Why Do People Not Prepare for Disaster? How You Can Be Different

Once again, a hurricane bore down on the United States.  Once again, people in the affected areas were told to evacuate.  Once again, hundreds did not, leaving them stranded in their houses as the water rose, or worse, dead.  Why is it that this keeps happening? It's not because people don't believe that the storm will hit (for the most part); it's not that they think the storm will be less severe than it's predicted to be, because surveys show most people believe the storm will be worse than forecast.  The reason is cognitive bias.  We know the storm will be bad, but we don't think it will affect us.  None of our neighbors are preparing, so we don't need to.  We forget what it was like the last time (which is also another explanation about why women have more than one child after enduring labor and delivery the first time). We focus on the immediate discomfort and decide to put it off.  We think if we do one or two things, we have done enough. 

In truth, our minds play tricks on us all the time, not just in the face of a natural disaster.  When was the last time you checked to make sure your long-term disability policy covered enough of your income? Have you updated your homeowner's insurance policy to account for the increase in the value of the house and its contents?  Probably not.  In fact, you probably even forgot you had those things except when the renewal notices arrive.

I'm sure you aren't surprised that Here in the Trenches, we come across folks who are unprepared all the time.  We have clients who saw the signs that their spouse was cheating or that their spouse was mishandling the finances, and ignored them.  We have clients who have been horribly abused, physically and emotionally, who downplay the severity.  We have clients who, when faced with overwhelming evidence that their spouse is taking a scorched earth strategy, still believe in an amicable resolution.  I'm not talking about stupid people, yet these folks fight us tooth and nail when we try to get them to see what's obvious to us and to take action.  Then, when like the hurricane's victims, they are left high and dry,  they can't understand how it happened, and somehow it's everyone else's fault.

I know facing reality is hard.  I'm human just like everyone else and underplay things that go wrong.  I'm not always the fastest at acting to correct the things that should be corrected.  I am, however, pretty darn good at protecting myself and I'm really good at protecting my clients - if they let me.
In that light, I have a list of things you can do to protect yourself, even if disaster never strikes.  If you do just one of these things, you will better off than the majority of the people I see.  If you do them all, then you're golden.  Notice, the list is short.

1.  Know what you own, where it is and what you owe.  You don't have to make a formal spreadsheet but have a good idea of what it is and where the paperwork is (making a copy and keeping it in one place is ideal).  I can't tell you the number of spouses who no clue - and that hurts you if you find yourself Here in the Trenches, or if you find yourself widowed.

2.  Apply for credit in your own name.  I don't care if it's a store credit card with a $200 limit.  Have something.  I had a friend whose mother became widowed and even though she had significant assets, she had a hard time refinancing the house and buying a car because she had no credit in her name at all. 

3.  Develop a marketable skill.  What if my friend's mother had no assets?  She was a housewife for 30 years and had no marketable skills.  She would have starved.  While you are married and have at least one other source of income is the time to take that word processing class, get a certification, renew your existing certification. Don't leave yourself dependent on the good health and employability of somebody else.  Even if you get alimony, that all goes away if the payor gets hit by a bus or dies.

Do one of the above and you're ahead of the pack.  Do two, and you're increasing your lead.  Do all three, and you win the race.  Here in the Trenches.

A Deposition is Not a Conversation, and Other Lessons of Life in the Trenches

When you are in the Trenches, you have the opportunity to learn a lot of lessons.  Those of us who work in the Trenches want you to learn how to co-parent effectively with your soon-to-be ex, to manage your finances, to create a life into the future, and to plan for your old age.  Unfortunately, there are also a lot of lessons we don't want you to learn the hard way.  Today's blog post talks about 5 of them.

1.  A deposition is not a conversation.  A deposition is when the other side's attorney sits opposite you at a table and asks you questions, the answers to which are made under penalty of perjury and recorded by a court reporter.  The attorney can ask you about ANYTHING that could lead to admissible evidence at trial.  In other words, they can ask you about just about everything, and you have to answer.  If you are a party to the case, that deposition can be used in court to contradict your testimony at trial or in place of your testimony at trial.  It's that important.  It is also the only time that the other side's attorney gets to speak directly to you.  Here's what we've learned in the Trenches - if we treat the deposition as a conversation, you will too.  You will talk to us like you talk to your friends and acquaintances.  You will drop your guard, and you will say things that aren't entirely accurate or that you wouldn't have said if your guard was up, because that's how regular conversations go.  A deposition is not a conversation; it is court testimony in an informal setting.  Treat it that way, and you won't learn an unfortunate lesson at trial.

