Not so quick, George.  I don't think a lot of the people you have called "dummies" or "idiots" are same people I referred to as working for free.  I was referring to people who set their fees so low that they can't be making a profit when you take into account the expenses of doing the work, the potential liability, and other things like health care and retirement planning. 

I don't know what the people you called "dummies" and "idiots" are charging, but you seem to think they are to blame because they aren't willing to sue non-paying clients.  I would disagree.  I have never sued a client for non-payment.  I don't seem to have as many problems getting paid as some, but I do understand that sometimes it just isn't worth the hassle.

I have been angry and I have called my attorney determined to sue - he usually explains to me that the cost of the suit will exceed what I am owed. And, even if I get the judgment, there is no guarantee I will be able to collect on it.  He's usually right.  Sometimes, its better just to cut off the deadbeat and move on.  If these people choose to handle their problems that way, and warn others on the forum to be wary of those companies who are not paying them, they should be commended - NOT berated.

If others decide not to post their experiences because YOU are going to insult them on a public forum, everyone loses. 

In some cases, the legal system may be a good option for collecting, but often times the amounts abstractors are owed just aren't worth the expense and effort of a lawsuit.  There are some cases where the balance due is high enough and it should be considered.  There are probably some cases where a company is just so egregious that they should probably be sued on principal.  But, in the end, those decisions are not yours to make - each abstractor must decide for themselves.  It is an exercise of business judgment and they don't' deserve to be called names because you don't agree with them.

Best,
Robert A. Franco
SOURCE OF TITLE