I want to go pro se! You people have taught me too much!

[Flamingo]

I am assuming your term "LA" means "Legal Assistant." I work in a law office...let me break down something for you to help educate you as to what their role is in the process of your bankruptcy.

A Legal Assistant is the administrative assistant to the attorney and probably works for more than one attorney unless the attorney is a partner. What he/she does is make appointments, prepare documents and is given the information to prepare the documents, take care of the attorney's schedule/travel and other misc. office duties. They can ask basic questions from you (i.e., date of birth, address, etc.) but cannot answer legal questions so don't even ask, unless it is to find out the date and time of a court hearing.

A paralegal has gone to school to obtain either a certificate or degree to work more closely with an attorney and do work and research under the guidance of an attorney. They cannot provide legal advice, do things like property searches, prepare draft briefs, pleadings, documents, etc. to give to the attorney for review. They too can answer basic questions regarding your matter but if you ask anything specific to which they would need to incorporate legal advice, they would need to check with the attorney first before answering you.

An attorney you retain may advise you that if you have any questions, to please call his paralegal directly to see if he/she can help. If not, he/she will relay the message to the attorney to get an answer for you.

Now, all law offices are not the same but the above should better explain to you what you encountered that is listed in your original posting.

[ediev]

Flamingo - thanks for the clarification. However, I know for certain the "girls" were LA's. The gentlemen (not the atty) we were encouraged to ask our questions to and who took it upon himself to answer, I found out was working on his law degree (online) so maybe he's a paralegal?

Regardless of their actual titles, they are not attorneys and according to your role/title descriptions neither should have been attempting to give us legal advice based on the type of questions we were asking. But they did and still insist that we run our questions by them, stating they are capable of answering our questions.

If they were requesting that we run our questions "thru" them - then fine, I get it. (I do understand the role of gate-keepers). BUT this is not the case. What really conerns me is that they have continusly attempted to answer our questions, with their "best guesses" without consulting with the atty on matters that are far beyond fact finding/data collection.

If they were behaving as you outlined below, I would be ecstatic. But I do believe they're way outside these boundaries, and I don't know that the lawyer hasn't instructed them not to do as they've been doing, but probably encouraging them to continue these tactics.

I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me? Should I run?

[Flamingo]

Flamingo - thanks for the clarification. However, I know for certain the "girls" were LA's. The gentlemen (not the atty) we were encouraged to ask our questions to and who took it upon himself to answer, I found out was working on his law degree (online) so maybe he's a paralegal?

Regardless of their actual titles, they are not attorneys and according to your role/title descriptions neither should have been attempting to give us legal advice based on the type of questions we were asking. But they did and still insist that we run our questions by them, stating they are capable of answering our questions.

If they were requesting that we run our questions "thru" them - then fine, I get it. (I do understand the role of gate-keepers). BUT this is not the case. What really conerns me is that they have continusly attempted to answer our questions, with their "best guesses" without consulting with the atty on matters that are far beyond fact finding/data collection.

If they were behaving as you outlined below, I would be ecstatic. But I do believe they're way outside these boundaries, and I don't know that the lawyer hasn't instructed them not to do as they've been doing, but probably encouraging them to continue these tactics.

I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me? Should I run?

From what I can determine from your original posting as to your questions, you were looking for legal advice for your situation and not just asking basic questions like if a figure has to go in this spot or should I list this amount there, etc., etc. It sounds to me as if you incurred the services of what is referred to as a "bankruptcy mill." You can do one of two things; insist on speaking directly with the attorney who is to handle your case (you are well within your rights to ask that since you paid a retainer) and if that doesn't pan out or you are not happy and have concerns, go get some other consultations. It all comes down to what you want to do and if you are comfortable witih the situation.

[ediev]

Exactly what I was thinking - a bankruptcy mill - where they lump every one together & do generic filings.

So I do feel it is my best interest to speak to another atty. I would really like to know if I can't do that b/c I've already retained this atty?

IF I find another atty I would forego the retainer fee I've already paid. But I do not want to "let them go" before I've had a chance to compare. It may turn out that they are my best choice?

[HakunaMatata]

Wow, your story is very similar to one of my first consultation experiences. Thankfully, I didn't retain. The attorney wanna-be "are you going to screw your credit union too?" comment coupled with the hard-sell and the inaccurate data presented to me left me too baffled to reach for my wallet! Sadly, I know someone who used this attorney and the case wasn't perfectly peachy. He was successfully discharged; however, there were a few bumps in the road (including misinformation, lost vehicles, and extra legal fees).

You asked if people exercise blind trust in the attorney selection process. Bankruptcy is a scary notion for many. People are often too afraid and/or too beat down to become their own advocates. Consequently, they invest considerable trust in legal powers to maneuver BK for them. Clearly, all the bankrupt people in this country haven't found the BK Forum. I suspect the firm you're dealing with has a wealth of these clients; and, they're not accustomed to dealing with someone of your caliber.

Provided you haven't invested a considerable amount of money into this mill, I mean firm, I'd definitely explore alternatives. You deserve to find someone who is a good fit for you...possesses the knowledge and experience to make your case as smooth as possible and has the ability to develop a solid working relationship with you offering the personal attention you desire. Talk to your accountant's attorney (my attorney -who is wonderful -was my CPA's recommendation).

[music12]

i don't think there is any problem with you going to consult other attorneys even though you retained this one. you are under no obligation to tell them that you have retained someone else. the only time they should ask whether you paid someone else is when filling out the forms - there is one question that involves how much you paid for bk services (which is supposed to protect you from being overcharged, i think). but they won't get to that before you pay them anyway.

[SleeplessMI]

Just filed recently I have two incorporated small businesses and wouldn't have dreamed of doing it pro se. There just isn't enough information on this board for business owners filing personal bankruptcy (no slam on the board, just a reflection that the majority of filers are non-business owners). When I saw my petition, I was struck by how my attorney got to the same numbers I did, but through a very different route than I would have taken if filing pro se. He knows how the trustee looks at those numbers and what the trustee wants to see. I don't.

My (non-mill) attorney does only bankruptcies. He has one paralegal and a shared receptionist. I've never sat down with either one of them, but had 3 meetings with my attorney lasting an hour each, plus e-mail contact that was responded to within 48 hours. I agree with others here that the extensive contact with support staff is a sign of a BK mill.

I got my referral to my attorney from a retired criminal defense attorney whom I'm in a recreational club with. Lawyers make a point to know other lawyers.

[ediev]

You all are right - i'm in denial about the fact I've got a dud. He did come recommended to me by another attorney, but I think I need to inform her that unless an individual really doesn't want to be involved in the process or communicate with the atty - then he probably shouldn't be recommended.

And don't worry sleepless - I will not be filing pro se - i swear it was only momentary insanity. I just need to find someone who is willing to give me the time of day and not play games...your atty sounds fabulous. Speaking of which, I would like to know more about the circumstances concerning your biz. Are you filing only on personal debt? Will you be attempting to keep your biz going? Where are you located?

Hakuna - i think you may be the main reason (because of previous replies to my posts) that I began questioning this firm. You may have saved me some undo hearache - thanks