Comments on the Value of Fee Benchmarking from Practitioners Who Participated in the Rural Fee Survey in October 2007
- I agree with the comments made that there should be more guidance for setting fees due to the large range especially when we try to discourage clients viewing legal services on a strictly cost basis
- I much prefer the concept of value costing as it takes some account of risk exposure. the problem is getting a feel for what is a acceptable range so as not to be stung in a cost revision versus not undercutting the value of what we do. whilst there will always be some around who will undercut it would be comforting to know what I charge is, if it is, around the middle of the range and not wildly too light or heavy.
- As a profession we are all over the place with fees for rural transactions. Many solicitors do not reflect upon the time and expertise, risk and responsibility they bring to this work.
- I would welcome it being extended to other fields of property and trust practice\n
- We often have discussions in the office - I have recently been asking other practitioners - following a recent cost revision hearing - it appears in discussions my fee was far too small and is still being challenged!
- Every case is so different. I record time and would use the time spent as a large factor in arriving at the fee.
- Very valuable if it gets the low fee chargers to come up.
- Interested to find out how others view it.
- The process of fee benchmarking will assist the profession in educating clients to expect legal costs to be commensurate not primarily with time expended, but with a range of new criteria, including monetary values due to our greater exposure to liability
- These rural transactions are the most valuable work we undertake, we consider we "specialise". Therefore it is extremely important that our work is valued correctly.
- Given that I do not want to undersell myself -- there is often only one shot at a decent fee as many rural clients are not serial transactors -- nor price myself off the market -- a rep for overcharging will get a round a club or sale yards in less time than it takes for the cockie's first beer -- there is a need for objective benchmarking and education of both lawyer and client as to realistic fees. Why aren't we as smart as the real estate agents and just have a (very healthy) percentage commission?
- Competing in the market on a level playing field* helps to withstand any potential cost revision* helps get us closer to what the agents charge* clients likely to be more satisfied with value than realising what the hourly rate equated to.
- Every year we have great difficulty in determining what we believe is a fair fee for the work involved which also meets the client's expectations.
- It is about time that there were some parameters of fee setting for all legal property work. The benefits would be:- fee revisions would be reduced.- Practitioners can more effectively manage their practices, client files and client expectations. - Clients can have a reasonable expectation of what can be charged.- Clients, their bankers and accountants can therefore budget more accurately. Benchmarking would also educate the public and other professions as to the value of the work and expertise required.
- I have very little idea what people outside my firm charge.
- Assists in supporting a reasonable charging regime.
- The more that solicitors communicate with each other on this issue the more likely we will be able to move to value charging rather than charging for time!
- This is an area that is commercially sensitive between lawyers and therefore difficult to ascertain. In addition on requests for assistance from the law Society on any of these questions by professional standards, practice and ethics department has been met with the same - no response whatsoever. The profession need some sort of guidance as clients can try all sorts of tricks to avoid appropriate fee charges - with almost the blessing of the law societies fee review process - which is also very poor and done by volunteers who don't have the time or interest. (One took over a year!)
- I would be very interested to hear what other rules of thumb and charging practices are used by other practitioners as I am sure we charge a lot less then we should!
- I think this is important so that there is not too much disparity. Sometimes we don't charge with a fear that the charge may be too high.
- I wish the law society would give some guide rather than saying that time is only one factor yet seemingly holding time as the base standard.
- HR people are constantly providing salary information for use in benchmarking. It is very useful to have this information when considering salary reviews. It also goes on in all sorts of other sectors as well. I therefore, see this sort of benchmarking will be invaluable to us and to the public so that there is some level of consistency in charging for similar regular transactions. There will always be a divergence of fees in a competitive environment and with differing fact circumstances in each case but some basic benchmarking gives everyone confidence. I am talking of confidence in setting fees and in discussing them with clients as well as for clients in assessing value. I can see us moving to use this sort of information in fee discussions with clients. It should be welcomed as it does not lessen competition in any way but will help to promote greater confidence in the profession. At the moment the client can go to a cost revision and get little satisfaction if the practitioner has been a rigorous timekeeper regardless of the outcome for the client. If we were able to point to benchmarks across the profession there would be some objectivity to it all. I will be interested to see the results.
