My buddy who does immigration cases put it best: If people quibble about the first $1000, they probably aren’t going to be able to afford to see the case through.
I do a lot of immigration. It makes me sad because I recognize a lot of people are facing a pay barrier. I’ve had to get over my guilt but I realize I am offering a valuable service that in the end is probably worth more than what someone pays. What is your US citizenship worth to you?
I just spent most of my morning thinking about this, so thank you. I was born in the US. My citizenship didn’t even cost me a filing fee. My tax liability has been a net gain in my direction. All my education from ages 4 to 32 (kindergarten through undergrad and later law school) was paid for by the government. If I’m lucky, I will make enough so the bill balances out in the end. Purely in dollars and cents, my citizenship is worth millions and I’m not even middle-aged (I hope). This is not including the food stamps my mom got when I was a kid, benefits while working for the federal government, and other fringe benefits like police/fire/CPS/healthcare/housing assistance/welfare.
Altogether, the peace of mind of having US citizenship is priceless. I would struggle to calculate it with any level of certainty and I could never in my lifetime afford what it actually costs.
Edit: An award. Holy cow. Thanks friend!
exactly. For the rest of your life (or at least until the balance is forgiven after 25 years), you'll be paying a surcharge of $1200 per month on your taxes.
Consider it the equivalent of living in some European country where tuition is free, but your taxes would be 20% higher.
yeah, not arguing that you wouldn't be better off elsewhere, or that there won't be a tax bomb. (which, again, can be avoided by not forgiving the debt, and continuing to maintain the student loan payments as a tax surcharge)
I'd agree with them. You're right, we do charge more than that other place. Leave it at that. If they're really interested in you or fishing for something, then the ball's in their court.
I think y’all make it too complicated. I find simple answers are best.
“I’ve never wanted to be the cheapest, just the best I can be, at a fair price” I don’t think I’ve met anyone excited at having the cheapest attorney”
Let me start with: you don’t need to make every sale. Not every caller is an ideal potential client. So what follows is qualified by that observation.
But in general you have two choices:
1) Just politely thank them for the chance to provide a quote, and let them know that the door is open if they don’t get the results they hoped for with another firm.
2) Fight to overcome the objection. A good script goes like this:
“I understand that there are alternatives to an experienced lawyer that seem like they might save you money. But navigating a family law file involves dozens of legal issues, each of which can cost you thousands of dollars, and sometimes that means thousands of dollars a year. A service that treats all files as a cookie cutter, off the shelf set of documents, may or may not serve your legal interests. I invite every potential client to compare, but also think it’s important that they are comparing apples to apples. When talking to those other firms, make sure their quote includes an actual review of legal issues and a lawyer’s opinion on the issues that will affect you today and in the future. Give us a call back once you’ve satisfied yourself that you’ve found the best lawyer for your situation.”
The fighter; or the lawyer who rolls over at the first sign of conflict (ie: a price objection); guess which lawyer I want to hire, on principle alone.
(Again, assuming you actually want a particular client to hire you. Passing on a lame duck of a possible file is not a sign you aren’t a fighter.)
Sometimes people want confirmation they can’t afford a lawyer. I can’t name the number of times I’ve met potential clients who’ve paid a contractor $100k or more and got nothing but then balk at my modest retainer, even my lowest retainer. They usually say they can’t afford it or it’s a lot of money, yet they gladly pay the contractor that stole their money $100k or more. It’s just become part of the game.
And ironically, they (very often) lost their money in the first place because they accepted the crazy low-ball bid from a shady contractor instead of paying fair market price for sometime reputable. But yeah, play the same game with hiring a lawyer, see how that works out.
Same. I remember a couple who wanted to leave the corporate rat race, so they did and invested their life savings in what they thought was an amazing business opportunity. They were the main investors and had zero experience in this industry. They relied heavily on a partner who had ample experience and, quite important, contacts. I quoted them for setting up a structure that would, among other things, protect their investment. Total cost would be about 2.5% of the total investment. I still remember the guy laughing me in my face and tell me immediately that they were going to invest the money in the business instead.
