How to Choose a Lawyer and Not Make a Mistake?

Unlike most advisors, lawyers are not allowed to advertise, state which parties they represent, or how successful they are in their work. However, in the legal services market, there are lawyers who are known to the public, those who have a good reputation, but there are also those who are less known, and some of them do not wish to become known to the public. Personal preferences should not be debated: some clients prefer well-known names, some want discreet lawyers, and some choose lawyers based on recommendations. You should pay special attention to personal recommendations for hiring a lawyer. While someone you know may have been satisfied with the communication, style, and engagement of their lawyer, the approach that the lawyer applied to one person may not be suitable for you or your case. Do not let someone else’s recommendation replace the initial conversation and agreement on important topics. For example, some may prefer billing by the hour, but that may not work for you.

Key Questions

The most important questions are: Why do I need a lawyer? What kind of lawyer do I need? What do I want to achieve by hiring them? Although the answers to these questions may seem trivial, they are actually crucial as they can be the basis for any subsequent problems, client dissatisfaction, and ultimately failure. For example, consider the collection of receivables, which in itself is not disputed, but the other party refuses to pay or delays payment. What can the lawyer specifically do here besides sending a letter giving a deadline for payment and threatening with a lawsuit? What is the general opinion about court proceedings, is it possible that the other party will become insolvent before the court proceedings are completed, and does it make sense to hire a lawyer in that case? A good lawyer will warn the client that tax regulations allow for the write-off of receivables that cannot be collected, for which documentation is required, but also that it makes no sense to conduct a procedure that is an end in itself. Would this case be different if the lawyer had asked you to clarify the relationship you had with the other party before sending a payment reminder, who among your collaborators participated in providing the service or delivering the product, and why would the other party refuse to pay the bill after years of cooperation? Certainly, it would be, as you might face the fact that you or your collaborators did something that the other party did not receive well, and that was crucial for the termination of cooperation. A lawyer who does not ask you these questions and does not insist on a detailed understanding of all relationships that could have influenced certain behavior is not focused on fundamentally solving the problem. A court dispute and winning it make no sense if they come too late and if in the meantime the business relationship has been destroyed in a market that is under constant pressure from competition.

Doubt in Good Forecasts

Do you trust a lawyer who assures you that you are right and that you will surely win the dispute and get what you are asking for, or do you seek a second opinion? Everyone likes to believe they are right and it is normal to hope for success, but how realistic is it that you will succeed in everything you have asked for? How likely is it that in a business relationship everything that was in your power was fulfilled impeccably? It is not wise to act in the heat of the moment, and if your collaborators adopt your behavior and reactions, let that be a sign that it may not be the best time for business decision-making. Unlike a visit to a doctor when you seek a second opinion after the first doctor has given you a bad health prognosis, when working with advisors, you should seek a second opinion, especially when the first one is ideal or very favorable. Why not hear another? After all, the conclusions drawn depend on the lawyer or any advisor and their questions and approach to the problem. If you present the same facts to different people for judgment, they will not give the same opinion; especially you will not get the same opinion if you allow questions to be posed to you that you may not have even considered. A lawyer who agrees with you means they are similar to you, but not that they are right. You also need to know how much capacity your lawyer has to handle your dispute, whether they have assistants and how they involve them in the work? Support from a law office with multiple advisors is certainly beneficial. If you feel that the lawyer you trust is only present at meetings, but someone else from the law office is working on your case, insist on meeting those people as well and getting a picture of how your case is being handled.

