OUR BLOGS

We're tough. When you call, a live person takes your call. There are no prompts to wade through. Most of the time you talk with an attorney on your first call. You have questions, but before we can answer your questions, free of charge and without obligation, we need to gather facts. We're experienced. We know what questions to ask and which answers lead most often to a successful outcome. We cut to the chase. In a free, no obligation telephone call, we cannot allow a caller to tell us their story from the beginning. We cannot allow a caller to tell us what he or she feels is important. We've tried cases from start to finish. We've won and we've lost. When you call and reach an attorney, expect to be grilled. Expect to answer the questions we ask; not the ones you want us to ask. This gets us in trouble once in a while. We recently were handed a poor review by a caller whom we upset upon grilling her with the tough questions we needed to insist she answer. She grew upset with us and hung up. We later heard from her by way of an unfavorable review. Hindsight teaches us not to pander to what our clients may want to tell us, but to better explain why we insist on straight answers only to the questions we ask. The question most have difficulty with when relating problems they have concerning the Lemon Law is, "What is the most substantial problem you are having today?" Most callers stumble, as they feel the need to tell us how they've taken their car for service endless times and what they experienced as they went through the process. We need a specific and pointed description of the most substantial current problem to answer the legal question for us, "Is your car right now, today, substantially impaired in use, value, or safety?" If we don't have a car presently substantially impaired, then the odds are we're looking at a losing case - one for which neither a judge nor jury may feel a sense of injustice. We want to be up front with you from the start. We don't want to tell you what a great case you have and how well we can do for you only to later tell you how your case collapsed and you should settle it. The most common call we get from clients who filed their cases with other lawyers is they find themselves in a position their current lawyer is telling him or her to settle their case, as it's a weak case, not likely to prevail after trial. This is a business model some law firms churning lots of cases follow. Everything up front sounds great. Services may be "free." But when it comes time to go to trial, the law firm suddenly counsels you to settle your case. Sometimes the pressure is intimidating. We try hard to avoid telling you your case is a good one if, right from the start, we are able to determine it's fraught with problems. Clients don't like being told they made tactical errors or misjudgments in handling their case early on. Clients try to shade the facts to present a good case. We take the position give us the facts and get good advice. Give us bad facts and get bad advice. We also tell our callers, tell us the truth, and get our opinion. If you don't like our advice, call another lawyer and tell him what you want to him or her to know, and get the legal advice you want to hear. Then, decide which lawyer you want to go with. Anyway, be prepared to be grilled and given straight tough talk. We don't lie to a client. We don't over-assess or inflate a caller's case to earn their business. My most recent caller complains he relied upon his bank when crediting him with a deposit but taking it back a week or more later when the bank learned the cashier's check was fraudulent. Our caller was unhappy learning federal law places most of the onus on the account holder; not on the bank for detecting a fraudulent cashier's check. Federal regulations place the burden on collecting the money from the criminal; not the bank. As a result of an initial phone call, our caller thought he was better served by an attorney who told him he had a strong case. The point is, he was unhappy with us for our opinion. Understand when you call, you will get the cold hard truth, provided you give us the cold hard truth. If you don't like it, find another lawyer who listens to what you want to relate and who tells you what you want to hear. We try to provide excellence. We demand excellence. Sometimes, we offend. We apologize and probably could do better with a more compassionate bedside manner. Problem is, we choose to take every call and don't put a clock on those first free telephone consultations. It costs us dearly in time and now, even a dissatisfied caller.