It's called a contingency fee. I've seen them where the lawyers get 25 - 33 %, but only if they "win." If the client wants to pay as they go, the client keeps all the money. If it isn't important enough to pay for a professional to do the work, then skip it. Same as if you wanted to hire a software engineer or a plumber. If you can do it yourself, don't pay. If you can't do it yourself, but it isn't important enough to pay, then don't do it.
I don't see why people think lawyers should work for free.
Professional journalists are far from perfect, but the best make a real effort to find and tell the truth. While they don't necessarily have regulations for their conduct (doctors, lawyers, accountants, professional engineers etc. all have legally imposed standards, journalists don't), they certainly have voluntary standards and ethics. So if I read an article in a mainstream publication like Time, the Tribune, the Times, etc. I have a fairly high confidence it's the truth. I do not have that confidence about what I read on the Internet, where anyone can say anything, true, false, meeting a hidden agenda or just a nutcase.
I subscribe to a paper newspaper and get their electronic updates. Would I keep the subscription to keep the electronic updates? Probably.
×
Email This Story
This feature is only available to registered users. You can register here or sign in to use it.
Re: Re: Re: Lawyers
It's called a contingency fee. I've seen them where the lawyers get 25 - 33 %, but only if they "win." If the client wants to pay as they go, the client keeps all the money. If it isn't important enough to pay for a professional to do the work, then skip it. Same as if you wanted to hire a software engineer or a plumber. If you can do it yourself, don't pay. If you can't do it yourself, but it isn't important enough to pay, then don't do it.
I don't see why people think lawyers should work for free.