2.  Completing discovery isn't optional.  I know that answering interrogatories and producing documents is a massive pain in the posterior (remember, I was a client once too).  It seems ridiculous to you to provide every darn document requested and overwhelming to answer every interrogatory fully.  Do it anyway.  Let me say that again - Do it anyway.  If you don't answer every question completely, if you don't provide every document requested, and then try to introduce at trial information or documents that should have been provided but weren't, you will get a nasty surprise.  Your information or your document may not be admitted at trial, and if its an important piece of evidence, that preclusion could cost you a decision in your favor.  If that happens, it's no one's fault but yours.

3.  Monitor your electronics.  We are so electronically connected these days that sometimes it's hard to remember everything that has a password.  Sure, most people remember to change the password on their email and their social media accounts, but what about Alexa, your Nest thermostat, your Ring doorbell, your digital door lock, your security camera?  Did you know those all could be used to spy on you or to drive you a bit crazy?  Do you have your computer open while you're talking to your paramour?  Are you sure no one has hacked into the computer's camera and microphone?  Is the GPS enabled on the phone that's on your spouse's cell phone plan?  Is your iPad password protected -are files you don't want your children (or spouse) to see separately protected?

4.  Monitor your online presence.  I love the phrase that is being shared on social media - "Dance like no one is watching.  Post on social media like it will be an exhibit at your deposition."  Enough said.

5.  A text is not an oral conversation.  It is a writing.  It is not a "he said; she said."  It is evidence of what was said, every much as is an email.  Treat your texts as if they will be evidence at your trial.  Don't call your spouse names.  Don't rant.  Think before you text.  It is so much easier to press "send" in a text than in an email, and for that reason, many people send texts in the heat of the moment. Don't.  It will come back to haunt you.  Be businesslike and polite and you won't go wrong.

Learn these 5 lessons of the Trenches and you can concentrate on mastering the bigger life lessons.  Here in the Trenches.

P.S.  If you don't recognize the picture, it's from the scene in "My Fair Lady" when Audrey Hepburn finally "gets' her diction correct.

Divorce Decision Overload AKA Analysis Paralysis

I have a real love/hate relationship with technology.  Sure, I need it, and when it works, it’s great.  When it doesn’t work, it’s a nightmare.  Many moons ago, actually at least a decade, I decided I had enough clients that I need case management software to manage my contacts, check for conflicts, keep my electronic client files in one location, automate documents.  I did my research, exhaustively.  I read everything I could on the various software.  I talked to everyone who had the software about what they liked and disliked.  I went to the ABA TechShow and talked to the vendors and played with the software.  I made my choice.  It has not worked as well as I hoped.  Every year, they updated the software, and when they did, it changed the data fields, so I had to hire a consultant at thousands of dollars every year to fix it.  I stopped updating.  They sold the company to one of the big legal data companies.  That company updated again, plus refused to provide support if you didn’t subscribe to annual updates.  Well, given all I went through, I wasn’t going to do that.  So, I have sat for many years, not really happy, but not sure what to do about it.  It works well enough, but it’s not great.  I’m not really happy.

Given that everyone in my office, including me at times, is not physically in the office, we made it possible for everyone to hop on our server remotely.  Given, however, that the power tends to go out at the office periodically and throws the server offline, that system isn’t perfect and I thank goodness one of us lives within walking distance of the office to turn it back on.  I thought we could migrate up into the cloud, that we could move all of our data into a new online service that would solve all our problems.  Then I started talking to others, reading reviews, reading comments, and realized the cloud systems are no better than what I have.  Plus, they charge a pretty hefty fee each month for my four users.  So, I feel stuck.  Actually, I feel paralyzed.  It hurts to stay, but it may be worse to leave.

