Lawyer charged $5,000 for nothing!

[MichaelJenkins6]

California


In July 2009, a police officer was investigating me for a crime in southern California. I spoke to the police officer who wanted me to come down to swab my mouth for the crime. I decided to hire a lawyer, who made a call or two to the police officer, and accompanied me to the police station where the police officer swabbed my mouth. At that point I never heard back from the police officer on the charges, nor did my attorney.
I recently heard about a lot of attorneys getting in trouble for charging incredibly high fees for doing next to nothing. I paid this lawyer $5,000 for him to make a call or two (which got no further than when I did it) and to accompany me to the police station. I did not sign any contract, either. I just paid the $5,000 from my credit card. Is this an unconcionable fee? I want to see if there is any way of getting some or all of this back. Is there a legal argument? An ethical argument? Should I reach out to the attorney? Is there a statute of limitations issue here? Any advice is greatly appreciated.

 

[TheGeekess]

California


In July 2009, a police officer was investigating me for a crime in southern California. I spoke to the police officer who wanted me to come down to swab my mouth for the crime. I decided to hire a lawyer, who made a call or two to the police officer, and accompanied me to the police station where the police officer swabbed my mouth. At that point I never heard back from the police officer on the charges, nor did my attorney.
I recently heard about a lot of attorneys getting in trouble for charging incredibly high fees for doing next to nothing. I paid this lawyer $5,000 for him to make a call or two (which got no further than when I did it) and to accompany me to the police station. I did not sign any contract, either. I just paid the $5,000 from my credit card. Is this an unconcionable fee? I want to see if there is any way of getting some or all of this back. Is there a legal argument? An ethical argument? Should I reach out to the attorney? Is there a statute of limitations issue here? Any advice is greatly appreciated.

The attorney seems to have performed the actions you paid him to do. The time to negotiate the fee was before the work was done, not after.

 

[tranquility]

No one can tell without all the facts. Sometimes, it's not making the call that counts, but knowing who to call.

 

[sandyclaus]

California


In July 2009, a police officer was investigating me for a crime in southern California. I spoke to the police officer who wanted me to come down to swab my mouth for the crime. I decided to hire a lawyer, who made a call or two to the police officer, and accompanied me to the police station where the police officer swabbed my mouth. At that point I never heard back from the police officer on the charges, nor did my attorney.
I recently heard about a lot of attorneys getting in trouble for charging incredibly high fees for doing next to nothing. I paid this lawyer $5,000 for him to make a call or two (which got no further than when I did it) and to accompany me to the police station. I did not sign any contract, either. I just paid the $5,000 from my credit card. Is this an unconcionable fee? I want to see if there is any way of getting some or all of this back. Is there a legal argument? An ethical argument? Should I reach out to the attorney? Is there a statute of limitations issue here? Any advice is greatly appreciated.

And was this to be payment in full, or was it considered a retainer? What were the details of the fee agreement when you handed over your money? Did you sign any kind of fee or retainer agreement?

Are there pending charges for which the attorney is to continue defending you, or is the case over entirely?

What did your attorney say when you asked them these questions?

 

[Willlyjo]

California


In July 2009, a police officer was investigating me for a crime in southern California. I spoke to the police officer who wanted me to come down to swab my mouth for the crime. I decided to hire a lawyer, who made a call or two to the police officer, and accompanied me to the police station where the police officer swabbed my mouth. At that point I never heard back from the police officer on the charges, nor did my attorney.
I recently heard about a lot of attorneys getting in trouble for charging incredibly high fees for doing next to nothing. I paid this lawyer $5,000 for him to make a call or two (which got no further than when I did it) and to accompany me to the police station. I did not sign any contract, either. I just paid the $5,000 from my credit card. Is this an unconcionable fee? I want to see if there is any way of getting some or all of this back. Is there a legal argument? An ethical argument? Should I reach out to the attorney? Is there a statute of limitations issue here? Any advice is greatly appreciated.

If you paid an attorney by credit card over 3 years ago and didn't sign some sort of contract that shows his performance, you are entirely out of luck. You should have been way more careful with respect to spending 5,000.00 and not drafting some kind of expectation of performance by the attorney.

If by chance you have a receipt for the money you gave him, indicating what the money was for, you could sue for breach of contract in that no lawyer is making 2500.00 an hour for their services, as I firmly believe this crook didn't spend more than a couple hours on your issue. I suspect you don't have such a receipt and therefore, like I said, you are out of luck. Sorry.

 

[swalsh411]

You waited too long.

In CA the SoL on legal malpractice is one year from the date of discovery. The SoL on civil fraud is 3 years. Either way, you're out of luck.

You learned in an important lesson in not waiting too long and it only cost you $5,000.

I would point out that it's entirely possible the OP signed a service agreement for representation until the matter was resolved (at least up until trial) and paid a flat fee for this. It could have taken 2 hours, or a lot more. So calling this attorney a "crook" without knowing what the agreement was is improper.

 

[Willlyjo]

You waited too long.

In CA the SoL on legal malpractice is one year from the date of discovery. The SoL on civil fraud is 3 years. Either way, you're out of luck.

