Quote from: JoelKatz on November 07, 2012, 12:47:35 AM

Quote from: Zeeks on November 06, 2012, 11:22:09 PM

That appears to be more like someone asking pertinent questions before handing over their money than part of the contract between them. That he lied or misled in his answers knowingly or unknowingly would put him more in the wrong.

There's no evidence he lied or mislead. In fact, he explained the factual basis for his incorrect conclusion and those he spoke to drew the same incorrect conclusion from the same facts.

Patrick didn't say, "trust me that X" or "I have secret knowledge that X". He said, "Because of facts A, B, and C, I conclude X". The facts A, B, and C were true. However, the conclusion X did not follow from them. If Patrick is responsible for the damages this mistake caused, so are the other parties who made the very same mistake and made the very same damages occur, drawing the same incorrect conclusion from the same correct facts.

Both parties had facts A, B, and C. Those facts were correct.
Both parties concluded X from A, B, and C. X was incorrect and did not follow from A, B, and C.
Both parties acted on X, jointly causing a loss.
Thus both parties are responsible for the loss and should share it.

He's the one left at fault without the money he owes though because he was the one taking money and trusting in those things so that he would be able to pay back what he agreed to. Therefore he's the one holding the bag, the one at fault. He willingly opened himself up to this position by partaking in these agreements and being the one taking the money which he agreed to return with interest.

The other people made a mistake but he's the one who made the mistake which caused him to apparently lose a bunch of money he soon owed back to the people who left it with him. That other people may have made the same mistake with the same data he had doesn't change that at all or make it any more ok that he can no longer pay back the money he now owes. He then did some sort of renegotiation of the terms for repayment without any actual negotiation with the people he owed money to.

You are saying that people made a mistake, the same mistake he made. That seems to be true, yes and I don't think anyone disputes that. However, he is the one who owes money and is in default over it, unable to pay it back as he agreed to.