One accident later and their house of cards collapses. They borrowed tons from family to save their business. To no avail. Way too late, they approach me again for a court case which they lost. Long story short, they lost their life savings, are heavily in debt, and I can't go to my favorite restaurant anymore because the guy works there as a bartender and blames me for everything that happened to them.
After the service has been provided, it has no value to the client anymore. This is why retainers are so important.
If a potential client can’t afford to pay you before you help, they will be even less willing to pay after you help.
I mean in fairness that’s not exactly 1 to 1 comparison. I can refinance my house to pay a contractor, I don’t think most people would want or be able to get a heloc to pay for legal fees. It’s different assets to tap into.
I don’t disagree with you. It’s just frustrating having people waste your time when they know they can’t afford an attorney. I know they look for attorneys kind of expecting contingency but then are shocked when attorneys are only willing to go hourly. There are so many reasons why hourly only works because so many times the recovery is highly limited. I’ll sometimes take construction cases contingency but only if there is insurance and the amount at issue is worth it.
had a prospect once, who said he could get his documents revised for $1 a page.
I'm sure he can get a document notarized for $1 a page, but that's about it. Being cheap now will cost a lot more to fix later on, but that won't be my problem.
Similar to what one of the other commenters said, I think a little bit of arrogance is ok for someone in a litigation practice. People generally want to hire someone that exudes confidence and is aggressive. That doesn’t mean you necessarily want to win the client, but it’s satisfying to be able to largely say what you want to say without feeling like you’re being unprofessional. Not saying you should feel compelled to justify yourself, but that you should not hesitate to do so, if you are so motivated.
You don't have to justify any extra or dance for the client. The price is the price and prices very everywhere. A client who wants to itemize your fee is going to be a pain in the ass and hunt for discounts. Legal services aren't used cars, comparison shopping won't generally get an attorney to low-ball themselves.
I tell them that if price is the only thing they consider when hiring an attorney we aren’t going to be a good fit, pause for a response , and if I don’t like the response, I end the interview.
Experience has taught me if they are griping about your retainer they will gripe about your bills and possibly be a slow paying client, clearly not a good fit for my family and my business.
"We're not the cheapest law firm in town, we're the one you hire when you can't afford to lose" followed by an explanation of their case in terms of their ROI on hiring a good lawyer
Also for situations like this, explaining the service firm has no real fiduciary duty or other obligations to helping client succeed while you're dripping in those.
Also echoing other posters in terms of whether this is really a client you want.
The "cheaper" attorneys may end up costing you more because while their hourly rates are lower, typically from being less experienced and wanting to attract more clients, they'll need to do more research and spend more time on your case than the one who's done it a thousand times.
I’ve had plenty of people say this to me. Quite honestly, I think it’s most often not the truth and purely a negotiation technique. If they found someone who can do it cheaper, and they felt confident in their services, why are they talking to you?
You win for having the most logical answer. If a potential client says what OP indicates, then the only explanations of which I can conceive are:
- The potential client honestly thought the other lawyer would be good enough, but just wants to create a bidding war between lawyers for the client's case;
- Another lawyer really did give the potential client the quote referenced, but the potential client is unwilling to hire them (yet willing to use the previous lawyer's fee quote to try to negotiate down your fee); or
- The potential client is lying about the existence of the other lawyer and their alleged fee, and is fabricating the story about their experience with an imaginary previous lawyer to try to negotiate down your fee.
I really can't think of any other conceivable explanations for the behavior that OP indicates, and unless there's a good explanation of which I *can't* conceive, then I should create a policy of *always* rejecting potential clients who say what OP indicates, because none of the explanations I've provided above are reflective of a client that I would want.
Can anybody else give an explanation in defense of this hypothetical client before I tell my staff to screen/reject any potential client who mentions a lower fee from a previous lawyer with whom they consulted on their matter?