The story sounds familiar, doesn’t it, not because we all have a love/hate relationship with technology, but because it sure sounds like I’m talking about leaving a marriage.  For so many of the folks who come into my office, this is their story.  They dated their spouse a long time before marrying. Their spouse seemed to have all the things they wanted in a mate.  Their families liked them.  Then they got married, and it didn’t work out quite as they planned.  Maybe their spouse wasn’t who they seemed to be.  Maybe their spouse changed.  Maybe their needs changed. Whatever it was, things weren’t great.  They weren’t awful, but they had the sense they could be better.  They tried to make things work - they went to counseling, had date nights, spent time alone.  Still not great, but not bad enough to do anything.  Then that new person at work seemed to like them; they sort of connected, even though they would never cheat.  It made them think that maybe there’s someone else out there with whom they could be happier?  But what if they’re not happier?  Then what?  They’ll be alone; they’ll have torn their family apart for nothing.  Maybe it’s better to just stay where they are?  

What’s a client to do? What am I to do?  For me, I’m going to keep researching and asking questions, of colleagues, vendors, and techs.  I figure one day there will be that one thing that makes my decision for me, either to go or to stay.  That’s how it always is.  On that day, and not before, I will decide. Then, I will be at peace with my decision; I will stop feeling angst and face the exhaustive process of either migrating my system or making do with what I have.  

That is why I am, at times, exactly the same as my clients.  Certainly, many of them have reached that point of decision when they walk in my office.  Many more, however, are still ambivalent. They’re not positive they want their marriage to end or the custody to change.  With those people, I spend a lot of time exploring what they really need right then, what they will need to know in order to make their final decision, how they can gather that information, and how I can help them tolerate and manage the uncertainty.  Going into the Trenches can be a grueling process, and it can be worse if you’re not sure that’s what you want to do.  Sometimes a lawyer can help you move forward even if moving forward is staying where you are and being comfortable with it.  We have a lot more experience than our clients in managing uncertainty, analyzing options and helping them find creative solutions.  Your lawyer - not just when you’re sure you want to divorce.  Here in the Trenches.

The Lessons of John McCain - Here in the Trenches

After the death of Barbara Bush, we all knew what it meant when John McCain's family announced on Friday that he had discontinued medical treatment.  Just as with Mrs. Bush, however, that didn't make the news of his death yesterday any easier to hear.  I'd like to take this post to talk about John McCain and two of the things that we in the Trenches can learn from him. 

First and foremost, if you know your core values, it doesn't matter what anyone else does.  You will always follow your own star.  Mr. McCain was offered the opportunity to be released by the Viet Cong only a year into his captivity.  He declined it because he knew it was because of who his father was, and that it would be used to break others who had been held longer but who didn't have well-known parents.  In other words, early release violated his personal ethics, so he didn't do it, even though it meant he was held almost 5 years longer than he could have been, in that hell-hole known as the Hanoi Hilton.  I don't think I need to talk about Mr. McCain's action in voting against the repeal of the ACA, against the mandates of his political party, because it was wrong.  (I don't care if you agreed with him.  It took guts and conviction to stand his moral ground against his political party).

Here in the Trenches, there will be people who do the wrong thing.  They exaggerate or outright lie.  They manipulate the children.  They hide money.  It's wrong to do that.  Yet, often it seems nothing bad happens to those people, that there are no consequences for bad behavior.   It's so tempting when faced with unpunished bad behavior to engage in it as well.  It takes a strong person to stay true to your inner self when your world is in chaos.  It takes strength to say no to short-term satisfaction.  John McCain knew the cost of not being true to himself - it's a looking yourself in the mirror for the rest of your life kind of thing.  If he can do it, so can you.

Second, he knew that mistakes don't have to define you.  John McCain's first marriage ended after his return from Vietnam.  Some of that was caused by the trauma of that captivity.  Some of it was caused by his infidelity.  Yet, you never heard about that during any of his campaigns.  I think that was, in large part, because he didn't hide it.  He owned it.  He moved on from it.  I am certain he felt guilt and regret, but he did not let them overshadow the rest of his life.  He made other mistakes as well, notably failing to speak his mind about the removal of the Confederate flag from the Capital building in Columbia, South Carolina, and his mistakes during the Keating scandal. All of us make big mistakes, luckily usually not in a national forum; he owned up to them and used them to inform his future actions and to teach the rest of us what humility looked like.

