COVID-19: What We’re Doing Is What We’ve Been Doing
From its inception, The Law Offices of Max Elliott has used technology to provide safe, efficient, secure, and cost-effective services to our clients. Over the years, our systems and processes, which were new to the legal industry, have been slowly adopted by other firms. And we’ve continued to evolve and grow into providing even more convenient and secure services for our clients. We were the first solo firm in Illinois to use a secure, encrypted client portal, which is now critical in light of COVID-19. Using our portal, we collaborate with clients about their legal matters safely and securely. Clients can upload or download the instruments and information they need without leaving home. Potential clients can complete intake online or over the phone. We were one of the first small firms in Illinois to accept credit or debit card payments. From the beginning, clients could forgo using postage or coming to our office to drop off payments. Appreciating the busy lives of clients, we routinely teleconference with clients and provide “house calls” for signing conferences. Recognizing the benefits of technology and productivity, our team members are accustomed to telecommuting. Valuing our workers, even as a small firm, we already have a paid sick leave policy, among other benefits. So, our firmwide processes, which are critical to keeping clients safe during the COVID-19 public health crisis, are processes that we’ve been using for years. We’re not changing much about how we work because we were already providing safe and secure client services. And we thank our clients and vendors for helping us provide a safe and secure law practice for all the individuals and families who comprise our firm\’s universe.
Protecting Families Globally…A Remarkable Colleague
Saving Parents\’ Precious Resources
Occasionally, I’m stunned by how little current clients\’ or customers\’ needs are considered by service providers. As an estate planning attorney for “non-traditional families,” one of my key concerns for my clients is providing them with services that are not only excellent, but also efficient. Nontraditional families include women who are heads of households with children and, as the primary wage earner, they have 3 issues to continually manage: Financial resources Time Parenting While The Law Offices of Max Elliott may not be able to assist in quality parenting, we do provide services and use tools that bring efficiency to the first 2 issues. In plain English, we help our clients by saving them money and time. Estate planning, as is said so often now, is not just for the very wealthy. So our services allow you to determine the scope of estate planning protection that fits within your financial framework. Are you a median wage earner who rents with a teenager living at home but working his or her way through college? If so, then an estate plan that encompasses education planning and a Qualified Personal Residence Trust, or “QPRT,” may be unnecessary AND we won’t turn you away. We will simply recognize that more than likely, to protect your family and yourself, you will and should want to start with simpler vehicles, which is what you can obtain for probably less than 1-2 months’ rent. BUT… “It’s not money, but time,” you say. Well let’s look at Joan: Joan is an HR executive at a Fortune 500 company and earns more than the median. Plus, she’s up by 5 AM to workout, get the kids off to school and daycare, is working her smartphone by 7:30 at the office by train by 9ish, eats lunch at her desk, is on the 5:15 and cooking or ordering in by 6:30 but answers her email until 10:00 PM. Weekends are for catching up on the latest SHRM reports she missed while taking the train during the week. Joan came up along the ranks in HR, so it would be unwise for us to waste her time talking about 401(k) planning and HSAs. She’s a tech wizard who lives in the ‘burbs and works downtown, so I’d also never think to ask her to commit to only in-person meetings when a teleconference or an exchange on our secure client directory will suffice. Speaking of that directory, if you are the mom, renting, and with the teenager or a parent with kids and no time like Joan, or someone who just wants to save time and money, our secure online portal that is available for clients makes it easy to engage in substantive, secure conversations, exchange documents, and pay fees all in one place. It’s not an open e-mail or even e-mail on our website. It’s a secure, designed specifically for lawyers and used strictly by us and our clients. So, in concluding this shameless “use our service” self-promotional piece, I’ll just say that whoever you choose as your legal services team, make sure that your precious resources are considered and used wisely.
