ACCESS LAW pactises in civil, Family and Criminal Law and conducts cases in all Victorian and Commonwealth Courts and Tribunals. As part of its "Access to Justice" philosophy, ACCESS LAW will provide free legal advice of up to 30 minutes to the first 20 people to email their queries to [email protected]. Legal advice will be provided by return email.
mod - amended title to show the limit of first 20 to email
+1 to spam
pactises i
and also username
I've got a concern about what happens to people who are not in the first 20 to email their enquiries in.
The person has sent a query to a legal firm. The person has asked for advice. The lawyer says they normally charge for advice, even if it's a first consultation.
So, it's a lottery system :S
If you get your email in and happen to be in the first 20, they say you get free advice.
What is implied is if you are not in the first 20, you might get advice that they will bill you for. …
If my concern is unfounded, I'd be happy to hear a response from the business.
Also, down below, Neil says you can go to a number of lawyers and get a free first consultation; with no lottery draw style about whether it's free or billed.
My warning is to make sure you read the terms and conditions on some of those. What with someone I know getting billed for their first consultation because they went back for a second consultation. (Going back allowed for billing of the first session per the T&C)
Agreed. From my own experience, lawers charges clients in minutes and you will receive an detailed invoice that "writing email to clients——-11 minutes, $40" something like that. That's why we have concern.
A work experience kid cannot lawfully give legal advice.
That's one fairly good reason to assume it will be a lawyer.
how would you know? it's just an email you are receiving…
I do not work with a legal service; I've just spoken with people who work with legal services or who have had legal services performed for them
With some services, students can collect the information, pass it to the lawyer and I believe the information can be delivered via the students.
Unfortunately, from what I've heard, if a student has poor communications skills (eg failing to remember glaringly important items) then the service can be a lot worse.
Different lawyers also can have different competence and efficiency levels from very good to absolutely abysmal :S
…
Usually the first consultation from a Lawyer is free anyway…
if that is the case, i'd rather meet them face to face than send an email…
maybe MSN chat would be better than email ??? it's hard to clarify information otherwise…
:S Be sure to go through terms and conditions very carefully.
I know one person who went for a free consultation. They were satisfied with what they were told and went back for a bit more information.
After the second consulation they got billed for 2 sessions. Why? The terms said, the first session was free only if they didn't come back.
Kind of like a "if you don't like our services we won't charge you. But if you do, no freebies"
It's very hard for me to take a law firm seriously when their website uses a .biz domain and hasn't been updated since 2006. I hope they're a LOT better at law than they are at hiring web developers.
or choosing a username
yeah… sounds dodgy…
(hope i don't get sued for defamation… :O)
they should have registered accesslaw.net.au, it's available…
LEGAL ADVICE AND REPRESENTATION IS FREE! ITS CALLED LEGAL AID! DONKS
… only if you get to access legal aid
If someone makes an enquiry about a matter involving you, you may be blocked from using legal aid for many, many years :S
(They can't deal with you in case there is any perception of bias in their handlings against you. I don't really know for sure the reason. I'm guessing that's it)
Getting a grant of legal aid is extremely difficult. They do, however, offer legal advice for a fee to the public.
If Legal Aid is representing someone by virtue of a grant of aid, they can't represent the other party due to conflict of interest. It only applies if they're representing that "someone".
I thought the rules (in Victoria) mean that someone is blocked for even, 30 years before they get a chance at getting legal aid themselves.
If we NEG this post, will the Rep take legal action ????
You could arrange an interview to find out. :)
and it's free
No.
I think you'd need to say something like "John Smith is mentally insane" for a claim to be defamatory. Even if negging is found to be defamatory, I don't see a jury going "Oh, the firm has suffered loss because of it, let's award it $5,000".
PS. In this situation, the defamed person would generally go after the site owner first (people who allow defamatory comments to be published are also liable for defamation) simply because they have more money. All that usually happens is the site owner takes the publication down and that's the end of that.
I'm sure if you arrange a time with them, they would love to give you their considered opinion … :)
.biz? get a proper url
OP, while I appreciate the post, this is standard practice for most lawyers in Victoria.
http://www.liv.asn.au/Referral
Free Enquiry Interview
All law firms included in the Legal Referral Service provide a thirty minute enquiry interview free of charge. You can use this interview to determine with the solicitor the nature of the legal issue, discuss the available options and receive an estimate of costs to proceed with the matter. If you request the solicitor to undertake any legal work on your behalf (e.g. reading contracts, writing letters etc) the solicitor’s normal fees will apply. Please be sure to discuss these costs before any work is completed on your behalf.
It's actually a good service. Saw a couple of lawyers through referrals from them. Additionally, I've walked into a lawyer's office and gotten the first consulation for free.
Based on this Access Law are already misleading people(!) as they should not normally have to pay $220. Doesn't sound very honest. Maybe need a lawyer to review their offer!
Doesn't sound very honest.
We are talking lawyers here, aren't we ???
If it is common practice to have the first service for free, it does not mean Access Law have to give away free sessions.
If they want to charge $220, normally, that's up to them.
Are you saying, though, that they claim to normally charge $220 for a first consultation and in reality, do not?
if it is a common practice in the industry though, whether Access Law do this or not is irrelevant… it means it is not a bargain as you can get if free elsewhere…
-> JV
I was responding to daydream. It's not misleading to say it's $220 of value if the firm normally charges $220 for a first consult. That's why I asked Daydream, if this firm normally charges for the first consult or not.
I don't know if they charge that amount but it's still misleading if it's common in the industry to not charge for the first consultation. Bit like me charging $20 for a Mars bar and saying "here's a bargain first 30 can have it for $2".
I prefer being my own lawyer, seriously.
I wonder if the response will equate to "You should see a lawyer in person" ;-)
No bargain found.
Free 30 minutes initial consultation is just a standard practice of many consulting firms.
As ozbargain becomes more and more popular, business representatives now use it for free advertisement platform.
Agreed this is no bargain just advertising
Agreed.
"Legal advice will be provided by return email." …the bill for the other 30 minutes they said they spent on your query will be sent in the mail! - TIC -
advertising/spam… good examples provided above by neil.
Thank you for the remarkable response. The limit has been reached. For those who have not received a response, advice will be provided over the weekend.
lol… Sure it has… We believe you… :P
-> jv
your response is a little baffling
All they said was first 20 to ask for advice would get free advice. There have been 57 clicks.
There is no reason to think they couldn't have had 20 requests for advice.
how do we know the advice will be from a qualified lawyer ??? it could be just the 'work experience' kid in the office ????
Neg because this is standard practice… therefore just SPAM