Here in the Trenches, folks do a lot of things of which they're not proud.  Some of those things are big; some of them are not. Some people kick themselves endlessly about what they could have done differently.  Some people let what they did wrong brand them for life.  Of course, there are those who behave badly who feel no guilt or remorse and we're not talking about them. The point is to face what you did wrong, what you didn't do right and deal with it.  Use it as a learning moment.  Embrace it.  Then us it to instruct your future self, move on and let the rest of your life show the rest of the world who you really are.  R.I.P. Senator John McCain.  Here in the Trenches

How Much Will My Divorce Cost? - Part 4 of 4

Whew!  You made it to part four.  Thanks for reading.  This part of How Much Will My Divorce Cost? is the hardest to think and write about.  This week, we're talking about fixed fees and value billing.  Why is this subject so difficult? There are a couple of reasons.  From the client's perspective, most of them have never been in the Trenches.  They have no idea of the value of legal services.  They all think that their case will be easier and take less time than other cases.  Plus, it seems like a lot of money to pony up.  From the attorney's perspective, they fear that without the hourly rate as a disincentive, clients will call them one million times a day, and monopolize their time, or (shudder) drop in unannounced multiple times a week.  It's also too much work to either figure out a fee that averages out to be reasonable or to sit down and have a deep conversation with the client about value and scope of service.

As we've done in the other parts of this series, let's start with definitions.  A fixed fee is a set amount of money that an attorney charges, either for set periods of the case being active or for discrete portions of the case, as opposed to a flat fee, which is a set fee for the entire case.  Let me give you more detail.  In a fixed fee, the attorney might charge the client $4000 for every 3 months the case is active, due and paid in full at the beginning of each period.  If you settle the case within the 3 month period,  then depending on the attorney and the length of time remaining in the time period, the client may or may not receive a refund of the pro rata unused portion.  An attorney might also charge a client per stage of the case, due and paid in full when that stage starts.  For example, the client might be charged for the initial litigation filings, then for discovery (information gathering), then for a hearing (which is generally a short court appearance), then for mediation, then for depositions, then for trial, and then post-judgment matters.  Each stage has its own fixed fee depending on how much time, skill and legal knowledge are required.  Fixed fees tend to apply across the board, with not a lot of customization.

Value billing is perhaps the most difficult of all the types of fees for the client to understand and the attorney to explain.  Value billing is simply that - deciding on a value to the case which adequately addresses the time and skill required of the attorney, and which the client believes is acceptable.  This kind of billing is difficult for a whole lot of reasons.  First, the client has to have a realistic vision of legal fees and the value of legal services.  That's difficult for most clients in the Trenches because the Trenches are usually the first and only time most people are ever involved in the legal system and have no concept of the reasonableness of a lawyer's fee.  Remember, part of reasonableness is the norms of the community, and they don't know what those are.  Second, The attorney has to assess the case in greater detail than they normally do in order to determine what the attorney thinks is reasonable. This assessment requires the attorney to do quite a bit of background work (at no remuneration) before setting the fee in order to determine the scope of the representation.  This second point is difficult on a couple of fronts: first, the client is usually anxious to hire counsel and may not want to wait to have an attorney under contract; second, the attorney may not want to put that kind of time into a lower dollar case. Third, the client and the attorney have to have an extremely detailed discussion of the extent and terms of the representation.  Having this kind of discussion when the client is emotional and overwhelmed is a challenge, but doable.

So I retain the format of the other posts, here are the pros and cons:

Fixed Fees

Pros

1.  The client knows what the representation will cost.  The attorney knows how much revenue the client will generate.
2.  The client can budget for the fee due dates.  The attorney has the certainty they will be paid and on time and their receivables will decrease.
3.  A fixed fee may be cheaper in the long run than an hourly rate.  The attorney has the incentive to be more efficient.
4. A fixed fee rewards the client who settles their case early. A fixed fee may mean the client is as motivated to settle as the attorney.
5. If the case turns out to be very complicated or time-consuming, the client doesn't need to worry it will increase fees.  The attorney can be creative without worrying if their creativity is costing the client too much money.
6. The client will feel free to share all important information with their attorney without concern for cost. The attorney will have all the information they need to best represent the client's interests.
7. The fee the client pays aligns with their need. The client may be willing to pay a premium for certainty.

