Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Family Law Lawyers- Is it true that "You get what you pay for"?

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

  • Family Law Lawyers- Is it true that "You get what you pay for"?

    So I've been trying to figure this out.

    What's your experience with family lawyers? Are the more expensive ones worth it? In my experience, I'd be inclined to say yes. A colleague of mine said "meh, as long as you don't have a shitty family lawyer, it's probably not worth it to pay $$$ for the big name ones". I genuinely don't know if I'd agree with that statement.

    Also- I'm in awe of some of the self-reps on this forum. You guys are the the real MVPs.

  • #2
    I went from $375 hr lawyer with 25 years experience. She was useless and more or less talked me into filing my motion to change saying I was entitled to what my agreement says. She did nothing to stick up for me or collect arrears. She more or less kept trying to make me concede.

    I went to a newer lawyer 5 years experience. $250 hr.. wish I had switched sooner. He at least has a fight in him and seems to want to fight for what I want. If I would have switched the first time I met with him I would have saved some money for sure.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Comment


    • #3
      I am not a lawyer, nor do I do family law, but in my years in the field of law I would say that paying more isn't always better. I've worked with brilliant and eager young associates, and have also dealt with lawyers who just go through the motions.


      I would say with law, more then most any other field, it is a matter of finding one whose personality matches your goals and one that you can manage. If you want to punish someone, you get the pitbull unreasonable lawyer. If you want to work out a deal, you find the deal maker type.


      Also, I would say that I would stay away from the general practitioners. Those that do your wills and estates, civil litigation and then corporate... then say they can also do family law.... They all take specific experience. I can't count how many times a minute book gets dropped on my desk that was prepared by a litigator that I have to review for a deal, only to end up essentially tearing it apart and picking it to pieces.


      I went to a family law lawyer for my agreement with my ex. For my Will, I went to an estates lawyer. For corporate, I do it myself. I wouldn't go to my pediatrician if I was having heart problems. You have a family law issue, find someone who only does family law. There is guarantee they will be great or the lawyer for you, but they are less likely to make simple errors that another lawyer who doesn't do it regularly would make.

      Comment


      • #4
        For me- I went from a $350/hr lawyer at a boutique (supposedly good) family law firm- to a $700/hr specialist who is super visible in the family law bar. But also kind of aggressive. I chose him based on some case law I was researching. He's aggressive, and I needed someone to go toe-to-toe with my ex's lawyer who is a partner at a Bay Street firm with a high profile family division. I thought she was hyper aggressive, but in hindsight- my previous lawyer just kind of sucked and got outlawyered- badly.

        In the same amount of time as my old lawyer- this one has moved me twice as far. For about 2/3 the costs I paid at the other firm (I was basically paying for my previous lawyers in-experience. brutal).

        So the saying rings incredibly true for me.

        BUT I look at my ex's lawyer. She's probably about the same hourly rate as my lawyer- but for the most part, I think she's kind of doing a shitty job. He isn't any further along than he was a year ago. He was clearly poorly coached for the OCL home visit. She's also done some questionable things- like refusing to put an offer before my ex to have a neutral third party accountant prepare our financial disclosures. We sent a written request to do this- she refused. I later found out she had never asked him about this. Because it wasn't a formal offer to settle- she had no obligation to put it to my ex...BUT it would've saved him money in the long run- certified divorce accountants are expensive, but still cheaper than lawyers.

        Comment


        • #5
          One person anecdote only.


          Went from an expensive lawyer ($400) to a cheap lawyer ($200). The cheap lawyer was substantially better, in every single way.


          I take that back, the expensive lawyer had a nicer office in a swankier area.

          Comment


          • #6
            Agree with going to specific lawyers for specific things like wills.

            My mom had a shitty first lawyer who was her own firm. Her second lawyer was with a big firm and was spectacular. Cool, calm, collected, took no shit.

            My man had a barracuda initially to do his divorce and she owned her firm (four lawyers) and was really good. He went to a firm in the city we live in and saw a partner first but was referred to an associate who is now his lawyer of record. Both had the same hourly rate (big city to small city).

            I don’t think you get what you pay for. I think it depends on what your lawyer explains, expects and offers. I would recommend people go on canlii to check results, rate my lawyers to see what people say, lexpert (if it still offers searches) as well as google. New lawyers may be more inclined to fight as they haven’t been worn down and mid level lawyers will have the experience to advise.