You learned in an important lesson in not waiting too long and it only cost you $5,000.

I would point out that it's entirely possible the OP signed a service agreement for representation until the matter was resolved (at least up until trial) and paid a flat fee for this. It could have taken 2 hours, or a lot more. So calling this attorney a "crook" without knowing what the agreement was is improper.

IMHO, any attorney who accepts 5k only to accompany his client to get a DNA swab and make a couple phone calls, is a crook! I don't have to know about any agreement or what was contained in such agreement to know this. If there WAS a service agreement signed by the OP like you say is possible, it certainly wouldn't warrant a 5k fee unless of course the attorney's representation consisted of quite a bit more than a couple hours (which it didn't according to the OP).

BTW...the SOL for a written contract (which a service agreement is) is 4 years, so if the OP did have such a service agreement, he would still be within the SOL to litigate against the Attorney for breach of contract.

 

[BigMouthWino]

IMHO, any attorney who accepts 5k only to accompany his client to get a DNA swab and make a couple phone calls, is a crook! I don't have to know about any agreement or what was contained in such agreement to know this. If there WAS a service agreement signed by the OP like you say is possible, it certainly wouldn't warrant a 5k fee unless of course the attorney's representation consisted of quite a bit more than a couple hours (which it didn't according to the OP).

BTW...the SOL for a written contract (which a service agreement is) is 4 years, so if the OP did have such a service agreement, he would still be within the SOL to litigate against the Attorney for breach of contract.

It's true that a criminal attorney's best skill is usually separating a client from their money in a time of great distress. I would wager that if there was a service agreement for a flat rate for X amount of time it was "fully earned upon payment." The chances of prevailing against a criminal attorney's flat fee agreement are slim to none.

 

[Willlyjo]

It's true that a criminal attorney's best skill is usually separating a client from their money in a time of great distress. I would wager that if there was a service agreement for a flat rate for X amount of time it was "fully earned upon payment." The chances of prevailing against a criminal attorney's flat fee agreement are slim to none.

Surely such an agreement for X amount of time would refer to an hourly rate if X amount of time was not reasonable enough to warrant the fee paid. I really don't believe ANY attorney can justify 2500 per hour though.

I really don't believe the client would throw 5k to an attorney as a flat rate for just 2 hours work. I would believe some attorneys would skillfully separate their clients from their money though, if the client was ignorant enough to let him, which appears to be the case here.

 

[BigMouthWino]

Surely such an agreement for X amount of time would refer to an hourly rate if X amount of time was not reasonable enough to warrant the fee paid. I really don't believe ANY attorney can justify 2500 per hour though.

I really don't believe the client would throw 5k to an attorney as a flat rate for just 2 hours work. I would believe some attorneys would skillfully separate their clients from their money though, if the client was ignorant enough to let him, which appears to be the case here.

That is the nature of flat fee representation. Sometimes the attorney makes out like a bandit at $2500 an hour, other times he gets stuck in two years of pre-trial work and motions and is lucky to see $50/hr out of his flat fee arrangement. It's a gamble for both attorney and client and in this instance it appears it paid off for the attorney.

 

[Banned_Princess]

I don't understand why he would hire a 5k lawyer if he knew the DNA swab would show he didn't commit the crime.

I wouldn't spend that until I was actually charged with something.

It probably was a flat fee to see the case to trial, but he was not needed after the swab. Thats what lawyers do. take money to stand there all knowing and authoritative like.

 

[Antigone*]

It must have been worth it at the time for the OP. He could have said "no" to retaining the attorney and gone on his merry way. This is a perfect example of way-too-late buyer's remorse.

In fact the OP wanted "nothing" to happen to him, and "nothing" did. He got exactly what he paid for.

 

[BigMouthWino]

I don't understand why he would hire a 5k lawyer if he knew the DNA swab would show he didn't commit the crime.

I wouldn't spend that until I was actually charged with something.

Some people would and they are the bread and butter of a criminal law practice.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I don't understand why he would hire a 5k lawyer if he knew the DNA swab would show he didn't commit the crime.

I wouldn't spend that until I was actually charged with something.

It probably was a flat fee to see the case to trial, but he was not needed after the swab. Thats what lawyers do. take money to stand there all knowing and authoritative like.

I agree 100%. If OP had nothing to fear, he could have given the swab and kept his mouth shut then hired a lawyer later if charged. He hired a lawyer to go with him, make sure he kept his mouth shut and impress on the legal system OP was not going to roll over and take a criminal charge laying down. He should have negotiated a separate price for each activity, instead of the "All I can intimidate" price.

 

[BigMouthWino]

I agree 100%. If OP had nothing to fear, he could have given the swab and kept his mouth shut then hired a lawyer later if charged. He hired a lawyer to go with him, make sure he kept his mouth shut and impress on the legal system OP was not going to roll over and take a criminal charge laying down. He should have negotiated a separate price for each activity, instead of the "All I can intimidate" price.

You live and you learn. In almost all cases unless you know something the lawyer doesn't the client will almost always be better off with an hourly over flat fee arrangement. And don't forget to negotiate the hourly rate!