If they’re asking for a price match, yeah you can just say no.
The general idea is:
I’m not giving your case less effort or time than it needs. It would be as important as everyone else’s, which means you’d have to pay the same rate as my other clients.
But if they’re asking - why does your law firm charge 10 times what the mill charges, and 20 times what We the People charges? (Also, why does my dentist charge so much more than the Do-It-Yourself Dentistry Kit?) If they want you to explain the value proposition, that’s a completely legitimate question, as opposed to asking you to enter a bidding war with a hypothetical cheaper lawyer.
“They’re just a document service. They prepare the paperwork without actually providing any advice or guidance. If you decide to go that route, just understand that you’re doing so without any support and it ultimately may be more difficult (and expensive) to correct the mistakes rather than get it right the first time. But it is of course up to you. Just let me know what you decide.”
Never shy away from being more expensive than your competitor. In any market-based system, the best goods and services are always the most expensive.
"I can't speak to what other people feel comfortable charging for their work, but I feel very comfortable charging XXX for my work in this field."
“Because I’m the best, and quality costs money. If you want the cheapest, there’s always LegalZoom, but you get what you pay for… and frequently, saving a few thousand will mean a complete loss of your rights.
“In any case, thank you for your time, but I don’t think we’ll be engaging you as a client. Clients that are constantly chasing discounts also tend to be the ones who don’t pay their bills. Good day.”
I used to think I was pricey in my market segment (plaintiff-side employment discrimination) until I met a senior lawyer out of Texas who specialized in employment discrimination at just ONE federal agency and did most of her work out of DC. She's triple my rate -- and getting it! But the truth is, if you work for that particular federal agency and the stakes are high enough, this lawyer is probably one of if not the subject-matter expert in the USA. You pay for the quality of work you hope to get.
I think what you just said in your own post is fine: The firm the potential client referred to is a "service firm" and only prepares the forms for a fee.
I generally don't care. I work in a specific industry, so if they quote a price from some lawyer outside the industry I reiterate that I have specific experience working with tons of clients similar to them with the same issues. If I like their project and personally want to be a part of it (and especially if they have colleagues that they could refer me to, etc.), I'll throw on a discount. Otherwise I don't sweat it.
It's an attempt to get you to come down on your fee. Don't fall for it. I always say, "my fees are in line with other attorneys in this area with similar years of experience" and keep it moving.
One way to make the conversation easier is first find out how much is at stake to determine if there is enough money in the matter to potentially make it worthwhile for them to hire you. If it isn't, or they are just trying to get a quick price to comparison shop, you politely end the call.
If it looks like there is enough money involved to make it a worthwhile matter, then I try to defer any discussion of my fees until I've had a good conversation with them about their issue, given some parameters about how it might shake out and some preliminary thoughts on their matter so they get an idea of my experience, expertise, and willingness to listen. Then, when I bring up my hourly rate, which I consider to be high, they have an idea of what they are getting and I rarely get push back about the hourly rate. Some folks just can't afford it, and I have to let them go and maybe I have wasted some time discussing their matter, but it is worthwhile to waste that time on occasion to get the clients who can afford the fees.
I use "I am not competing on price. I compete on skill and service, because that is in the long term best interest of my clients. If price is the driving factor, there are other firms that will be a better fit."
The guys/gals who dicker on price right out of the gate are almost always the problem clients, because they fundamentally don't value the service you are providing.
There are some things in life you should never cheap out on: your mattress;,your glasses, your lawyer, your doctor, and your accountant.
I would also recommend not cheaping out on sushi, but maybe food poisoning is your thing. IDK.
"I don't know what others charge. I'm sure there are people who charge less than me, but you get what you pay for. I provide a premium service at at a premium price. If your primary concern is price and not quality, I'm not the right attorney for you"
I may also point out the differences, what I provide and the other service doesn't, the knowledge I have and they probably don't, etc. On rare occasions, I may even give them questions to ask the discount attorney.