- You are making headway, Richard-even here in ... Keep at it.
- The wide range of fees in the previous survey makes it clear that lawyers are struggling with this area of their practices. Any guidance as to what are the appropriate fees is very valuable.
- Richard, you know my views on the hourly rate being a trap for clients and practitioners alike. I commend you for this initiative. The problem is that our profession is indescribably naive in accepting as adverse criticism the comment that lawyers are expensive. In fact, more people boast about the expense of their expensive lawyer than go away because of the cost.
- Richard. This is an excellent initiative. Congratulations.
- The survey results will be useful as I often just use time to base my fee as it is the easy way out.
- A little concerned that this should not lead to any anti-competitive understanding or arrangement (tacit or express). I would not like to see any recommendation as to what an appropriate fee is or meetings among lawyers to discuss that issue. As information to enable us to set our own fees (whether that be undercutting the bottom of the range or the reverse) this seems to me a very valuable exercise (and more transparency around fees should facilitate competition).
- This is good work you are doing. I would like some sort of predictive idea, for example I can tell clients the sort of range of charges for real estate agents, and if there is some sort of range for the amount lawyers charge for amount they have saved the client for instance it would be good. Also how can anyone be on a costs revision committee (and I have been) and try to determine what is out of the range of acceptable without giving some guidelines for lawyers about what is acceptable. I have had people argue that their overheads are higher for example, but what relevance has that actually if it does not provide a better service?
- Costing is the most difficult exercise in legal practice as it is totally subjective and the various factors that can be taken into account in assessing a fee are almost impossible to justify to a client (apart from time spent)
- Thank you.
- This is what we need more of! Unfortunately the cost cutters and car boot conveyancers won't pay any heed.
- Thanks for doing this!
- I know I probably charge on the low side, but I find it hard to justify more....So, I'd like to think that your survey and your paper at the conference will give me a bit more confidence in charging more
- Thank you for this - it will be very interesting to get the results- very valuable
- In 40 years of rural work I have only had one straight forward purchase, no straight forward sales
- Any thing this project does to encourage other lawyers to cost their work at a true value will be worthwhile
- The survey has been a great idea. I look forward to viewing the results
- We are a firm in an isolated area and it is good to have this sort of information.
- By chance I see a seminar on Judicial Review. A worthwhile topic to be sure but one that I would only visit once or twice in my legal career. I carry out costing most days
- Well done Richard for doing this. I can see this being very valuable. There is such a divergence of charging practice around the place. Some seem to have this secret squirrel type attitude on the one hand and arrogance on the other. We need to get like many other sensible and sane industries and professions and share information to better our reputation with the public. It is a pity that the Law Society did not initiate this as part of a drive for greater client service and focus. Everyone seems to run for cover on fees citing fears of engaging in anti-competitive behaviour or disclosing too much to "the competition". That may be relevant to the domestic conveyancing market but for the rest of the work areas it is all about service and relationships. We could serve ourselves and our clients better if we had some benchmarking to work from when setting and discussing fees without fear of losing clients or being engaged in anti-competitive behaviour.
- Information is provided on the basis that it does not constitute a breach of the commerce act. If there is any risk of that, response is to be trashed.
- I hope this survey can be a regular event.
- we need advisory parameters
- Appreciate the opportunity to take part. Thanks.
- I greatly appreciate the opportunity to participate. It is essential that we try and get some uniformity; my own personal experience has found a number of solicitors with a great deal of experience are still charging well below cost for this work
- We need a scale again! Lawyers are discounting their value when we should be adding a premium. My answers reflect the local competition, not what I think I should be charging.
- I practice is in… (Small town); other local legal firms are not often willing to discuss their charges-this is therefore a welcome initiative.
- My firm has a policy whereby any rural transactions with recorded time of more than $2,000 the fee to be charged has to be discussed with one other partner experienced in that area of work but I believe we still have a cringe mentality when costing these matters, which now involve large amounts of money in terms of prices paid & amounts borrowed.
- Keep up the good work!
|
|
