HOW IT WORKS
Our experienced, US-based attorneys analyze every charge, on every legal bill, to make sure that each and every time entry and expense charge adds value and complies with industry-standard billing guidelines.
COMMON BILLING DISCREPANCIES
Excessive Time
This is the most common complaint of clients, yet historically has been the hardest to nail down. Many clients have a “feeling” that a certain task took too long, but cannot explain why. LBR’s analysts have worked in large law firms and know all the hallmarks of hourly time inflation. When a discrepancy is found, LBR explains in detail the reasons the time spent was excessive and how exactly a law firm should revise the bill. Here is an example:
The law firm charged 5.1 hours for work on a confidentiality agreement where opposing counsel had already provided a comprehensive draft agreement for comment and markup. We propose the charge be revised to a total of 2.5 hours: 2.0 for analysis and markup of the draft agreement, and 0.5 for negotiation of points with opposing counsel.
Junior-Lawyer Training
Law firms often find ways to charge for a junior lawyer’s on-the-job training. But the law firm carries the financial responsibility for training its lawyers; it is for the law firm’s benefit, not the client’s. Most of the time, this is an honest mistake that occurs because most junior lawyers are not adequately taught the difference between time that is billable to the client and time that is not. When this happens, LBR discusses the specific time entries with the billing attorney so the law firm can revise the bill accordingly.
Higher-Rate Staff Used Inappropriately
Sometimes lawyers will do work that is more appropriate for a lower-rate attorney or a paralegal. As one court quipped: “Michelangelo should not charge Sistine Chapel rates for painting a farmer's barn." Ursic v. Bethlehem Mines, 710 F. 2d 670, 677 (3rd Cir. 1983). In these cases, LBR identifies the staff that should have been assigned that task so the law firm can adjust its charges.
Administrative Tasks
Sometimes law firms will charge attorney or paralegal rates for tasks that could and should be done by administrative staff. For example, the client should not pay $300 an hour for filing a court document. That type of task should be done by a legal secretary at no charge, as part of the firm’s overhead costs.
Overstaffing a Given Task
A client should not have to pay three attorneys to accomplish a task that requires only one lawyer. Worse yet, sometimes overstaffing actually increases the time it takes to complete a task because there are "too many cooks in the kitchen." LBR adjusts these charges to match a more appropriate staffing level.
Inadequate Description
When a lawyer does not adequately describe his or her activity, there is no way for the client to determine if that activity added value for the client or if the charges for that activity are reasonable. Attorneys are paid to be precise in their language. It is not unreasonable to require lawyers to accurately describe how they spent their time and the client’s money. In these cases, LBR will investigate to determine the correct amount.
Factual Inconsistencies Between Time Entries
Sometimes two lawyers attend the same meeting but have differing accounts of how long the meeting lasted. Sometimes one lawyer charges for an in-office task when another time entry shows she was not in the office that day. The variations of inconsistent time entries are many, but the conclusion is singular: one of the two time entries is probably inaccurate. When this happens, LBR will investigate to determine the proper charge.
Duplicative Work
Duplicative work usually results from an honest mistake; at the end of one month and the beginning of the next, an attorney may charge for the same task twice, across two billing periods. In other instances, two attorneys may both perform the same task in the same billing period, failing to coordinate with each other and divide responsibilities. Here is our response to an instance of duplicative work:
[Junior lawyer] charged 25.1 hours to draft the motion for summary judgment. [Senior lawyer] charged 14.6 hours to draft the same motion at a later date. The client did not receive 39.7 hours of value in this scenario and we propose that only the 14.6-hour entry be charged.
Block Billing
Block billing is when a lawyer enters multiple unrelated tasks under one time period, without separating the time each task took. Block billing obscures the value to the client and the reasonableness of the charges for a given task, and courts around the United States have condemned the practice. Studies have shown that lawyers who enter their time in blocks tend to overestimate the actual time they worked, which is why LBR discourages this practice.
Intra-Office Communications
This is when multiple attorneys within the same firm discuss the client’s matter with each other or seek advice from a colleague about a legal issue. A major selling point for larger law firms is that they have a breadth of knowledge in specialized subjects. But when a lawyer seeks a colleague’s advice, the client should not have to pay for one attorney to educate another -- just have the knowledgeable attorney handle that part of the matter. When a law firm charges for intra-office communications, LBR will suggest corrections that are appropriate for the specific situation.