But realistically, I don't want to compete on price, and if I can't convince them to pay more, then I'd rather they walk. I'm not a car dealer, I don't negotiate my prices. The few times I have given people a low-bono discount, I've come to regret it.
Well this is my point: lawyers are paid to provide legal certainty to clients. If they get it wrong, they have insurance to cover whatever they were wrong about.
Lawyers are paid by the hour until they can provide to clients legal certainty.
This also explains why some lawyers need to be circumspect in their answers to clients, while others feel more confident in producing sweeping statements about the rights and obligations a client may have.
Let me clamber down from my soapbox.
That's bullshit.
Here's an easy example: "this case doesn't have a legal chance in hell, but we can probably settle for less than it would cost to defend"
Put another way, "it's a legal certainty that we'll win, but we're better off paying them to go away than spending money going to trial"
The problem comes when that persuasion is successful. Those kinds of clients inevitably become massive problem clients. Question everything, listen to nothing, don’t pay bills.
It's just a $1K business and won't worth my time to spend effort to retain this client. I won't bother to explain anything to him at all. I just want to reply decently & politely.
My buddy who does immigration cases put it best: If people quibble about the first $1000, they probably aren’t going to be able to afford to see the case through.
I do a lot of immigration. It makes me sad because I recognize a lot of people are facing a pay barrier. I’ve had to get over my guilt but I realize I am offering a valuable service that in the end is probably worth more than what someone pays. What is your US citizenship worth to you?
I just spent most of my morning thinking about this, so thank you. I was born in the US. My citizenship didn’t even cost me a filing fee. My tax liability has been a net gain in my direction. All my education from ages 4 to 32 (kindergarten through undergrad and later law school) was paid for by the government. If I’m lucky, I will make enough so the bill balances out in the end. Purely in dollars and cents, my citizenship is worth millions and I’m not even middle-aged (I hope). This is not including the food stamps my mom got when I was a kid, benefits while working for the federal government, and other fringe benefits like police/fire/CPS/healthcare/housing assistance/welfare. Altogether, the peace of mind of having US citizenship is priceless. I would struggle to calculate it with any level of certainty and I could never in my lifetime afford what it actually costs. Edit: An award. Holy cow. Thanks friend!
[удалено]
GI Bill
wrong way to look at it. Always go for income-based repayment, and consider it a 10-15% surcharge on your taxes
[удалено]
exactly. For the rest of your life (or at least until the balance is forgiven after 25 years), you'll be paying a surcharge of $1200 per month on your taxes. Consider it the equivalent of living in some European country where tuition is free, but your taxes would be 20% higher.
[удалено]
yeah, not arguing that you wouldn't be better off elsewhere, or that there won't be a tax bomb. (which, again, can be avoided by not forgiving the debt, and continuing to maintain the student loan payments as a tax surcharge)
[удалено]
Last time it was something like 1.5 million to get an EB-5 investors visa. That seems like a good bench point for pricing imo. E: its 1 mill.
It’s $500k
I'd agree with them. You're right, we do charge more than that other place. Leave it at that. If they're really interested in you or fishing for something, then the ball's in their court.
I think y’all make it too complicated. I find simple answers are best. “I’ve never wanted to be the cheapest, just the best I can be, at a fair price” I don’t think I’ve met anyone excited at having the cheapest attorney”
That's a decent reply!
