Lawyers, Fees And The Concept Of Time Costing

[sedna]

It does, and its partly because of my responses. I forget how I come across when I'm not thinking about the ptsd part of why we're here. Ive done that before on a different thread. I totally own the instigating aspect of how I get with various topics. It serves me in other areas of my life, but it doesn't really belong here.
Thank you for pointing that out, shimmerz.

 

[Sideways]

Just to clarify - insurance actually covers a very large proportion of legal fees. Lots of people and businesses have insurance that will pay their legal costs. Lots and lots and lots.

It's interesting to me, having worked for community legal centres (ie free legal help) - they all have to dedicate a tonne of resources into sifting through applications for advice to seperate thosethat the centre can assist and have merit, from those that the centre can't actually assist or don't have merit. That process takes up a lot of resources (ie money) when people see the opportunity to get even a small amount of legal advice for free. It's actually an incredibly expensive process.

In some areas of law, like personal injuries, it's super easy to get a free initial consult. But I don't think that system would work in a lot of areas of law.

 

[sedna]

Just to clarify - insurance actually covers a very large proportion of legal fees. Lots of peop...

Ragdoll, Im needing to just drop the thread here, but its hard for me walk away from this area for reasons I wont disclose and dont really matter --
So, I cant help blurting out that....

Insurance companies usually send out their own attorneys, its not like you pick an attorney and submit the bill to your insurance agency. The same way they make you take your car to one of the mechanics on their list when it gets hit by someone, they have approved attorneys, and attorneys that work for their company directly. Legal aid for many reasons is a whole other process in giving assessments for people. The concept of having " A lawyer " and the many levels and status elements to both the law and the attorneys is what I was trying to separate to show why my original comment about assessment fees was valid.

What you described being an involved process was evaluations and directions for filings and dealing with ,motions and filings. Thats not the same as a short consultation.

The area of law in question and resources available determine how you should approach it and how you should be approached by an attorney you are considering hiring. There are many different levels of playing fields in this particular game.

Good for you for doing legal aid volunteer work!! I always love to see that. Its such a scary thing for people to get involved in when they feel victimized. People always think its going to be like on TV. :(

 

[Sighs]

@shimmerz - its not a trigger - I don't have PTSD. Its just been a source of irritation for 17 years. People seem to think that if they call "just to ask a quick question" they shouldn't have to pay. If they "just want to make preliminary enquiries" they shouldn't have to pay. If "the property didn't even sell" or "the Council didn't approve the subdivision" or "I didn't end up with any money because the defendant declared bankruptcy" or "I didn't get to see my kids any more" they shouldn't have to pay. Buddy - if I did the work you have to pay. I'm not a charity. I've got bills to pay myself. So, for me, its personal because I personally deal with this attitude on a regular basis.

then tells you what he thinks your options are

This IS in fact giving you legal advice. If I were to completely miss an option, that would be professional negligence. And whether you've paid me or not you'd probably be able to sue me for it. If it weren't legal advice you wouldn't need to see a lawyer to get it. You could get it from your grocer, or your hairdresser or your personal trainer.

What you described being an involved process was evaluations and directions for filings and dealing with ,motions and filings

Nope. That is not what @ragdoll was talking about. She was talking about simply determining whether the person seeking free legal assistance had a valid case and could be legally helped. (Or in your terminology - an assessment.)

I guess the other factor that irritates the hell out of me (not triggers me - just normal human irritation) is when someone purports to know better than I do about my own field. I admit I know very little about most of the world. But I do know how to practice law. And, again, its an attitude I deal with on a regular basis. Often my clients want to argue about my advice because their brother, or grocer, or hairdresser or personal trainer told them something different. So fine - get them to run your matter. What I would I know? I only spent 4 years getting a law degree, then another 2 doing articles of clerkship, then have practiced for another 15 years. But yeah - you should totally go with that unqualified inexperienced anecdotal advice.

Obviously @coco9 and I disagree here. Her experience leads her to think one way and mine the other. And clearly we're both stubborn about letting it go. @coco9 I sincerely apologise if I have upset you. My intention was not to increase stress in anyone's life - just to genuinely understand why people think they should get the initial advice free. I think I can see where you are coming from. I don't agree with you necessarily but I see where you are coming from.

 

[mamachick]

There are firms out there that will give away lots of consult time in hopes of being the firm representing a large business that will be biling hourly in the future.
You call and explain that you were in an auto accident and it was the others fault, or slip and fall, or wrongly terminated, or medical malpractice, and the lawyer will get enough information over the phone to set up a consult and have a contract for you to sign where they will receive a third plus expenses because it is a slam dunk case. Others they will have to confirm your story before proposing, and if high risk, will want cash up front. It is a mutural interview.

