Let me do my rant.
Without knowing your circumstances, no one, and I mean NO ONE, hear can judge if it is a "fair" price. It really depends on what you are getting for the money. Attorney fees contain 3 components, Complexity of case, level of service, and expertise.
For example, if this attorney has been practicing 2 years and 90% of the work is done by a para legal, and you have a fairly straightforward case, that is NOT A FAIR price, it is probably too much.
If you are plastic surgeon earning $40K per month and want to keep your business open, then that is NOT A FAIR price because no attorney in their right mind could or would do the work involved in that type of case for $1,500.
Ultimately, the main price differentiator between attorneys is level of service. The problem is, the average person does not use attorneys that often and find out too late that they paid too much or too little for what they expected to receive. Also, there is some regional difference so what someone was charged in California will be different than Mississippi. But in general, most attorneys that charge less than $2,000 generally provide very low or poor service (there are exceptions, but those attorneys end up in BK themselves because they are not making money). By poor service, I mean, very limited access to the attorney, most work being done by staff, and very little, if any, planning or strategy to make sure you have the most successful case possible.
If you really want to see how this plays out, go to a 341 meeting of creditors. You can generally tell the attorneys that charge less; they show up in casual clothes, or have someone else show up; haven't prepared their clients; there is always problems with the petition, the list goes on and on.
See this thread on what can really happen with "low cost" firms
Without knowing your circumstances, no one, and I mean NO ONE, hear can judge if it is a "fair" price. It really depends on what you are getting for the money. Attorney fees contain 3 components, Complexity of case, level of service, and expertise.
For example, if this attorney has been practicing 2 years and 90% of the work is done by a para legal, and you have a fairly straightforward case, that is NOT A FAIR price, it is probably too much.
If you are plastic surgeon earning $40K per month and want to keep your business open, then that is NOT A FAIR price because no attorney in their right mind could or would do the work involved in that type of case for $1,500.
Ultimately, the main price differentiator between attorneys is level of service. The problem is, the average person does not use attorneys that often and find out too late that they paid too much or too little for what they expected to receive. Also, there is some regional difference so what someone was charged in California will be different than Mississippi. But in general, most attorneys that charge less than $2,000 generally provide very low or poor service (there are exceptions, but those attorneys end up in BK themselves because they are not making money). By poor service, I mean, very limited access to the attorney, most work being done by staff, and very little, if any, planning or strategy to make sure you have the most successful case possible.
If you really want to see how this plays out, go to a 341 meeting of creditors. You can generally tell the attorneys that charge less; they show up in casual clothes, or have someone else show up; haven't prepared their clients; there is always problems with the petition, the list goes on and on.
See this thread on what can really happen with "low cost" firms
Comment