Thanks for the Flux*
In a recent newsletter, I gave thanks to what means most to me personally – my relationships. Having given thanks on a personal level, I now turn to what I am thankful for professionally. I am ever so grateful that the legal profession is in a state of flux and, what many of us think, is a period of dramatic transition. Liking “change” may sound odd coming from one whose profession is based on the cardinal rule of “precedent.” Still, I like good ole flux, especially when it’s followed by progress. Dating back to the early 17th century, the word, “flux,” meant a sense of “continuous succession of changes.” Works for me. I have witnessed on numerous occasions non-stop, sequential, flips and flops that have brought about positive and progressive steps for humanity. Often, while in the moment, we don’t recognize turmoil as the benefit it is because the moment is painful. However, here is where hindsight is acceptable and we can nod, \”Yes, that was tumultuous and painful, but worth it.\” So I am optimistically thankful of the continuous succession of changes occurring within our profession, most of which, like other professions, have been brought on by technology. It started with computers, then e-mail, next the Internet, and now this “cloud” thing. Computers made writing and editing a faster process, whereby time saved could have been money saved by clients. Hmmm… E-mail, especially within firms, made communication between colleagues collaborating on cases easier and faster. Still, occasionally something would get lost in the translation, especially since the business world frowned upon emoticons. Plus, sometimes, instead of getting lost, something would be set free, to everyone, e.g., when a poor associate accidentally hit “reply all” and client confidentiality was no more. 😮 Moving on, we entered the age of the Internet, where “surfing” became more than something LA lawyers did when they finally took a vacation. It was also the age where an occasional law clerk wished they were in the ocean when, instead of performing online research, they were surfing without permission and blasted by a pornado. Today, a few daring legal eagles are embracing “the cloud,” online storage and project management systems that allow for not just storage but client and team collaboration. Technology dramatically streamlined many of the processes lawyers depend on, decreasing the need for all that file cabinet space – and exorbitant client fees to pay for it, allowing for the sharing of legal information online, and helping potential clients better and more completely understand what we do. Some think that technology has brought us too far. Clients are scrutinizing bills and, heaven forbid, asking us to explain to them, in plain English, the fundamentals of their cases or matters. Whereas before clients would just listen, get the bill, shrug their shoulders, pay the bill, and be thankful. Yes, Mr. Mason, those were the good ole days…Not. I like these days better. I like clients who care about their finances – being fiscally prudent is the world we live in and I like clients who live in reality. I relish clients wanting to understand their options and the legal parameters of their matters because, ultimately, while I may know what’s best for them from a legal perspective, they know what’s best for them from a human perspective. If the 2 perspectives form the frame in which I work, there is an opportunity to build a lasting bridge that benefits us both. Yes, I like these days better because today’s changes are bringing transparency, accountability, client collaboration, and more flexible fee arrangements. All of that combines in a formula providing more people access to the legal system and the protections and justice it brings. Of course, there will unfortunately still be “dream teams” but there will be more “Cinderellas,” too. Of course, there will be growing pains, more oopses, and battles between the old and new guards. However, if the changes we’re experiencing in the legal field mean more of our society will receive the legal services they need, I am very thankful for these changes, indeed. Now, let’s eat! Send me an e-mail or comment below and I\’ll tell YOU what the asterisk (*) after the \”Flux,\” means.
