Dear John
I have always given legal advice on a
need to know basis. But my insurer has encouraged me to be
more expansive so that my advice must now anticipate unexpected but
possible issues such as nuclear attack.
Areas of law which used
to be peaceful, such as wills and conveyancing have been
declared war zones by my insurer. In the past, my test for the mental
capacity for older clients making wills was that their memory was better than
mine. My insurer tells me that I was setting the bar too
low.
How can I go on?
Anon
Dear Anon
It was when my initial advice letter on
the purchase of a home had become so long that I could not bear to
read it myself without suicidal thoughts that I decided things had to change.
I tried restricting myself to truly
non-contentious practice areas such as votes for mothers. Then I developed
the Deluxe Pro Bono Model (“the Model”) which provides
that rather than receiving payment for legal services; I pay my clients. They were
delighted, expectations and deadlines, fell away, my work
life balance improved and my customer satisfaction surveys shot up.
At first, the fees my
clients charged me were relatively modest. But as my clients had to spend
increasing amounts of their time trying to get me to do anything their fees sharply increased. Eventually, I
had to look overseas for clients that I
could afford, and I am proud to
say that by applying the Model I have lifted entire villages in India out of
legal advice impoverishment.
I have asked the government
to appoint me as a Lex Discrimination Commissioner
to change the attitude of lawyers so that people not only have
access to legal advice but are paid by the lawyers to listen to it. I
am awaiting a response.
JF
(c) Paul Brennan 2015. All rights reserved.
 |
| Sponsored by Brennans solicitors |
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment