Law That You Can Afford : Self-Help Law, Limited Legal Services : MyLawyer.com : Law That You Can Afford

A new site called LawBidding.com was recently launched by Nick Cronin, CEO. The site enables potential clients to submit a description of their legal problem in a post,  and have law firms submit legal fee proposals to serve them.

This kind of reverse bidding process has been tried before in the legal industry during the early days of the Internet without success. [ See LegalConnection ]. But times have changed since 2000. The idea of providing "unbundled legal services" to clients for a fixed fee is more accepted now than it was ten years ago, and the current recession is forcing more solos and small law firms, as well as large law firms to become creative about their pricing structure. Its about time lawyers started thinking differently about pricing. Pricing every transaction by the hour doesn't make any sense. If a carpenter can give you a fixed price for a custom wall unit, a lawyer should be able to estimate a fixed price for standardized transactions where the costs are easily estimated and known. Not all transactions will lend itself to this approach. LawBidding.com also provides for fees based on hourly rates, so this could create a market for hourly rates for certain kinds of transactions. The analysis becomes more difficult when the matter is very complex requires a lawyer with very specialized knowledge or skill.

This concept has also been tried in the United Kingdom:

http://www.ask-solicitors.com/ Bid for Solicitors ; and http://www.takelegaladvice.com

And in Canada: http://www.dynamiclawyers.com/

This is an advertising driven web site, so its feasibility depends on traffic to the site which should grow as consumers and lawyers become more aware of it. Traffic could grow quickly which would attract advertisers.

I could see this idea being picked up by other law sites that already have traffic such as AVVO and Lawyers.com. But I right now LawBidding.com has a head start and we wish Nick good luck with his project.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Last week, in a New York Times Opinion article, entitled, A Nation of Do-It-Yourself Lawyers, Chief Justice John T. Broderick, Jr. of New Hampshire and Chief Justice Ronald M. George of California endorsed the concept of the legal profession offering "unbundled legal services" to the broad middle class. Recognizing that there is a large "justice gap" with the number of self-represented parties increasing monthly in the nation's court systems, the Justices called for the legal profession to provide limited legal services as a way of getting at least some representation to unrepresented parties.

They write, " Forty-one states, including California and New Hampshire, have adopted a model rule drafted by the American Bar Association, or similar provisions, which allow lawyers to unbundle their services and take only part of a case, a cost-saving practice known as “limited-scope representation” that, with proper ethical safeguards, is responsive to new realities."

State courts are facing severe budgetary cuts in staff and resources. The current recession has increased the level of disputes landing in those same court systems while at the same time stripping the ability of citizens to pay full service legal fees. Current circumstances make it  even more urgent that the legal profession provide innovative approaches to closing the gap between those who need access to the legal system but who cannot pay full service legal fees.

If citizens cannot access the legal system because they cannot afford it, our legal system will exist only for the "rich", resulting in further stratification of American society. As the Justices write:
"If we are to maintain public trust and confidence in the courts, we must keep faith with our founding principles and our core belief in equal justice under the law."

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There has been some recent blog comments [See: Carolyn Elefant 's Blog  [about  the meaning of Robert Capps article  in this month's WIRED Magazine, (September 2009) about the concept of "Good Enough",  "Good Enough" solutions, (when cheap and simple is just fine). , and my quote about how this concept applies to the legal profession.

When I was interviewed for the Wired Article, I didn't know the focus of the article, and I was simply reporting my experience in offering limited legal services to consumers for a fee they can afford. I wasn't saying at all that lawyer's should do less competent or less excellent work. Rather I was thinking about how legal transactional events between consumer and lawyer can be restructured to get to the "good enough result" that many consumers seem to want.

My best example is one that I participate in daily, and which I mentioned in previous blog post. Divorcing couples opt for a quick settlement, even if they don't get "every right" they are entitled to in the interest of reducing their legal fees and getting on with their lives.

Divorce lawyers can charge from $5,000 - $10,000 (low-end of fee schedule) for even a relatively simple divorce. case. The lawyers will say there are no simple divorce cases. But that is from the the viewpoint of the lawyer. From the consumer point of view, they have a choice to spend $5,000 for each counsel who is representing either party- or to take the money and use it to get on with their lives. The question is--  what is the ROI from the consumer's point of view?  Sometimes the investment of $5,000.00 in legal fees is worth it. ($5,000.00 is really a low end estimate). Consumers don't think so, or there would not be thousands of pro se litigants representing themselves in family court. Pro Se Representation is a good example of a restructuring of the lawyer/client relationship to get a "good enough result." The success of LegalZoom -  admittedly a service which is a very small step above a bare legal forms service is more evidence of consumer preferences.

So is the movement towards "limited legal services." Lawyers, mostly solos and small law firms, that think that otherwise and think that full service representation is the only way to go are not facing consumer reality. These lawyers are living in a dream world.

Consumers want solutions to their legal problems. If they can get legal solutions in a different form than a traditional legal service from an attorney that is "good enough" at much less cost, they will turn away from the legal profession and seek those alternatives if they get a result that satisfies their expectations. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 I am offering an on-line course on "unbundling legal services" with a particular focus on how to offer limited legal services over the Internet.  "Limited legal services" is another name for "unbundled legal services."The course begins the week of June 1, 2009 and there will be 7 sessions over a 12 week period. By the end of the course participants will have developed a design for an "unbundled legal service" that can be integrated with their traditional law practice. Topics include: how to "unbundle" legal services by task or by issue; how to create and price an on-line service; marketing of on-line "unbundled legal services"; and ethical and regulatory requirements for offering "unbundled legal services."

For a detailed syllabus go to: Solo Practice University

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This blog is published by RIchard S. Granat, a member of the Maryland and the District of Columbia Bar, CEO/Founder, of MyLawyer.com, Inc., a company and web site that is devoted to providing consumers accessible and affordable legal services.

This blog is addressed to consumers who are seeking alternatives to expensive legal services and to solos and small law firms that want to connect with these consumers by offering affordable legal services over the Internet.

Developments that we monitor include:

• The trend towards limited legal services and pro se (self-help) representation, particularly limited legal services over the Internet;

• new web sites that offer affordable legal services over the Internet and the technologies that support these web sites;

• non-lawyer web sites that offer legal information, legal documents, and self-help tools that enable consumers to represent themselves;

• efforts by the organized bar to support or constrain the delivery of legal services over the Internet;
   
• efforts in other countries particularly the United Kingdom and Ireland to de-regulate the legal profession in the interest of providing greater access to the legal system.

We believe that the legal services delivery system will be impacted by rapid change caused primarily by the expansion of access to the Internet. We plan to report on these changes and the implications for both lawyers and consumers. We invite comment on both our reports and our opinions.

In the interest of full disclosure, we should mention that Richard Granat is also President of DirectLaw, Inc., a legal information and legal software company that provides a turnkey solution to law firms who want to deliver automated legal forms and legal services to their clients over the Internet. The MyLawyer.com web site is designed to generate prospects for law firms in the DirectLaw network.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link