Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cost benifit of self repping

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cost benifit of self repping

    I'm seriously considering self/repping. I have burned through all my life savings, RSP's, etc. I have $600 in the bank and $50,000 in debt. If I continue with my lawyer I may as well light a match to my equalization payment. There will be no hope of home ownership for me in my life time and no chance of retirement. I've spent about $150,000 just to protect my kids and ensure their safety. There will also be a 75% chance I will have to
    go bankrupt. Even if he starts paying the child support ordered, the total for the life of the kids won't compensate me for the money I have already spent.

    Lawyer doesn't think I'll do well as a self rep...as compared to? Not exactly doing well now financially with a lawyer so how's that different?

    Disadvantages of self rep
    - don't know what I'm doing
    - time
    - other side may or may not try to take advantage
    - terrifying
    - don't know if I can remain dispassionate
    - could loose everything or could I?


    Advantages of self rep
    - save a s-load of money in legal fees
    - won't touch any of the settlement money that's in trust
    - will really, really, really piss off the ex because he's still paying legal fees
    - won't have to declare bankrupcy
    - keep my credit rating intact
    - can buy a home
    - can retire
    - no more stress of chasing my lawyer to get court dates or material filed on time
    - I know my case better than anybody else
    - my case matters to me

    Anyone else struggling with whether or not to self rep?

  • #2
    I'm struggling with this as well. My lawyer says he used to advise self repping about ten years ago but says judges since then can be negative towards self repping (likely due to people not being knowledgeable about the system).

    Comment


    • #3
      I self repped, ex had a lawyer.

      I found as long as you did your research, knew the procedures, served the correct forms, provided true and accurate information and showed the judge respect, it went well.

      I strongly feel this is a really good option, I am blown away by how much some people have spent on lawyers.

      Anyone can do it, just read, read, read.

      Comment


      • #4
        That $150.000 is nothing for protecting "your" kids from their father, that money was well spent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Actually BitHunter, they are "our" kids. My ex has been charged and convicted of assaulting them. He has also been charged and convicted of assaulting other people. I would love for the kids to have a relationship with him as his prognosis due to his brain injury is that he will be institutionalized within 1-3 years.

          He can not help himself, has no insight , impaired judgement and it doesn't take much to set him off. He needs round the clock care himself but is stubborn and refuses care. Since he has not yet been deemed incompetent nothing can be done to help.

          I would love the kids to have a relationship ship with him so long as safety measures are in place.

          I am seriously considering going self rep as my lawyer tends to escalate things as well. I also feel my lawyer at times lacks empathy. My ex's lawyer sees my ex as a walking piggy bank who is easy to manipulate due to his injury. I can't protect my ex anymore. That's not my job. I'm interested in doing the best by my kids which includes providing them with a roof over their head, necessities of life, stability and encouraging a relationship with their dad while simultaneously looking out for their safety.
          Spending more money on legal fees may seriously impair my ability to do so.

          Comment


          • #6
            I self-repped, no matter what happens (I am waiting for an important judgement) I did a way better job than my lawyer and my ex-wife's lawyer.

            I studied and researched hours and hours though.

            I'm also well-spoken and calm with some relevant work experience.
            I think everybody should self-rep unless there are millions of dollars involved.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Links17 View Post
              I self-repped, no matter what happens (I am waiting for an important judgement) I did a way better job than my lawyer and my ex-wife's lawyer.

              I studied and researched hours and hours though.

              I'm also well-spoken and calm with some relevant work experience.
              I think everybody should self-rep unless there are millions of dollars involved.
              not everyone has the ability or time to self rep.

              Comment


              • #8
                Self-representing works well for some people, but not everyone. Keep in mind posters on this forum are not necessarily representative of the general population.

                There are many factors to consider when deciding to self-represent, here are a few:

                - Your personal emotions. If you cannot be objective it may be beneficial to have a neutral party advocating in your case.
                - Your ability to understand the law and apply it to your situation. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses, and not everyone can do this. Even with help important facts may go undisclosed, leading to bad research. A good lawyer knows what questions to ask.
                - Your free time. Learning about the family law system is an extremely time consuming task, and if work/other commitments prevent this then self-representing may not be a wise move.

                That's just a few. There are more of course.

                Comment


                • #9
                  In many cases time = money.

                  Most people don't make 300$/hr net (500$/gross) and even if you consider the learning curve.

                  Most of the time lawyers need to do the same amount of research for a case than you do. Most case law is either EVERYWHERE or quite rare. Everywhere means your lawyer might have it in 10 minutes, for you it'll take an hour.

                  There are like 10 processes in total.

                  I would get a lawyer for simple low conflict case but once its anything more than a basic thing, I would trench in.

                  I would consult a lwyer though if I could/


                  I agree though, some people are just not as smart as me

                  One thing is important, is that if EVERYBODY represents and lawyers stop making money the family law industry will change.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You see people on a forum who know a thing or 2 about divorce. Vast majority dont even know where to look for a lawyer let alone self rep.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi all;

                      Personally I think I could have self repped given that my separation was relatively low conflict. Scale of 1-10..a 4.

                      I'm reasonably well educated and have a job that allows research time.

                      HOWEVER, the biggest thing that would have screwed me over, would have been..... ME. I would have been far too emotional (ex left..wanted a change).

                      Unfortunately, in Family Law, it catches you at your must vulnerable.

                      My mistake....getting a high end lawyer as I thought this was the way to go...WRONG....looking back I can't believe I actually took Case Conferences, etc. that seriously. They (in my case), meant nothing. Be polite sit there and say minimal. If you don't like what the judge says, who cares, just don't agree to it.