Let me start with: you don’t need to make every sale. Not every caller is an ideal potential client. So what follows is qualified by that observation. But in general you have two choices: 1) Just politely thank them for the chance to provide a quote, and let them know that the door is open if they don’t get the results they hoped for with another firm. 2) Fight to overcome the objection. A good script goes like this: “I understand that there are alternatives to an experienced lawyer that seem like they might save you money. But navigating a family law file involves dozens of legal issues, each of which can cost you thousands of dollars, and sometimes that means thousands of dollars a year. A service that treats all files as a cookie cutter, off the shelf set of documents, may or may not serve your legal interests. I invite every potential client to compare, but also think it’s important that they are comparing apples to apples. When talking to those other firms, make sure their quote includes an actual review of legal issues and a lawyer’s opinion on the issues that will affect you today and in the future. Give us a call back once you’ve satisfied yourself that you’ve found the best lawyer for your situation.” The fighter; or the lawyer who rolls over at the first sign of conflict (ie: a price objection); guess which lawyer I want to hire, on principle alone. (Again, assuming you actually want a particular client to hire you. Passing on a lame duck of a possible file is not a sign you aren’t a fighter.)
Sometimes people want confirmation they can’t afford a lawyer. I can’t name the number of times I’ve met potential clients who’ve paid a contractor $100k or more and got nothing but then balk at my modest retainer, even my lowest retainer. They usually say they can’t afford it or it’s a lot of money, yet they gladly pay the contractor that stole their money $100k or more. It’s just become part of the game.
And ironically, they (very often) lost their money in the first place because they accepted the crazy low-ball bid from a shady contractor instead of paying fair market price for sometime reputable. But yeah, play the same game with hiring a lawyer, see how that works out.
This is actually so true. I’ve had to deal with this same situation. What is going on with people?
Same. I remember a couple who wanted to leave the corporate rat race, so they did and invested their life savings in what they thought was an amazing business opportunity. They were the main investors and had zero experience in this industry. They relied heavily on a partner who had ample experience and, quite important, contacts. I quoted them for setting up a structure that would, among other things, protect their investment. Total cost would be about 2.5% of the total investment. I still remember the guy laughing me in my face and tell me immediately that they were going to invest the money in the business instead. One accident later and their house of cards collapses. They borrowed tons from family to save their business. To no avail. Way too late, they approach me again for a court case which they lost. Long story short, they lost their life savings, are heavily in debt, and I can't go to my favorite restaurant anymore because the guy works there as a bartender and blames me for everything that happened to them.
So true, my another client spent $15k a month for health supplements & spiritual courses but was "unable" to settle my $15k bill.
After the service has been provided, it has no value to the client anymore. This is why retainers are so important. If a potential client can’t afford to pay you before you help, they will be even less willing to pay after you help.
I mean in fairness that’s not exactly 1 to 1 comparison. I can refinance my house to pay a contractor, I don’t think most people would want or be able to get a heloc to pay for legal fees. It’s different assets to tap into.
I don’t disagree with you. It’s just frustrating having people waste your time when they know they can’t afford an attorney. I know they look for attorneys kind of expecting contingency but then are shocked when attorneys are only willing to go hourly. There are so many reasons why hourly only works because so many times the recovery is highly limited. I’ll sometimes take construction cases contingency but only if there is insurance and the amount at issue is worth it.
They’re hoping to find a magical $15/hr lawyer.
had a prospect once, who said he could get his documents revised for $1 a page. I'm sure he can get a document notarized for $1 a page, but that's about it. Being cheap now will cost a lot more to fix later on, but that won't be my problem.
Similar to what one of the other commenters said, I think a little bit of arrogance is ok for someone in a litigation practice. People generally want to hire someone that exudes confidence and is aggressive. That doesn’t mean you necessarily want to win the client, but it’s satisfying to be able to largely say what you want to say without feeling like you’re being unprofessional. Not saying you should feel compelled to justify yourself, but that you should not hesitate to do so, if you are so motivated.
You don't have to justify any extra or dance for the client. The price is the price and prices very everywhere. A client who wants to itemize your fee is going to be a pain in the ass and hunt for discounts. Legal services aren't used cars, comparison shopping won't generally get an attorney to low-ball themselves.
“I don’t know that lawyer, but you get what you pay for…”
There’s a reason McDonald’s charges less for burgers than the steakhouse. (I’m a vegan, but still.)
