Atty Question

[thecaptain24]

My atty is through Cordell & Cordell. I got notice about 3 weeks ago my atty on the case (since August of '11) was moving out of state. It came unexpectedly. I was obviously not charged for my new atty initial meeting (which I'm not happy comes 2 months before a year long custody dispute) or anything related to court filings for her taking over the case. I was also told I would not be charged for her catching up on the case.

Last week I called to ask her a question, we discussed it for 10 minutes, maybe 15. We then discussed the information she had previously been catching up on for another hour. I got charged 90 minutes on my bill this week, but with the explanation it was for my initial question for her. It was not a 90 minute conversation regarding sending her atty a letter requesting my ex uphold our parenting plan in regards to summer time. We talked about what she had caught up on.

This is highly irritating, just given I'm 50k in, and now am being charged for conversations I already previously had with my old atty who is walking out 2 months away from hearing. Whats the odds I can have this dropped from my bill? Because I'm not going to continue to pay to have the same conversation twice, hell I can't even afford it without this mess going on now. Anyone ever had this happen? What do I do?

[Fatheroffour]

Get in touch with your customer care representative.

[capslock]

AlwYs scary with any atty. They can always bill you somewhere else.

[nighthawk]

This is highly irritating, just given I'm 50k in, and now am being charged for conversations I already previously had with my old atty who is walking out 2 months away from hearing.

I'm sorry, I thought you were saying you just hired Cordell and Cordell, I didn't know they were there during the meeting with your previous attorney?
Well, yes, they should have heard you the first time. They were there when you told the first attorney, RIGHT?

[thecaptain24]

This is highly irritating, just given I'm 50k in, and now am being charged for conversations I already previously had with my old atty who is walking out 2 months away from hearing.

I'm sorry, I thought you were saying you just hired Cordell and Cordell, I didn't know they were there during the meeting with your previous attorney?
Well, yes, they should have heard you the first time. They were there when you told the first attorney, RIGHT?

I've always been with Cordell, my atty is moving, and so another atty in the office is taking over the case. It would only make sense to not charge for a conversation I previously had with my last atty, with my new one about anything prior to her ccoming on my case. Or at least credit my account for all the convos with my orginial atty that are now useless and apply payment to my new attorney.

Such a pain. I'm calling tomorrow.

[nighthawk]

I have to agree with FOF! I would call!