                      Best move I did do...fired my high priced lawyer and picked up a young smart lawyer. Less than half the price and actually seemed to give a hoot. The other thing I did notice (at least in my scenario), the second lawyer was a female. Paid far more attention to detail.

                      Hope this helps,

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        My ex hired female lawyers and I think that was his problem. They were terrible and ineffectual in the court room. I hired a young lawyer (male) who was a tremendous asset to me in and out of court. We all have our own experiences.

                        When we first enter into the family law den most of us have absolutely no experience with the legal system. We are overwhelmed. It is daunting to have to put one's trust in a relative stranger. In my situation I simply did not have the time to take up the reins of proceeding with my divorce as I was busy picking up the pieces of our business. I did, however, get informed on family law procedures. This new-found knowledge at the time, helped to keep my legal bills from escalating. I recall that at the start I was pretty high-maintenance by communicating with my lawyer on an almost daily basis. I recall being extremely frustrated at the length of time everything took. The waiting for court was excruciating to me at time.

                        Hiring a lawyer was important to me as I knew I could not be objective. I do recall that all of my draft affidavits were put into the waste bin. My lawyer had a very effective way of trimming everything down. He also told me that unless I could prove something it did not go into the affidavit and therefore emphasized relevance.

                        It is logical that one cannot be expected to be able to jump into a courtroom and defend oneself with all the knowledge a lawyer gains from law school and years of practice. I do believe that a well-organized individual can effectively assist their lawyer. If a person can't effectively "instruct" their lawyer then there is a problem.

                        I agree that case conferences/4 way meetings are a total waste of time. I believe that when one decides to litigate, as opposed to trying to work out an arrangement on their own, matters should proceed to motion or trial sooner rather than later. If a case conference judge is not going to make a ruling on something then why bother? Waste of time and money IMO. If people were able to compromise effectively they likely wouldn't be separating in the first place.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I am going to make a sexist ageist generalization.

                          If you had to discriminate - I would say:

                          Younger Males
                          or
                          Older Females

                          Younger Males are gung ho take the case seriously and have hope and belief in the justice system. Men tend to be a bit more logical which helps in court to when you lack experience.

                          Older Males don't care, are so jaded from years of seeing perfectly good fathers getting screwed for no reason.

                          Younger Women - lack experience and often aren't assertive enough perhaps.

                          Older Women - Experienced, Assertive and normally years of success because they often see mothers win (attributing it to their skill).

                          Yes, everything i just said is sexist, ageist, politically incorrect and there are bound to be a million exceptions but its worth consdering maybe.

                          I've dealt with all 4 classifications + based on what I've read here.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            My partners original lawyer was a barracuda. She was well known in his city. His ex hired a woman as well who was effective but his ex also couldnt shut her mouth which backfired in court. His lawyer where we live is male and also a barracuda (albeit a charming one) with a high success rate. His ex is getting advice from a family friend (which is actually a conflict since he did their wills and house sale) and from FLIC.

                            I help out by doing research and organizing his documents. He would never be able to self rep because of his emotions. Having me to organize the documents saves time at the lawyers.

                            In my opinion, if you can manage your own paperwork and research but need a lawyer for the court stuff, it might save you money. If you can stay calm and cool and manage to follow the rules of the court, you could self rep. There are books out there on how to do it but sometimes some people get overwhelmed with emotion.

                            Working dad amazes me because his case was immense (and still going), he has volumes of files, english is not his first language and he works full time. He researched, did his own paperwork and self repped successfully.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Links17 View Post
                              I am going to make a sexist ageist generalization.

                              If you had to discriminate - I would say:

                              Younger Males
                              or
                              Older Females

                              Younger Males are gung ho take the case seriously and have hope and belief in the justice system. Men tend to be a bit more logical which helps in court to when you lack experience.

                              Older Males don't care, are so jaded from years of seeing perfectly good fathers getting screwed for no reason.

                              Younger Women - lack experience and often aren't assertive enough perhaps.

                              Older Women - Experienced, Assertive and normally years of success because they often see mothers win (attributing it to their skill).

                              Yes, everything i just said is sexist, ageist, politically incorrect and there are bound to be a million exceptions but its worth consdering maybe.

                              I've dealt with all 4 classifications + based on what I've read here.
                              Sometimes its refreshing to hear one's honest opinion, even if it means going against the flow of political correctness.

                              My real reason for hiring a young male lawyer was that, at the time of the end of my marriage, I used to golf with 2 retired family court judges. They both told me (in confidence of course) to go with a young male lawyer. They both said that when on the bench they could relate to the young lawyer and if the lawyer was effective they would think "that's what I was like when I was young". In other words, they stressed it was a good thing if the judge could relate to the lawyer. I kept this in mind when I made my selection. Interestingly, the judge who decided our JDR was female. I observed that she related better to my lawyer than my ex's high-profile female lawyer.

                              Over the years I have heard repeated stories of people who have had the misfortune to hire a female lawyer. Most have similar stories of how the lawyer was a letter-writer ($$$) and shied away from court. In most situations the people ended up dumping the ineffectual lawyer for a male lawyer and have said they wished they had never hired the female lawyer in the first place.

                              Of course I believe there are exceptions. Onus is on all of us to do a very thorough vetting of a potential lawyer prior to retaining them. I also think people fail miserably in instructing their lawyer and they therefore find the lawyer's bill spins out of control.

                              Comment

                              Our Divorce Forums
                              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                              Working...
                              X