What I am saying, it they will not charge for consult if they want your case and are marketing their practice/firm.
Divorce case-usually much different and charge for consult and want big retainer to start, even if the other parnter has large assets unavailable to client. That is very sad that the party with the assets will get the better attorney and better divorce settlement often. It really depends on the type of legal work.

There are other professions that DO give free consult. REaltors will appraise your home for free or find you housing when only benefit from a fraction of their efforts often (depending on area) Even hairstylist will meet for few minutes to tell you how they would approach meeting your desires with their skills. Insurance companies will take a lot of information and give you a quote for free, as will anyone bidding on home repairs, (roofing, painting, remodels, builders). Same as car sales. Most are working on a commission, but so is the attorney, in reality, that settles and accident. In these situations, the client may never work again and get 200K and the attornery 100k. That is outragous. How long can one survive on 200 k and no work.

Medical professions are like comparing apples and oranges. They dont know whats wrong until expensive testing.

Not all lawyers are making a fortune, but an accident which will settle for 100 k and they get a thrid plus all expenses back want this case and will do free consult.

 

[sedna]

@shimmerz - its not a trigger - I don't have PTSD. Its just been a source of irritati...

Sighs,

You haven't upset me, and there's no need to apologize.

I think I understand where you're coming from a little better now. I can see why that would be a source of aggravation for you when you have client situations that you've just described. The context of my original comment seems to keep getting generalized over the entire legal field for you somehow though, I'm not sure how that is happening.

The experience I have is not the entire source of my information, it's only a portion of it. I have regular involvement in court cases and an entire range of attorneys I have to communicate with regularly, this has been part of my life for twenty years. I communicate on a regular basis with attorneys both in a functional and on a personal basis. The areas of law I'm most familiar with are business and real estate law, and family courts.

I'm not sure why you keep giving references regarding your opinion citing careers and areas of law - that don't apply to the advice I gave the original person that asked. When did I say all attorneys should give free consultations over every legal matter possible? I didn't . I made it clear in what circumstance that would be expected, and a bad sign if the attorney didnt approach you that way.

It's in simple terms why an attorney would be speaking to someone without charging for a brief overview, and what exactly takes it out of the category of free legal advice. It would certainly not be possible to sue an attorney over his opinion, when it is given as an opinion and not as professional advice, then followed with suggesting the person consult more attorneys before making decisions. That is a release of liability, and it's how the 30 minutes serves the attorney as well as the client.

I am sorry I got on your nerves to that degree, I know that I can get a little obnoxious. Lets just agree to disagree and let it go if that's alright with you.

I can relate to people always wanting to get something out of you for free because they don't like the expenses involved in your business, I've had to deal with peoples attitudes about that in different ways in various lines of work. I was also on the totally screwed end of the unfair divorce attorney situation, I appreciate your general compassion over that. Not many attorneys will admit that it works that way. Even the well established hotshots I know personally here, won't admit that's the real issue when a client gets shafted. So seriously, I appreciate your integrity on that. :tup:

 

[Sighs]

I should leave this alone. But I've had a bad day. I will probably regret this post tomorrow after a good night's sleep but - sigh - here goes:

t would certainly not be possible to sue an attorney over his opinion, when it is given as an opinion and not as professional advice

Yup. That's exactly why this whole thing gets up my nose.

I do not understand your distinction between a lawyer's opinion and his/her professional advice. All advice is an opinion. Until a judge actually decides the case everything the lawyers tell you is just their opinion.

And in my professional opinion if you see a lawyer to find out what your legal options are (regardless of whether you have paid for the time or not) and he or she leaves one out (eg: they tell you about your common law rights but leave out your statutory rights) then I believe that you could sue them for negligence. But I used the word "probably" in my post because I am professionally cautious. But you - with no law degree but hell you've been around attorneys for years so I guess that is close enough - feel confident enough to say that it "would certainly not be possible". Awesome. I wish I had the confidence to tell you how to engineer buildings or bridges or whatever it is that you do.

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

I'm done with this thread. I'm sorry I asked the question in the first place.

 

[sedna]

I should leave this alone. But I've had a bad day. I will probably regret this post tomorrow after a go...

The distinction between an opinion and professional advice is one is free and the other is paid for as services rendered.

The opinion is giving someone your opinion of what their legal options are and include suggesting getting other opinions.

If someone goes to court, to sue an attorney for a bad result from acting on one option in his opinion, without hiring that attorney or getting any other legal advice from another source after it was suggested he do so, then he will not win. Note here, not there, not globally.

It's kind of obvious you need to feel like you have the last word, so I didn't want to let you have it. Mainly because your reply involved an irrelevant argument again.

 

[shimmerz]

its not a trigger - I don't have PTSD.

Everyone triggers over certain things, not just people with PTSD.