            Again, it all comes down to your expectations and understanding. If you are unreasonable, your lawyer fee means nothing. If you understand the law and go in with knowledge of your rights, you will save money.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
              For me- I went from a $350/hr lawyer at a boutique (supposedly good) family law firm- to a $700/hr specialist who is super visible in the family law bar.

              The one common thing I see is that you went from a family lawyer, to another family lawyer. The latter being a specialist in family law. The specialist designation can be very important. Not all lawyers get specialist designations in the respective area. So finding one, well, you're likely gonna pay for them. On the upside, they will likely know best the road to take given their experience.


              YMMV comes to mind a lot when it comes to law. Especially when success by the lawyer comes down to the ability and mindset of the client.

              Comment


              • #8
                My ex keeps choosing lawyers that are general practioners only a couple of months out of passing the bar because he is cheap (he only pays the legal aid rate of $125/hour). He doesn’t realise that one of the most expensive things is a cheap lawyer. A one hour case-conference was dragged out to 9 hours (and she was working on other cases at the time) to increase her billable hours. It is annoying, but I am self-rep so at least I don’t have up-front costs; all of his lawyers’ mistakes have been ultimately good for me (because I correct any of their procedural errors right away if they negatively affect me but keep quiet when they are in my favour).

                For anyone else shopping for a lawyer, pay attention to their call year and check if their rates are in line with their experience. Anyone that is a fresh call AND a sole practioner gets a bit of side-eye from me (especially if they are a general practioner) no way a new grad can function without guidance, and the lack of guaranteed income tells me they will over-bill (blaming it all on the ex of course). Fresh sole practioner hints to me that the person has a reputation already through the network/articling and might not have the strongest skills.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tilt View Post
                  For anyone else shopping for a lawyer, pay attention to their call year and check if their rates are in line with their experience. Anyone that is a fresh call AND a sole practioner gets a bit of side-eye from me (especially if they are a general practioner) no way a new grad can function without guidance, and the lack of guaranteed income tells me they will over-bill (blaming it all on the ex of course). Fresh sole practioner hints to me that the person has a reputation already through the network/articling and might not have the strongest skills.
                  I agree with you on a bit of this- I would say anyone who is less than a 5 year call should not be practicing on their own. Generally. But that's not always the case. It's really dependent on the lawyer.

                  Take for example- a law clerk (shout out to Hammerdad- I think you are one, aren't you?) - with a ton of experience. If they go to law school and immediately set up a practice after articling- you'd be a fool to overlook them.

                  Total aside- but a good family lawyer has an EXCELLENT law clerk. And you want them to be excellent as the truth is that 90% of the work done on your file is (or should be) the the law clerk.

                  Also like Hammerdad said- some young associates are way more hungry than their older colleagues. They're also, generally, MUCH better at sussing out the most recent and applicable case law.

                  If you're going to a firm- guaranteed all the research is being done by a junior associate or law clerk.

                  I think family law is really interesting area though because you can have the best case law- and all the right facts, and still get obliterated. If you are high conflict- you need someone who can play the psychological game better than the other party. You need someone who can play chicken really well with the other party and NOT BLINK.

                  My previous lawyer kept telling me that the DV didn't matter. The same thing that many of you on here have said- "courts hear it all the time", etc etc. A lot of lawyers told me that actually. My current lawyer- when I first interviewed him- said "I have great respect for my colleagues, but on that- they're wrong". He said most of the time DV is presented poorly- but it does matter. He was right. It does. It all depends on how you frame it...but I'm off on a tangent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by HammerDad View Post
                    The one common thing I see is that you went from a family lawyer, to another family lawyer. The latter being a specialist in family law. The specialist designation can be very important. Not all lawyers get specialist designations in the respective area. So finding one, well, you're likely gonna pay for them. On the upside, they will likely know best the road to take given their experience.


                    YMMV comes to mind a lot when it comes to law. Especially when success by the lawyer comes down to the ability and mindset of the client.
                    I take it you're a law clerk with a ton of experience.


                    I know I'm paying for the specialization with my current lawyer- and frankly- his name and reputation for litigating the hell out of family law cases. It's what he's known for. It's funny though- because I chose him because he litigates very difficult cases...but only after I started working with him did I realize he probably settles at least 70-80% of his files. And I think that's because of his reputation.