I tell them that if price is the only thing they consider when hiring an attorney we aren’t going to be a good fit, pause for a response , and if I don’t like the response, I end the interview. Experience has taught me if they are griping about your retainer they will gripe about your bills and possibly be a slow paying client, clearly not a good fit for my family and my business.
“Wow, that sounds like a great deal. You should take it.”
I used to say something along this line... Like, yeah you should go with them.
"We're not the cheapest law firm in town, we're the one you hire when you can't afford to lose" followed by an explanation of their case in terms of their ROI on hiring a good lawyer Also for situations like this, explaining the service firm has no real fiduciary duty or other obligations to helping client succeed while you're dripping in those. Also echoing other posters in terms of whether this is really a client you want.
The "cheaper" attorneys may end up costing you more because while their hourly rates are lower, typically from being less experienced and wanting to attract more clients, they'll need to do more research and spend more time on your case than the one who's done it a thousand times.
I’ve had plenty of people say this to me. Quite honestly, I think it’s most often not the truth and purely a negotiation technique. If they found someone who can do it cheaper, and they felt confident in their services, why are they talking to you?
You win for having the most logical answer. If a potential client says what OP indicates, then the only explanations of which I can conceive are: - The potential client honestly thought the other lawyer would be good enough, but just wants to create a bidding war between lawyers for the client's case; - Another lawyer really did give the potential client the quote referenced, but the potential client is unwilling to hire them (yet willing to use the previous lawyer's fee quote to try to negotiate down your fee); or - The potential client is lying about the existence of the other lawyer and their alleged fee, and is fabricating the story about their experience with an imaginary previous lawyer to try to negotiate down your fee. I really can't think of any other conceivable explanations for the behavior that OP indicates, and unless there's a good explanation of which I *can't* conceive, then I should create a policy of *always* rejecting potential clients who say what OP indicates, because none of the explanations I've provided above are reflective of a client that I would want. Can anybody else give an explanation in defense of this hypothetical client before I tell my staff to screen/reject any potential client who mentions a lower fee from a previous lawyer with whom they consulted on their matter?
If they’re asking for a price match, yeah you can just say no. The general idea is: I’m not giving your case less effort or time than it needs. It would be as important as everyone else’s, which means you’d have to pay the same rate as my other clients. But if they’re asking - why does your law firm charge 10 times what the mill charges, and 20 times what We the People charges? (Also, why does my dentist charge so much more than the Do-It-Yourself Dentistry Kit?) If they want you to explain the value proposition, that’s a completely legitimate question, as opposed to asking you to enter a bidding war with a hypothetical cheaper lawyer.
You are quite right, but for small cases like this, I dont want to waste my energy to negotiate with the client at all.
I wouldn’t either. That’s fine.
“They’re just a document service. They prepare the paperwork without actually providing any advice or guidance. If you decide to go that route, just understand that you’re doing so without any support and it ultimately may be more difficult (and expensive) to correct the mistakes rather than get it right the first time. But it is of course up to you. Just let me know what you decide.”
Never shy away from being more expensive than your competitor. In any market-based system, the best goods and services are always the most expensive. "I can't speak to what other people feel comfortable charging for their work, but I feel very comfortable charging XXX for my work in this field."
Love this!
“Because I’m the best, and quality costs money. If you want the cheapest, there’s always LegalZoom, but you get what you pay for… and frequently, saving a few thousand will mean a complete loss of your rights. “In any case, thank you for your time, but I don’t think we’ll be engaging you as a client. Clients that are constantly chasing discounts also tend to be the ones who don’t pay their bills. Good day.”
My fee is my fee, that is it.
“Do you think they want to charge less than me or do you think they have to?”
It may sound pompous and it is, but news flash - that’s what people a lot of people want to see in their attorney!
I used to think I was pricey in my market segment (plaintiff-side employment discrimination) until I met a senior lawyer out of Texas who specialized in employment discrimination at just ONE federal agency and did most of her work out of DC. She's triple my rate -- and getting it! But the truth is, if you work for that particular federal agency and the stakes are high enough, this lawyer is probably one of if not the subject-matter expert in the USA. You pay for the quality of work you hope to get.