 

[Thematrix]

I am trying to understand this thread..the poster is an attorney that does not have PTSD, but helps people with PTSD pro bono. We are on a PTSD forum and the question is why do people not want to pay for other legal services?

Ask them?

 

[sedna]

I am trying to understand this thread..the poster is an attorney that does not have PTSD, but helps p...

Thematrix,

The thread is something that digressed into a back and forth conflict about whether a half hour consultation for certain issues,
is appropriate to provide free of charge by the attorney.

There was no argument about people not wanting to pay for legal services or thinking attorneys should work pro bono.

It just became incredibly difficult to clarify that repeatedly when it was ignored.

I don't know why someone without ptsd would be a member unless they were a supporter of a person with ptsd.

This thread become a small conflict between two people that work in the law field, its really not a topic of interest to anyone.

Sorry it confused you, lots of better and informative threads around!

 

[mamachick]

@Coco-I agree to disagree with you on this statement you made, but will explain:

Thematrix,
This thread become a small conflict between two people that work in the law field, its really not a topic of interest to anyone.
Sorry it confused you, lots of better and informative threads around!

Evidently, a new thread was started because of posts in another thread, and so I understand why you would think this and say this. However, (just a guess) but it seems that those with ptsd have legal needs more frequently than the average person, I know I sure have, and for various reasons-not being in trouble. We are not always thinking clearly and quickly but read information on here. We have the choice to take your advice or leave it, accept your opinion or deny it. I realize it is just an opinion, but much legal advice is just an opinion. I am grateful for those with knowledge who share. I have read posts stating many professions, but never read a post from someone who identified themselves as an attorney. I can understand sighs irritation with the subject in one way, as I have been defensive of criticisms of my profession when they seem unreasonable.

Many healthy people would say, you must be really co dependent to have degree's and/or experience and work for peanuts or for free. I can see that to be true, and before having ptsd was still a care taker and did just this. That is who I am and ok with that.

@Sighs-I was not aware that you did not have ptsd or are a supporter. I knew nothing about your history and still do not other than what is posted here and that you are an attorney. I DO think your time is very valuable and understand why you disagree about others seeking free legal services. I do think there are area's of law that paying for a consult are not customary. Accidents are one area. I was involved in an accident and it was on survailance camera. Everything I claimed was true. I had a friends husband come to my house and get me to sign contract. He made 120K 3 yrs later when we settled, and that was after expenses. I was injured and could not have paid up front.

Try to find a divorce attorney to do this, (at least where I live). I met with one for about $250 and hour for the initial consultation and she wanted a $5000 retainer and would not take it from husbands pension or other assets. It had to be upfront. I am not saying this is wrong or right. Personally, I am afraid that an attorney that would not want consult fee or big retainer might not have much business. (This area of law). I could not afford to be on stinky end of divorce since husband can afford the best.

I have contacted other attorneys for other area's of law, such as small claims. They can tell you its not worth their time in 2 minutes, or the cons of the case.

Once I had to do a protective order and my accident attorney did not do these kind of cases and referred me to someone who did. He charged me $1000 and the domestic violence coalition paid 500 and the other 500 came out of my settlement a year later. I was grateful for his generosity toward me, but he did not want to push when it came down to it and said he would do it for free if I would agree to something that was wrong. Unfortunately, I would not agree.

Even when attorneys take your case and you sign an agreement for contingency or pay up front, if they are an addict and abandon your case and miss the statute or something of that nature, and the Bar Association finds them in violation of ethics, you do not have a snowballs chance in hell of winning a legal malpractice lawsuit that would compare with damages. Some professions seem to be innately immune to malpractice, unlike physicians. I am not putting attorneys down in general, but some are not all that great. They do not need to have brains like Drs. do. They are not all that smart. They also do not all make 6 figures. So my experience is-BEWARE, be selective if the issue is important to you. Their opinion, if representation is agreed in contract, is not much more valuable than a free or paid consultation.

Another issue is this, if you live in a small town as I do, and if you are married to another attorney or someone with some power, you are not going to get a fair deal most likely. Many listen for free consults because they are nosey. That said, I have also had an attorney help me with a small claims case and after settling (less than damages but fair enough) to pay him what I could afford and felt was fair. I believe in passing it forward. His help even helped me to restore some faith in humans. It was restored faith that allowed me to get out of the house and volunteer by feeding the homeless one night per week at a cold weather shelter. So a person never knows the impact they can have.

I just don"t see the problem here. Where I live, many do pro bono, some free consults but seems to depend on type of law. If I want a will done, or real estate deed for mortgage- I don"t expect a free consultation. Most secretaries can give you an idea about the flat fee or price range. Then there is a gray area such as custody where an hourly rate may apply with a retainer, but many attorneys will meet for a short time and give you and idea if you have a chance based on circumstances. Again, if you live in a small town, Beware not to be given bogus advice.