                    My brother-in-law's sister is also a lawyer- and an annoying as fuck one too- when she heard I had hired my current lawyer she said "Oh- I know him. I thought you said you didn't want to go to court". She assumed I was getting ready for trial (I am, kinda). That was my goal. To scare my ex and his counsel into settling this. I didn't bank on my ex being a total nutjob with sociopathic tendencies.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I agree with you on a bit of this- I would say anyone who is less than a 5 year call should not be practicing on their own. Generally. But that's not always the case. It's really dependent on the lawyer.

                      I agree, life experience adds maturity. In my case, my ex’s lawyers have all been less than six months experience after finishing law school in their early 20s. They are simply over their heads which is dragging things out for me as their mistakes keep delaying things. They don’t have the insite to know they don’t have the educations/experience/maturity to handle the level of responsibility of their position. I don’t like being part of their learning curve.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
                        Total aside- but a good family lawyer has an EXCELLENT law clerk. And you want them to be excellent as the truth is that 90% of the work done on your file is (or should be) the the law clerk.

                        My partner’s lawyer has been completely up front about how his clerk keeps him going. He told us he has thrown more money at her and vacation to keep her because he depends on her so fully. It also makes a difference when you need to reach your lawyer and they are busy.

                        We also do a lot of work ourselves. I have done the research legwork and know things. I attend the appointments and the lawyer gives me instructions. I then put together the data for the appointment. This saves a ton of money. I have all the tables and charts ready, edit documents and organize all evidence accordingly.

                        You get what you put in. If you are constantly calling and bugging and being unreasonable and dying on useless hills you are going to get a giant bill. If you are reasonable and you have a pretty good lawyer, you will be ok.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
                          My previous lawyer kept telling me that the DV didn't matter. The same thing that many of you on here have said- "courts hear it all the time", etc etc. A lot of lawyers told me that actually. My current lawyer- when I first interviewed him- said "I have great respect for my colleagues, but on that- they're wrong". He said most of the time DV is presented poorly- but it does matter. He was right. It does. It all depends on how you frame it...but I'm off on a tangent.
                          One thing people warn about is lawyers who tell you what you want to hear in order to take your money. Perhaps your new expensive lawyer is doing that.

                          I'm curious how your new lawyer would properly present your dv to make a difference where everyone else was wrong. There are definitely times when it counts, but I'm not sure how in your situation. Also how did you prove his hypothesis?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by StillPaying View Post
                            One thing people warn about is lawyers who tell you what you want to hear in order to take your money. Perhaps your new expensive lawyer is doing that.

                            I'm curious how your new lawyer would properly present your dv to make a difference where everyone else was wrong. There are definitely times when it counts, but I'm not sure how in your situation. Also how did you prove his hypothesis?
                            It's not proven yet. It really wouldn't be "proven" until we go to court. But hopefully it won't get there. To the extent that it's been proven is that CAS believes it, OCL believes it. Even my ex's lawyer now says "he's working to change the pattern of behaviour he's previously displayed". Our co-parent therapist believes it...and oh yeah, his criminal conviction for assault and uttering threats against his kid.

                            You're really invested in proving that the DV in my case won't matter, huh? Why is that? I mean- I've been pretty open on here about the history of violence in my matter. What steps were taken to show there is an established pattern of behaviour. But you're very selective in what you choose to remember. You seem really invested in hoping and wishing that my ex gets joint custody and shared parenting time. I'm really curious as to why?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
                              It's not proven yet. It really wouldn't be "proven" until we go to court. But hopefully it won't get there. To the extent that it's been proven is that CAS believes it, OCL believes it. Even my ex's lawyer now says "he's working to change the pattern of behaviour he's previously displayed". Our co-parent therapist believes it...and oh yeah, his criminal conviction for assault and uttering threats against his kid.
                              The judge will believe you too, but that still doesn't change the outcome, and you didn't answer the question.

                              You're really invested in proving that the DV in my case won't matter, huh? Why is that? I mean- I've been pretty open on here about the history of violence in my matter. What steps were taken to show there is an established pattern of behaviour. But you're very selective in what you choose to remember. You seem really invested in hoping and wishing that my ex gets joint custody and shared parenting time. I'm really curious as to why?
                              You came here to say everyone, including all other lawyers you spoke to, were wrong. I'm waiting to hear why your situation is special and how you will be presenting it properly, in order to get that outcome.

                              Dad has never abused child, has always had a great relationship with child, child wants to be with dad more, the past year of supervised access has been great, parents communicate well, parents attend co- therapy together, dad works and lives a productive life, dad has fought for child non stop while you're hoping to avoid court, etc...
                              Mom thinks he's too angry and probably on drugs/alcohol.

                              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