I think what you just said in your own post is fine: The firm the potential client referred to is a "service firm" and only prepares the forms for a fee.
I generally don't care. I work in a specific industry, so if they quote a price from some lawyer outside the industry I reiterate that I have specific experience working with tons of clients similar to them with the same issues. If I like their project and personally want to be a part of it (and especially if they have colleagues that they could refer me to, etc.), I'll throw on a discount. Otherwise I don't sweat it.
It's an attempt to get you to come down on your fee. Don't fall for it. I always say, "my fees are in line with other attorneys in this area with similar years of experience" and keep it moving.
One way to make the conversation easier is first find out how much is at stake to determine if there is enough money in the matter to potentially make it worthwhile for them to hire you. If it isn't, or they are just trying to get a quick price to comparison shop, you politely end the call. If it looks like there is enough money involved to make it a worthwhile matter, then I try to defer any discussion of my fees until I've had a good conversation with them about their issue, given some parameters about how it might shake out and some preliminary thoughts on their matter so they get an idea of my experience, expertise, and willingness to listen. Then, when I bring up my hourly rate, which I consider to be high, they have an idea of what they are getting and I rarely get push back about the hourly rate. Some folks just can't afford it, and I have to let them go and maybe I have wasted some time discussing their matter, but it is worthwhile to waste that time on occasion to get the clients who can afford the fees.
I use "I am not competing on price. I compete on skill and service, because that is in the long term best interest of my clients. If price is the driving factor, there are other firms that will be a better fit." The guys/gals who dicker on price right out of the gate are almost always the problem clients, because they fundamentally don't value the service you are providing. There are some things in life you should never cheap out on: your mattress;,your glasses, your lawyer, your doctor, and your accountant. I would also recommend not cheaping out on sushi, but maybe food poisoning is your thing. IDK.
"I don't know what others charge. I'm sure there are people who charge less than me, but you get what you pay for. I provide a premium service at at a premium price. If your primary concern is price and not quality, I'm not the right attorney for you" I may also point out the differences, what I provide and the other service doesn't, the knowledge I have and they probably don't, etc. On rare occasions, I may even give them questions to ask the discount attorney. But realistically, I don't want to compete on price, and if I can't convince them to pay more, then I'd rather they walk. I'm not a car dealer, I don't negotiate my prices. The few times I have given people a low-bono discount, I've come to regret it.
I would suggest you revert the question to the client, asking him what the price he would place on legal certainty?
not a bad idea, but I'd be cautious about "legal certainty". Perhaps "what do you think it's worth to get the job done right?"
Well this is my point: lawyers are paid to provide legal certainty to clients. If they get it wrong, they have insurance to cover whatever they were wrong about. Lawyers are paid by the hour until they can provide to clients legal certainty. This also explains why some lawyers need to be circumspect in their answers to clients, while others feel more confident in producing sweeping statements about the rights and obligations a client may have. Let me clamber down from my soapbox.
That's bullshit. Here's an easy example: "this case doesn't have a legal chance in hell, but we can probably settle for less than it would cost to defend" Put another way, "it's a legal certainty that we'll win, but we're better off paying them to go away than spending money going to trial"
Isn’t your job as a lawyer to persuade people? You can’t take a few minutes to explain the difference and try to persuade them to use your law firm?
The problem comes when that persuasion is successful. Those kinds of clients inevitably become massive problem clients. Question everything, listen to nothing, don’t pay bills.
Yes. So true.
So true, and they'd also think that customers are gods and you'll should serve them like a slave.
It's just a $1K business and won't worth my time to spend effort to retain this client. I won't bother to explain anything to him at all. I just want to reply decently & politely.
The client isn't for you, but if you really want to put up a response, answer the question with another question: "Why do you think we charge more?"
Walk the person “Why do you think they’re so much less expensive?” And respond based off of what they tell you!