Free Consultations.....
When I started working at a law firm, I realized that some firms participate in providing free consultations and some firms do not. Before reading chapter 9 of Brian Tannebaum's book, I did not know how I felt about free consultations at the beginning of the legal process. I understood why firms implemented them, but I also noticed some disadvantages.
I started working at a firm as an intake coordinator and we participated in free consulations. I would listen to different people telling me all about, what they believed, was an amazing case that the attorneys I worked for had to hear. My job was to speak with the potential new client and summarize their potential claim for the attorneys to look over. As one of the attorneys I worked for said, "You are creating a story for us." After many hour long phone calls where I was told the same information three times or I was told who every person in the "story" was and how long the potential new client had known them, I learned that many of them just wanted to feel heard and understood.
Once I realized that they just wanted to feel like someone understood and cared about their situation, I learned what parts of the "story" were important for the attorneys while still making sure they felt heard and listened to. After speaking with a potential new client, I would mention that I had to type up everything they told me for the attorneys and I would always ask if I could call them back if I felt like something was missing or if I thought of another question the attorney might want to know. Every time I asked that question, they would repeatedly thank me and know that I genuinely did care about their situation.
Unfortunately, with free consultations, you also have the people calling who are just looking to file a lawsuit just to file one. I cannot count the number of times that I would summarize a potential "claim" and have the attorneys tell me that it was not a legal issue. I was not allowed to say that for obvious reasons, but due to the free consultations, I spent a lot of time summarizing those types of potential "claims."
I personally found it interesting how Tannebaum mentioned that he does his free "consultations" at the end of the legal process with a client or he would sometimes waive the consultation fee depending on the circumstances (like if the client came from a good referral source). I think this method of asking them at the end of the representation if there is anything else you can do for them speaks volumes. Instead of having a 30 minute or hour long conversation for free where the attorney knows nothing about you or your potential claim, having the free consultation at the end allows the attorney to show that they care about the client's life and connect more with their client which can lead to referral sources or repeat clients. This method would also cut down on the free consultations where people are lawyer shopping or want to file a suit just to file.
In the future, I am planning to implement Tannebaum's method of having the free consultation at the end of the representation. I think it is important that your clients know that you care about them and you are willing to help, even if you are no longer representing them.
I found this to be interesting as well in the readingm Jessica. Attorneys at my firm handle these all different ways. My current attorney as a shareholder has more flexibility and will often provide the consultation free at the outset to determine if there is a case, if the client is a good fit, etc. Other attorneys insist on 1.5 hourly fee paid up front, which often deters clients from coming in at all.
ReplyDeleteI've done it both ways. When I did trial court work, I charged a consultation fee. This was for two reasons.
ReplyDeleteFirst, consultations took up several hours of what would have been otherwise billable time each week. I soon realized that merely by charging for consultations, I could bring in enough revenue to nearly pay my legal secretary's salary. So I could spend time with potential clients and charge them enough to defray staff costs. Or I could do them for free and work into evenings and weekends, away from my family, to do the billable work for existing clients that didn't get done because I was tied up in free consultations.
Second, as I developed a reputation for solid legal work, there were people who didn't want to see me on the other side of their case. So they would schedule a consultation with me for the sole purpose of creating conflict that prevented their spouse from hiring me. They already knew who they were going to hire, and it wasn't me. These people were known in our local legal community as "shoppers." In some cases, I suspect the lawyer they planned to hire put them up to conflicting me out of the case.
Nearly all the in-demand family law attorneys faced the problem of "shoppers" trying to conflict them out of representing the other side in a divorce case. Most of us decided to start charging a consultation fee to discourage this type of behavior.
Jessica,
ReplyDeleteI would think free consultations can indeed be a double-edged sword in legal practice. I also though it interesting how Tannebaum's approach shifts the consultation to the end of the legal process to seemingly foster stronger client relationships and reduce time spent on non-viable cases. This method seemed pretty smart - not only demonstrates genuine care for the client's overall well-being, but also strategically targeting clients who are more likely to provide referrals or return for future services. Seems your experience as an intake coordinator gave you solid insights from which to speak on this - thanks for sharing.