Embracing Online Legal Services…Toothpaste Shouldn\’t Go Back into the Tube
Welcome to The Lotus Rules, formerly known as the Shark Free Zone, the blog for my practice\’s web site. As an experienced blogger, admittedly, this first post is too long, but it\’s the first so I took license. Still, for the sake of you readers and my practice, subsequent postings will be shorter. I was going to write my inaugural piece on why most individuals should have something in place protecting their property and possessions in case they die. However, most, if not all, of the teleconferences, seminars, and webinars that I’ve recently attended were tinged with angst caused by online legal services. Inevitably, a participant would give a haughty, “We’re not afraid of you …humph!” when nothing could be further from the truth. So, the “why you should have something,” piece will make its debut next, as I now share a few observations on the brouhaha regarding online legal services. The fundamental perception underlying the online legal services debate is based on our profession’s steadfast and imprudent use of an outdated framework. The 3 sides of this frame are change aversion, fee generation, and professional egoism. Encompassed within are a myriad of factors, including risk aversion, money affection, perfectionism, and control- and structure-orientation. However, it is the bottom of this non-gendered triumvirate, our professional egoism, causing the most discord. Arguably, certain arguments opposing online services are justified, as is a certain amount of lawyer egoism. Many colleagues and I spent years of enormous effort, anxiety, sleepless nights, money we did not have, and BIG brain power to get to achieve our goal – acceptance in one of the most respected professions in the world. So, those of us who “survived” are now in an “elite” group and that has to mean something. Right? Yes, it does … within reason. The reasonable justifications for opposing online services and justifications for our egoism include: A very high standard of performance in communication and analysis, A deference and respect for those seeking our services because most folks don’t turn to an attorney unless there’s trouble afoot, A deference for and an ability to establish rules that can stand the test of time, lending stability and civility to our society, aka “precedent,” and A genuine desire to help others – not necessarily the altruistic human rights,\”let\’s save the internally displaced\” kind of help, but the “if you sign this contract as it’s written, you’ll lose your shirt” kind. However, the unreasonable justifications are what foster the profession’s debate and undergird the angst: Interpreting elite as exclusionary whereby understanding the law is our territory and online legal services are trespassing, Defining clients as those who can pay premium fees for our efforts, and Simply meaning that “we’re ‘in’ and you’re ‘out’; hence, we make the rules, hide their meanings, and change them whenever we want; and you follow the rules while we enjoy lavish lifestyles.” The reasonable justifications for opposing online legal services can be reconciled with supporting the same. However, those of us holding on to the unreasonable justifications are doing so perilously. Understanding the law is not the exclusive purview of lawyers. It is our duty to protect our clients’ rights. For us to discharge that duty, clients should at least know what their rights are, when their rights are in jeopardy, or when they\’ve been violated. Yet, lawyers don’t sit around coffee shops to see who’s writing the next “One L” and we certainly don\’t troll sweatshops calculating how long the seamstress has worked and for what amount of compensation. Ergo, clients must have some understanding of the law as it applies to them in order to seek protection or demand redress. Frankly, non-exclusivity in this context has generally been the case, so exclusivity is a meritless argument and efforts to continue hiding behind the curtain in Oz are foolhardy. Let me explain. Several decades ago, on Main Street, USA, Almost Famous Author finished \”Two L\” and told Neighbor Nikki about his manuscript, who then advised “call the Library of Congress and get it copyrighted; they’ve got the forms.” Almost Famous Author did as advised but also went to see Attorney Shingle. Attorney Shingle gave Almost Famous Author the forms at no charge, saying, “Call me if ya got any questions, and don’t worry about the fee ‘cause it won’t take long.” In fact, the visit with Shingle was free, too. Well, times changed. Main Street gentrified into Wall Street and Attorney Shingle joined BL & Associates, LLC where forms along with most visits were no longer free. Moreover, Attorney Shingle’s son also went to law school and joined BL, and so did Attorney Shingle’s grandson, and times were great for the profession. Now, times have changed again. Technology allows companies and firms to provide free or inexpensive legal forms and free information, with expeditious delivery, so that even wannabe famous writers who could afford BL are obtaining legal services online. Irrefutable is that the purveyors of the new free forms and information earn a comfortable living, but they are also doing something to offset a most egregious result of the second factor – limiting who obtains help by requiring clients to pay a premium’s premium fee. Firms embracing technology are providing access to legal services to those who needed them but often could not afford them. Technology helped unmask the rules and unlock their “hidden” meanings with “plain English.” As a result, the technology toothpaste is out of the tube, so to speak. Yet, all is not lost for lawyers and clients who prefer the traditional ways. The legal profession has a great opportunity in its impending transformation. Of course, some practice areas are too complex to lend themselves to online services, e.g., international intellectual property matters and corporate litigation. However, if lawyers in even complex areas can unbundle repetitive, redundant processes, the outcome will be greater efficiency, happier clients, more clients, and higher income without increasing fees. In contrast, some areas must change dramatically or technology will devour