It has been over 5 months since my last post, and it's the same sad story. In
nearly two years, only 3 clients have retained me. The fees on those 3 cases come
no where close to the amount I have already paid out, plus I am paying about $500 per
month because I did not have the $11,000 or so to pay up front.
I do not know if I agree that Legal Match has a good marketing strategy on behalf of
attorney clients. Most of these people expect to retainers in the neighborhood of
$300.00 (Initial court cost exceed that), if they are not expecting free services.
I feel my fees are very reasonable, yet everyone I speak to from LM acts like I gave
them a terminal illness when I ask for a retainer of $1,500 to $2,500.
I may call them on their 6 months free deal because there is no way I will earn
$11,000 in fees at this rate, but I do not plan on renewing at all if it will cost me.
On 10/20/07, Jeff Minde wrote:
> On 5/11/07, Rob wrote:
>>>> LegalMatch is the worst investment I have ever made. <<<
>
> I too have had a very disappointing experience with LegalMatch. Their marketing
> and support service seems to be competent, and I've followed all their suggestions
> for writing good introductory templates. I've also been creative with the
> templates. Nothing seems to work in attracting more clients.
>
> In 11 months, only one client has retained me, paying me only a modest retainer.
> At $1000 a month for services, LegalMatch has been a huge loss to my small firm, a
> real waste of resources.
>
> The problem is not the LegalMatch concept itself, but rather the types of clients
> and cases it attracts. There are plenty of cases listed---at times five or six a
> day---but for the most part, I find that all the clients have very unrealistic
> expectations regarding the cost or the function of legal services. Often they do
> not grasp why something cannot be resolved with just a single phone call or
> a "lawyer's letter," and they refuse to invest time, money and effort in their own
> case, even where it might concern child custody, for example.
>
> I've reduced my hourly for LegalMatch clients and offered extensive free
> consultations, but this has not attracted clients.
>
> Many has been the time a request for a nominal $1000 Retainer for a matter
> requiring Court appearances has been dismissed with a snort; supposed would-be
> Clients solicit advice so that they can represent themselves; "I have no money"
> and "I need pro bono" are frequent remarks I hear or read; and 80-90&37; of the
> Client-written case descriptions are barely comprehensible.
>
> "Cherry picking" cases on LegalMatch is not a strategy, it is a necessity. Very,
> very few of the listings represent truly viable cases. In almost a year I've
> contacted about 100 people, and spoken to about 60 (the rest never responded).
>
> LegalMatch seems to be a gathering place for a woefully uneducated and very low-
> income clientele. Most are seeking free legal services or legal aid. Very few seem
> to understand the nature of their legal problems. I pride myself in being able to
> explain complex issues in basic terms, but LegalMatch clients are among the most
> difficult I've worked with.
>
> Since these clients have failed to do anything about their cases over long periods
> of time, their legal position is always VERY weak. And as is always the case, the
> weakest cases are always the most expensive to manage. These cases simply AREN'T
> WORTH IT to the lawyer in terms of time versus compensation.
>
> LegalMatch's service is a good idea in theory, but the company really needs to do
> several things:
>
> (1) Explain to the public WHAT LAWYERS DO.
>
> (2) Give the public an idea of WHAT LAWYERS WILL CHARGE and what COSTS are.
>
> (3) Make VERY clear to the public that it is not a pro bono or legal aid portal.
>
> (4) Give the subscribing lawyers a REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY to recoup their
> investment by setting some GUIDELINES regarding the types of cases LegalMatch will
> list.
>
> Right now, it's a garbage dump, and an expensive one, at that.
>
>
> On 5/12/07, Rob wrote:
>> They threatened to sue "me" - i.e. legalmatch because they googled pro bono
>> lawyer and Legal Match was the first listing. There is apparently an option on
>> Legal Match for a free lawyer so when I told the client I was not legal aide,
>> thry were very upset. I was only able to calm her down when I gae her the
>> number to the actual legal aide office.
>>
>> A lot of people I talk to think LM is a legal aide service.
>>
>> On 5/11/07, Kung Fu wrote:
>>> When the client threatened you, what did you tell them? What ultimately
>>> happened with that?
>>>
>>> You seem to have some exposure to the bottom of the barrel. Can you share
>>> some of your experiences with that class and that kind of work?
>>>
>>> On 5/11/07, Rob wrote:
>>>> LegalMatch is the worst investment I have ever made. Google pro bono
>>>> lawyer or free lawyer and see who comes up near the top of the list (if not
>>>> the first paid ad).
>>>>
>>>> In almost 18 months, only 4 clients retained me. The rest I spoke to
>>>> thought I was legal aid. One threatened me with a lawsuit for "false
>>>> advertisement."
>>>>
>>>> A waste of valuable resources.
>>>>
>>>> On 5/04/07, Get Serios wrote:
>>>>> A practicing attorney needs efficient time management. Every attorney out
>>>>> there gets calls and visits routinely that waste their time. A smart
>>>>> attorney networks on many different fronts. LegalMatch is just another
>>>> front
>>>>> to find business. The key to LegalMatch service is the ability to pick and
>>>>> choose what cases makes sense for you. The value surfaces in -not how much
>>>>> money you make- (the obvious) but in how much time is saved. Who wants to
>>>>> chase Google ads? That a job in itself. not to mention the high cost.
>>>>> Lawyers are too caught up in being busy or in many cases trying to micro
>>>>> manage everything. Forget it. Have a life as well as a practice. Support a
>>>>> process that delivers the potential clients to your desktop inbox so you or
>>>>> your para legal can easily sort through them. In the long run this will
>>>>> reduce a great deal of busy work and enable one to become a better more
>>>>> organized practitioner. If you don't see the value proposition in that
>>>>> efficiency then you should keep doing what you've always done to see if you
>>>>> get the change in results you expect. What's that the definition of?
>>>>> Clearly attorneys need help in new case management. If we didn't need help
>>>>> the YP wouldn't have the thickest section of advertisement listed for
>>>>> attorneys. We wouldn't need to scramble around trying to figure out the
>>>>> Internet services. While I'm at it...since this is about clients...at least
>>>>> LegalMatch protects the interest of the client and the attorney by
>>>>> permitting both to choose each other with discretion. I don't have to rely
>>>>> on my gate keeper to make decisions on who I talk with. That's sane,
>>>>> sensible, ethical and over time very profitable. Plus, I get to have a
>>>> life.