Another "reputation" experiment

Word of mouth/reputation   In communications with attorneys and the Virginia State Bar they stated that "word of mouth" serves the regulatory function over this industry. The Virginia State Bar an Agency of the Supreme Court of Virginia has chosen to dismiss oversight of the service. It will address obviously easy concepts such as turning in papers and attendance. It will also go after such activities as members desertion, but in this case it will not protect the damaged clients, so much for those old ethical standards pre-2000. It is to be noted that if the Bar was concerned with DR 1-101. Maintaining Integrity and Competence of the Legal Profession. the institution would have ensured one probono client had competent counsel for their case and billed the offending deserter's case.

Sunday June 14, 2009 I sent an email to the law firm of Whitestone, Brent, Young and Merril, P.C., addressing the failed services of a senior partner in their law firm, Mr. A. Strode Brent. The question becomes Does direct "word of mouth", reputation have any regulatory impact on this industry ?

Sunday June 20, 2009 - No response, silence, it is expected. Again this identifies the regard these professionals have for their services and the clients that they service.

I doubt that there will be a response, if there is I will probably be called names, love the ad hominem attacks by the Judge Jay Scott Bybee's of the world.

Check out how the attorney population responds on lawyers.com forum to experiences such as ours. From these responses would you want one of these individuals representing you, subjecting you to name calling regardless of ones mental acuity. They claim to be professionals and what I was describing was taking legal action against the Virginia State Bar for negligence, presumably action could be taken against either the State of Virginia or the Bar. The State for a betrayal of the public trust, the Bar for negligence. Maybe not but calling me stupid does not represent professionals, just cowards who I would not want in my corner.

January 25, 2009 I tried to write some negative reviews on attorneys. Interesting discovery, they were not posted. I did not use offensive language, so that is not an excuse. Some have called me stupid so it may have been incoherent, but that does not mean that the review is not relevant. The bottom line is that the review was not posted. The only conclusion that I can come to is that negative press is censored. As a result no individual researching this attorney, a member of the Virginia State Bar can make an informed decision.

Better Business Bureau March 2006 we subscribed to a company called Pre-Paid Legal Service, we thought that this would be a solution to our attorney diligence problem. This turned out not to be a case, the service claimed to be able to provide an attorney within 24 hours. My girlfriend gave three weeks notice and no attorney was referred for a court date. So July 30, 2007 we contacted the The Better Business Bureau for failed service. The Bureau claimed that it was outside their purview, I responded that it was, as explicit services were not rendered, the complaint was filed but the Bureau recommended that we contact the Virginia State Bar. The law firm responded to the Bar that they had referred an attorney and that they had sent a letter, course the letter was dated after the court date and we never received it. A year passed of requests to address and a complaint to the BBB and the Bar made before this excuse was provided ? The Bar sided with Pre-paid Legal Services and their "referring" law firm.

"Reputation" is not an effective deterrent to those that participate in predatory practices. Like any criminal they have a plan and it is to claim the accuser has "sour grapes" or make a joke of their failed diligence.