Cost-Effective Billing Formats

  One of the major complaints against lawyers is that they charge   too much for their services. With the time a lawyer spends on a   matter being the major criteria for billing, the complaints about   high legal cost are, in reality, a criticism that lawyers are not   efficient or productive, or, at the very least, have little   incentive to minimize the time spent because it would diminish   the fees they can charge. Indeed, to be fair to this new client   perspective, up front monthly billing does discourage lawyer   efficiency and the incentive to provide cost-effective service.   Most importantly, a client, under this method of billing, must   accept all of the risk, including how efficient a lawyer chooses   to be in accomplishing a legal objective.

    "You Pay for Results, Not Time"

  It is for this reason that, for the last several years, we have   asked the question, “Is monthly billing, based upon the time a   lawyer spends on a matter, the best and fairest way to set the   value of legal services?” From most attorneys’ points of view,   billing a client every month based upon time spent may seem   appropriate and advantageous. From a client’s point of view,   however, “time” is not what clients feel they are buying when   they consult with a lawyer. Clients want favorable results,   solutions and benefits. Moreover, any billing method that does   not depend exclusively on time spent as a measure of value   creates an incentive for a lawyer to be efficient and obtain a   quicker resolution of the legal matter being handled. In other   words, if you pay an attorney when he accomplishes a client’s   objective, the client will more often receive value because of   the incentive placed upon the attorney through his assumption   of the risk to accomplish the client’s legal objective.

    “No Upfront Legal Cost To Collect Delinquent Assessments.”

  The Firm agrees to invoice legal fees incurred in collecting   delinquent assessment accounts as funds are collected from the   delinquent homeowner. Our clients are only responsible for out   of pocket expenses incurred by the Firm in connection with a   specific matter we are handling for them. The agreement applies   to all phases of the collection effort including pre-litigation   activities such as demand letters.

  Under this billing format, our clients no longer find it necessary   to devote a large portion of their community’s budget to legal   costs which, in the past, was necessary in order to pursue   delinquent maintenance assessment accounts. This is true   because our clients who use this billing format are, in most   instances, not invoiced for the legal fees incurred by the   Firm in collecting the outstanding maintenance   assessments until payment is collected from the   delinquent homeowners who have become a part of the legal   collection process. This helps to ensure, to a large extent, that,   while the Firm pursues and collects the entire debt owed to the   Association by the delinquent homeowner, an association’s   cash outlay for legal costs closely approximates the cash   inflow received from the collection process. Within the   limitations outlined in the representation agreement, we initiate   and pursue the collection process at no upfront legal fee cost   to a community association regardless of the amount of time   necessary to collect the outstanding sums.

    "Out-of-pocket Deed Restriction Legal Fees Greatly Reduced"

  In a perfect world, every homeowner would comply with the   rules that govern their subdivision and would maintain their   residence in a manner which would increase the value of every   home located within their community. Unfortunately, it seems   that, in every community, there are homeowners who do not   share this sentiment and, for whatever reason, choose to   maintain their residence below community standards.   Consequently, an association, after unsuccessfully attempting   to motivate a homeowner to bring their residence in line with   community standards, is often faced with the issue of whether   to use legal action to accomplish deed restriction compliance. If   the cost of legal services to obtain deed restriction compliance   was free, an association’s decision to use legal action would be   fairly easy to make. However, most associations are somewhat   leery about using lawyers or courtrooms to accomplish deed   restriction compliance because, even if they recoup their legal   costs in the long run, they have no way of determining their   initial out of pocket cost. As a result, the real question, in the   Association’s collective mind, becomes: “Is it worth it to spend   potentially thousands of dollars in legal costs to obtain   compliance in a single deed restriction matter?”

  In an attempt to address this concern, Gammon & Associates   offers a program for deed restriction enforcement which   minimizes an association’s out of pocket legal costs by   combining a capped out of pocket legal fee component with   a result oriented legal fee component. Fees for legal   activities relating to the enforcement of deed restrictions will be   invoiced to the Association on a monthly basis through the   preparation of the lawsuit petition and the Firm’s attendance at   the Temporary Injunction hearing. Following the Temporary   Injunction hearing, the association is no longer obligated to pay   upfront monthly charges for the legal services provided in   pursuing a deed restriction matter. Rather, legal fees incurred   by our clients after the Temporary Injunction hearing are   invoiced when money is recovered from the homeowner who has   failed to comply with the community’s deed restrictions. Most of   the legal cost incurred in pursuing a deed restriction matter   arises after the temporary injunction hearing and through, if   necessary, the ultimate trial of the lawsuit. In fact, more often   than not, the association’s costs for legal services rendered   through the Temporary Injunction hearing is approximately a   little over $1,000.00. Consequently, this program greatly   reduces the upfront monthly legal costs paid by our clients. As   importantly, it removes the possibility of the “black hole” deed   restriction lawsuit, in which, because of unforeseen   circumstances, the association spends thousands of dollars in   legal costs attempting to pursue a single deed restriction   matter. The purpose of this fee arrangement is to enable an   association to implement an active, uniform deed   restriction enforcement program by minimizing the   uncertainty of the cost to pursue legal deed restriction   enforcement.

  Selecting legal counsel for a community association used to be   a difficult task. Gammon & Associates, however, offers a   compelling series of reasons to build a relationship with our   winning staff. Contact us today at (713) 964-5340 to receive   free, no obligation information by mail or to speak with a   representative about how we can assist your community in   meeting its objectives or e-mail us at info@gammonlaw.com.

    
all website content ©2005 Gammon & Associates.  Disclaimer.