Can a legal office lie/bluff to try to get money for a client? Ethics?

[doomwalrus]

North Carolina

I have a lawyer's office claiming they will take legal action against me if I don't pay their client... But the client is trying to collect money from me for *unsolicited services.* Is this a breach of ethics on the part of the law office, or can they claim to pursue action as a threat even though they know they don't have a case?


Some details... NC resident, my rich neighbor felt like the gravel driveway was too bumpy for his Mercedes, so he spent $7,000 in "road maintenance" without consulting anyone of the 7 homeowners on the road. We were not consulted about whether it was necessary, about what should be done, about what was an appropriate budget, or about who would do the labor. The neighbor went rogue, had all of this work done, and then split the bill stating that we owe him for what I consider to be a gift. The road was fine, and certainly not in need of $7,000 in maintenance.

Now he's threatening legal action through a lawyer to everyone on the road. There is no road maintenance agreement. I don't think he has a case, and I'm sure the lawyer knows this. Is this unethical behavior on the case of the lawyer? Is it to a point that I should bring a lawyer into the situation to protect me from this foolishness?

Thx - DW

 

[adjusterjack]

I know how you fee. My ex's lawyer pulled the same crap during my divorce.

Trouble is, your enemy's lawyer is doing nothing wrong or unethical.

His duty is to represent his client against you in whatever shape and form that takes.

Even if it makes you angry and unhappy.

It's all tactics.

You can clam up and ignore it until you get sued and then defend yourself in court or you can succumb and give his client whatever the client is trying to get.

 

[quincy]

North Carolina

I have a lawyer's office claiming they will take legal action against me if I don't pay their client... But the client is trying to collect money from me for *unsolicited services.* Is this a breach of ethics on the part of the law office, or can they claim to pursue action as a threat even though they know they don't have a case?

Just to be clear: It is not the lawyer who is threatening to sue you, is it? It would be the client who is threatening through his attorney to sue you and the neighbors if his demands for reimbursement are not met. Right?

Some details... NC resident, my rich neighbor felt like the gravel driveway was too bumpy for his Mercedes, so he spent $7,000 in "road maintenance" without consulting anyone of the 7 homeowners on the road. We were not consulted about whether it was necessary, about what should be done, about what was an appropriate budget, or about who would do the labor. The neighbor went rogue, had all of this work done, and then split the bill stating that we owe him for what I consider to be a gift. The road was fine, and certainly not in need of $7,000 in maintenance.

What sort of road is this? You have used both the words "road" and "driveway."

Now he's threatening legal action through a lawyer to everyone on the road. There is no road maintenance agreement. I don't think he has a case, and I'm sure the lawyer knows this. Is this unethical behavior on the case of the lawyer? Is it to a point that I should bring a lawyer into the situation to protect me from this foolishness?...

A client can, through his lawyer, send demand letters to you and the neighbors, threatening to sue if he is not reimbursed for the cost of the road/driveway repairs. The lawyer can represent this client in any lawsuit that is filed against you and the neighbors if you do not meet these demands.

Whether the client's legal action has any merit is determined by the facts, of which we have been given only a few.

But I am not finding anything unethical in the lawyer's actions. I guess I am not seeing the "lies" or "bluffs" of which you speak in the title of your thread.

You can speak to an attorney in your area who is familiar with the road/driveway and perhaps the attorney you see can provide you with direction.

 

[doomwalrus]

Additional detail. The road is a 1/4 mile of gravel, not state maintained. There are 7-8 houses along this road. Mine is one of the last ones, which incidentally, the guy who did all the maintenance did not do anything past his own house, which is where it would have needed maintenance if anywhere.

As for the threats, and sorry for the caps, but that's how it was sent, the letter I received today reads:

THIS IS AN EFFORT TO COLLECT A DEBT, AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. UNLESS YOU, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE, DISPUTE THE VALIDITY OF THE DEBT, OR ANY PORTION OF IT, THE DEBT WILL BE ASSUMED TO BE VALID. IF YOU NOTIFY THE UNDERSIGNED IN WRITING WITHIN THE THIRTY-DAY PERIOD THAT THE DEBT, OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, IS DISPUTED, WE WILL OBTAIN VERIFICATION OF THE DEBT OR A COPY OF A JUDGMENT AGAINST YOU AND A COPY OF SUCH VERIFICATION OR JUDGMENT WILL BE MAILED TO YOU. UPON YOUR WRITTEN REQUEST WITHIN THE THIRTY-DAY PERIOD, WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR IF DIFFERENT FROM THE CURRENT CREDITOR.

You have not paid your share of maintenance expenses incurred prior to selling your property. If you do not pay your pro rata share of the expenses of maintaining ***roadname***, your neighbors who have paid for the maintenance intend to pursue a claim for reimbursement against you.

 

[quincy]

Additional detail. The road is a 1/4 mile of gravel, not state maintained. There are 7-8 houses along this road. Mine is one of the last ones, which incidentally, the guy who did all the maintenance did not do anything past his own house, which is where it would have needed maintenance if anywhere.

As for the threats, and sorry for the caps, but that's how it was sent, the letter I received today reads:

THIS IS AN EFFORT TO COLLECT A DEBT, AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. UNLESS YOU, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE, DISPUTE THE VALIDITY OF THE DEBT, OR ANY PORTION OF IT, THE DEBT WILL BE ASSUMED TO BE VALID. IF YOU NOTIFY THE UNDERSIGNED IN WRITING WITHIN THE THIRTY-DAY PERIOD THAT THE DEBT, OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, IS DISPUTED, WE WILL OBTAIN VERIFICATION OF THE DEBT OR A COPY OF A JUDGMENT AGAINST YOU AND A COPY OF SUCH VERIFICATION OR JUDGMENT WILL BE MAILED TO YOU. UPON YOUR WRITTEN REQUEST WITHIN THE THIRTY-DAY PERIOD, WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR IF DIFFERENT FROM THE CURRENT CREDITOR.

You have not paid your share of maintenance expenses incurred prior to selling your property. If you do not pay your pro rata share of the expenses of maintaining ***roadname***, your neighbors who have paid for the maintenance intend to pursue a claim for reimbursement against you.

Your neighbors received this same letter?

Other than your share of the $7000 (unauthorized and possibly unnecessary) road improvements financed by the rich neighbor, have you always paid your share of maintenance expenses for the road? You have not been sued? No judgments against you?

What you received is a rather typical debt collection letter - a capital-lettered demand for payment with a threat to sue.

It would be smart for you to contact an attorney in your area for a personal review of the letter you received and the history of maintenance on your road. The attorney can help you draft an appropriate response to the letter.