Seek a Specialist

If you are looking for a lawyer who specializes in a certain area, before you conclude for which area you need a specialist, consult several lawyers about how they see the situation. It is possible that your belief that the other party committed a crime at the moment they did not pay your proper invoice has little to do with criminal law. Someone who does not understand modern technologies does not have to be bad at advising on how to arrange labor relations, business organization, and tax issues of a technology startup. Ask your collaborators to regularly report to you on the projects they are responsible for, request reports, hold meetings, and communicate daily by phone. Why would working with a lawyer who takes care of something important to you be any different? Does your lawyer have enough data, evidence, and instructions about what is expected of them at all times? Do you receive minutes from hearings only after they are completed without being informed in advance about the events that could have occurred at the hearing, what evidence will be presented, which witnesses will be heard? Will you be at the hearing with the lawyer or do you want someone to defend your position and stance from the beginning of the dispute even though the development of events requires a different approach? Due to constant changes and improvements in the rules, court proceedings are conducted quite differently than they were ten years ago. A lawyer cannot, as was previously the case, present new evidence in the middle of the proceedings if they agreed with the expert, they must make an effort to explain why their finding is not good, and so on. For all this, they must be in contact with the client, seek evidence, and inquire about the history of the dispute’s origin.

Collection of Disputes and Responsibilities

Due to distrust in the judicial system, the length of court proceedings, uncertainty, and the costs associated with it, entrepreneurs tend to agree with lawyers to collect fees only after success in the dispute, usually at some percentage. This is also seen as a way to motivate the lawyer to be active and resolve disputes faster, as if they are the only ones influencing how long the dispute will last and how it will end. While this is legally permissible and can be very good for both the lawyer and the client, in some cases this method is counterproductive. Imagine a situation where all the evidence is on your side and it is only a matter of time before the court understands what it is about and rules that the other party must pay you a certain amount. Is it wise in that case to agree to pay the lawyer’s fees only after success in the dispute? Given the enormous interest rates that are attributed to the principal during the court proceedings (above 10 percent per year), might it be more tempting for the lawyer to delay with evidence proposals or not to hurry the court to schedule a hearing as soon as possible? It is in your interest to receive your money, and if you agree to be in a court dispute with the other party even after a time that does not align with the expectations you had, you may want to reach a settlement with the other party. In the settlement, you will certainly waive interest and pay the lawyer’s fees yourself. You will receive the money that belongs to you, but your lawyer will not receive a percentage of what you could have obtained if you had persisted in the proceedings until the judgment and the decision of the appellate court, enforcement… Here, therefore, it is not about someone who is handling your dispute being negligent because they are paid in advance, but about the fact that you also need to take the risk of entering into a court dispute.

Fixed Fee Representation

In some cases, the fee for representation is fixed. While this may seem fair, in practice it has its illogicalities. For example, for representation in a dispute concerning the legality of terminating an employment contract, the fee for representation is fixed for both the employer’s and the employee’s lawyer, amounting to 2000 kuna for the entire procedure. If the employee wins the dispute, the employer pays that 2000 kuna to the employee’s lawyer. The employee then sues the employer for the payment of unpaid wages during the proceedings and is sure to win in that dispute. Although this solution, which requires suing in two steps, provides judicial protection to employees after termination at that price which cannot increase, sometimes due to the complexity of the procedure, it is incredible that a lawyer would conduct all actions for a total fee of 2000 kuna. To correct this, the employee often does not sue only for illegal termination but also seeks payment of wages that were not received while the dispute lasted in the same case, which increases the value of the dispute, and the lawyer’s fee rises. If the employee wins the dispute, they return to work and receive back wages, and their lawyer receives costs that are higher than 2000 kuna. If the employee loses the dispute, they bear the costs of the employer’s lawyer, which are higher than 2000 kuna. Therefore, a timely decision must be made about how and why to sue. Questions such as whether you should pay before or at the end of initiating the proceedings and how much the subject amount is are for the contract with the lawyer. A lawyer may charge for a service for which you have not signed a special contract because there is an official price list for services. To avoid these doubts, definitely agree on the price before the consultation and request that all details of the agreement be included in the representation contract. How much the fee should be paid often depends on the amount that is the subject of the dispute or contract. The higher the amount, the higher the representation fee.

Author: Danijel Pribanić