and held to the statutory standard of care. No good can come from punishing them for doing their duty. Should Indiana wish to change its laws regarding adoption agreements and or putative fathers, the place for that is the legislature and can only apply to future cases. We do not apply new laws to past actions, as the Kramers seem intent on doing, to no helpful end.

  5. I am saddened to hear about the loss of Zeff Weiss. He was an outstanding member of the Indianapolis legal community. My thoughts are with his family.

ADVERTISEMENT