Advocate.Mifs about lawyers

Lawyer (from Latin advocatus – legal consultant), a person who has chosen as his profession legal assistance. For consultations of lawyers people pay money, sometimes very considerable, and, of course, wish to receive in exchange everything more, better and cheaper. In short, the consumer has the right to expect a high-quality and affordable service.

Advocate.Mifs about lawyers

According to experts who provide legal services, the clients themselves, turning to them for help, do not always understand the essence of the activities of lawyers. In captivity of their illusions and in pursuit of immediate benefits (wanting to save cash) consumers lose much more.

In other words, clients are deceived more often than they are deceived by lawyers, so when going to an appointment with a legal officer, you should get rid of some misconceptions.

Experience comes with age, so the older the lawyer, the better.

This is not true. The path to jurisprudence has no age limits, and a lawyer in the sphere of providing services to the population can start from scratch with a man of any age, any profession. But there are exceptions that require mandatory legal experience. For example, to acquire the status of a lawyer, you must work for a minimum of two years. Therefore, a 50-year-old lawyer can have no more experience than a 25-year-old, if they passed exams to the bar at the same time.

High quality is not necessarily expensive.

The client seeks to find an attorney for the extra class, but wishes to pay as little as possible. And some are deliberately looking for a man more famous, not taking into account the price factor. Let’s give an example: somehow a very poor woman came to see a lawyer. After receiving a free consultation, she asked what kind of reward he would take for her cause. Hearing the amount, the woman reported that she could not even pay such money, and then asked where to find one of the most famous lawyers of Russia N. Asked the expert who consulted her: “Do you really think that N services are cheaper?” – she answered without hesitation, “yes.”

We need a rich lawyer.

So some clients believe, assessing the capabilities of a specialist in his material situation. Of course, the success of the lawyer is noticeable in its security. But welfare is not necessarily the result of his career in this field. He could inherit wealth. In addition, the services of such a lawyer are much higher. It is all the more strange when clients, turning to such specialists, are hoping to save on hospitality expenses, for example, expecting that the lawyer will go to the court and business trips on his own car and therefore they will not have to spend money on a taxi or a train.

Here you are … dollars and do not deny yourself anything (all-inclusive tariff).

So the customers who, turning to the lawyer, give practically all their modest savings for many years (they do not want the enemy, but this happens). Naturally, in this situation they do not have the additional funds to either compensate for actual expenses or to prevent a failure. They require the inclusion of all costs in the amount of the fee, as well as guarantees for winning the case. Of course, it is naive to believe that the specialist will receive the evidence from his own pocket: then the evidence base may not be enough for his remuneration. With regard to safeguards, we note: the lawyer is only the person who promotes justice, and his opinion is not for officials who are just making decisions that determine, therefore, he can not be held responsible for improper performance of their duties. Moreover, according to part 3 of Article 16 of the Code of Professional Ethics of the lawyer, “he should refrain from concluding an agreement on fees, in which payment of remuneration is made dependent on the end of the case in favor of the principal.”This rule does not apply to property disputes, where compensation may be in proportion to the price of the claim in the event of a successful conclusion of the case.

I need a lawyer with connections.

Actually, the lawyer rarely attracts personal connections for the client’s needs. A friend of the investigator or judge as a token of gratitude for patronage will take care of the calm of the official, and not the principal. It must be admitted that there is a certain contingent of lawyers who for one reason or another cooperate with investigators or judges. This professional symbiosis benefits both sides: the defender takes advantage of the recommendation of the official, who in return is provided with “peace and quiet” in the process, relieving the benefactor of the need to respond to numerous complaints. “His” lawyers are actually working against the client for his money and such friendship is very cherished. Among the population, it is widely believed that to resolve the case, the lawyer will use the communications as an intermediary in the transfer of bribes. In part, probably, this corresponds to reality. But it should also be borne in mind that corruption in our state is not absolute and not all-encompassing. Along with unclean employees of state structures there are also principal ones. If we talk about lawyers, so far very many cherish their honor more than a fee. Even a single transfer of a bribe deprives the lawyer and, consequently, his client of the main guarantee – independence, – involving in a criminal conspiracy with a judge, a prosecutor, an investigator. An attorney who helped to bribe the participants in the proceedings is no longer capable of active action. Paraguayan dictator Stroessner said: “Corruption engenders complicity, and complicity engenders devotion.” It should also be taken into account that even theoretically “buy-sell” can not be any business, but only that which has a certain qualification. Otherwise, the permissible risk of liability will clearly be higher than the possible illegal remuneration. But in the minds of our compatriots, the myth that the judge must “be given” is firmly rooted, that is why everyone considers it his duty to make an offering, and since the people are poor, the dimensions of “gratitude” are appropriate. However, a dishonest person such “bribes” offend. The consequences of such actions are understandable.

The lawyer delays the matter to get more money.

Many cases, especially civil cases, last more than one year, some more than five years. The reasons, of course, are different: somewhere the process is hampered by the bureaucratic apparatus, the timing of the execution of forensic examinations is great, or even the client himself could slip something. Doors in such situations tend to fall into despair, but one should not immediately blame the lawyer for deliberately delaying the case, he is least interested in it. In an overwhelming number of cases, the specialist receives a fee in the form of a one-time payment at the conclusion of an agreement – it is more advantageous for him, on the contrary, to quickly manage the client’s business and work out money. Theoretically, “pulling rubber” on the hands of lawyers only very wealthy clients, whose fees are tens of thousands of dollars, but then demand from the defender of another, he runs the risk of losing his reputation, so he values ​​any clientele: both financial magnates and workers.

Running out of money? Then we go to you!

This misconception follows from the previous one. The client, seeing that the money is not enough to pay qualified legal assistance, refuses the lawyer and tries to find an adviser outside the institutions of the legal profession. The result of this decision, as a rule, is not very pleasant: saving on quality work, the client actually sacrifices the opportunity of winning. The attitudes of the defender and the client should be based on mutual trust, therefore in the lawyer it is impossible to see the enemy. It is possible that fate will confront you with an unscrupulous member of the bar, but because of him you should not disdain the whole corporation. Ultimately, the choice is to listen to the proposed advice or reject them, it is up to you.

Add a Comment