Oh the irony! Junk debt lawyer who threatened to sue me is now a BK attorney on TV!

[bluemartini]

I almost laughed my rear end off today when I was at the nail salon getting my nails done. The TV was on and there was a commercial advertising Dxxxx Bxxxxx of Maitland, FL (suburb of Orlando) as a bankruptcy attorney specializing in Chapter 7 bankruptcies.

Mr. Nice Guy up there in front of the camera encouraging people to come to him so he can help them wipe the slate clean.


Only problem with that is -- about a year and a half ago, he and his cronies were sending me letters threatening to sue me for a credit card debt that had charged off.

From junk debt buyer to BK attorney --- does this happen that often?

I shudder to think of being some clueless Joe Schmoe off the street, going into this slimeball's office to ask for help, completely unaware that just a few months ago he was getting wage garnishments and scaring people with the threat of lawsuits.


I just couldn't believe the irony!

[dman]

Perhaps he got tired of his job and decided to change sides?

[IamOld]

I always wonder that in some areas of law, is it possible for a lawyer to do both BK and creditor representation...how can you...bifurcate yourself to that extent...

[justbroke]

Why not. There are bankruptcy attorneys that are also Trustee's. I won't see it's the most lucrative legal profession out there, but it certainly has a lot of work these days!

[bluemartini]

I just thought it was funny.

Also, this guy was a real shark. When he and his, ahem, "associates," (gag!) were harassing and threatening me, I looked them up on the local court dockets and saw that on a daily basis, his law firm was securing judgments against usually a half dozen creditors per day.

Day after day, week after week, month after month. There were hundreds of local people who were nailed by this guy.


I would just cringe to think of going in to someone like that for help.


Also I see that the name of the lawyer that I posted has been edited out. Thanks AngelinaCat and I apologize. Didn't realize we weren't supposed to do that.

[AngelinaCat]

Also I see that the name of the lawyer that I posted has been edited out. Thanks AngelinaCat and I apologize. Didn't realize we weren't supposed to do that.

Not a problem!

[lillymarlene]

I always wonder that in some areas of law, is it possible for a lawyer to do both BK and creditor representation...how can you...bifurcate yourself to that extent...

When I was going on my "free consults" that is what helped me eliminate one of my "candidates." This lawyer had thank you notes out on a table for viewing in his outer office. In one of the notes, this couple wrote about how happy they were about him helping them collect back rent from a former tenant. It made me feel like he worked too much for the "other side."

[sassiebaz]

My attorney told me he has worked on behalf of some creditors in the past. I don't find it all that ironic...I guess it's all about who is your client at the time...

[StartinOver]

Having some experience inside the tent of "the enemy" allows them to bring some pretty useful info to the table, I would think. (Though I might not want to use an attorney who had been so very in the tank so recently...)

[bcohen]

Thanks a lot moderators, for deleting the name of the law firm in the original post. Most of us are not psychics you know, and taking away that valuable information damages the usefulness of the thread. It is not considered libel or slander to state true negative information about another person/entity so why the censorship?

[AngelinaCat]

It wasn't a firm, it was an individual's name. Please see the Forum posting rules: http://www.bkforum.com/announcement.php?f=17

I left enough information there--the first initials as well as town, that anyone wishing to, can easily figure out who this individual is. If that doesn't work, then PM the OP and ask the name.

But this is not going to become a forum where people start bashing other people by name, even if they might be a *skank* of a lawyer.

Thank you.

[keepsmiling]

Our Fairy Mod Mother is a wise woman.

[LadyInTheRed]

It is not considered libel or slander to state true negative information about another person/entity so why the censorship?

To know for certain it isn't libel or slander, we would have to investigate the OP's claim. It isn't realistic to investigate every time somebody wants to warn others about their lousy lawyer. Also, even if it is true (I don't doubt it is), the lawyer could still claim it is libelous and make a lot of trouble for the board.

[pushed]

It is not unusual for a small law firm to work on both sides of the street. They understand the law as it applies to each class of client and they have reasonable expectations with respect to the work load required, as well as the expected monetary return for their efforts.

However, many upscale law firms that cater to business interests (business formation, tax planning, intellectual property, succession planning, government regulations, etc.) will not represent consumer plaintiffs in product liability actions. They earn their money by protecting their business clients interests over a period of decades. They are not going to turn around and sue a business for product liability, even if they have no presence in that industry.

There are a plethora of law firms whose business model is to focus on product liability, medical malpractice, etc., primarily on a contingency basis. The lawyer's primary expertise there is to have a clear understanding of the elements of risk and expected outcomes for certain classes of law suits. And that's where the rub is; the business law firms must intimately know the weaknesses of the businesses they represent in order to serve and advise them properly.

[angles]

Money is money, its all green. We all have our limits of integrity on how far we are willing to go to obtain it. Consider the financial institutions on Wall Street and the big banks.