Cons

1. The client may not have sufficient sources of cash or credit to pay a substantial fixed fee.  The attorney may lose clients who don't have the money up front, but who could pay over time.
2. A fixed fee may be more expensive than an hourly rate, depending on the complexity of the case and the length of time to completion.    
3. Knowing that there is another deadline for infusion of cash may cause a client to settle their case under unfavorable terms. Knowing a client lacks the funds to continue may also pressure the attorney to settle.
4. The client may cause compassion fatigue in the attorney by calling all the time.  Why won't the client stop calling?
5. This method may also inhibit creativity in order to get the case done before the next stage or installment of payment.  

Value Billing

Pros

1. The client is well-informed about the scope of the representation to be provided by the attorney.  The attorney has thought out the scope of representation and the intricacies of this particular case.
2. There are no surprises in the fee. Everyone knows what is expected of whom.
3. The client feels they are getting value for their money. The attorney knows the value the client places on their expertise.
4. The client sees the plan for the treatment of their case. The attorney develops the plan for the client's case early, before representation begins.
5. The client gets the best from the attorney because money is no longer a consideration.  The attorney can be as creative as they need to be without worry over cost to the client.
6. The client knows whether they can afford the attorney.  The attorney knows they're getting paid.
7. The representation begins with the client and attorney working as a team.  The client plays an active role and has a stake in the representation from the beginning.
8. It's the goal, not the fee that determines the cost.  It's the goal, not the fee that determines the cost.
9. The client doesn't have to worry about how much time the case takes. The case takes the time it takes.

Cons

1.   The client may lack the knowledge to adequately assess the value of the attorney's services.  The attorney may oversell the value of their services.
2. The client may not have sufficient sources of cash to pay the attorney.   The attorney may lose clients who don't have the money up front, but who could pay over time.
3. A fixed fee may be more expensive than an hourly rate, depending on the complexity of the case and the length of time to completion.  
4. The client may be too emotionally overwrought to decide whether a value-based fee is reasonable.  The attorney has to assess carefully the client's capacity to understand and make decisions.
5. The client can't hire the attorney or know the fee at the initial meeting. The attorney will have to put in significant time for no pay to decide the fee, with no guarantee they'll be hired.
6. Sometimes the lawyer may charge a wealthy client more than a client of more limited means for the same work.  

How Much Will My Divorce Cost? - Part 3 of 4 - Flat and Capped Fees

Not all attorneys charge strictly by the hour.  Some of them offer a flat or a capped fee.  What are they, and what are their Pros and Cons?

For purposes of this post, I'm going to define a flat fee as an all-inclusive, one-time fee that covers your case, soup to nuts, no matter the facts.  For example, some attorneys charge a flat fee for an uncontested divorce.  That fee covers preparation of the pleadings, necessary orders, and court appearance. If any other issues come up, say that the divorce isn't really uncontested, that is not covered, and many times the attorney defaults to an hourly rate.  Some attorneys charge a flat fee for a contested divorce, or for drafting a separation agreement.

A capped fee is when the attorney says that they will charge their hourly rate, but if the total bill reaches a certain dollar amount, they will stop charging.  So, if the attorney agrees to cap the bill at $20,000, once the hourly billings hit $20,000, the client doesn't owe any more money.

What are the pros and cons of each?

Flat Fee Pros

1. The client knows exactly how much they will be charged.  The attorney knows exactly how much to charge the client.
2. The client knows up front whether they can afford the attorney.  The attorney knows up front if the client can afford them.
3. The client pays up front and then they're done paying.   The attorney gets paid in full before starting work.
4. If the work is simple, then the fee represents the value of the work performed.  The work performed in a flat fee arrangement is usually work the attorney has done many times, so they aren't taking any risk and are probably making money.

Flat Fee Cons

1. The client doesn't always know what their case entails at the start of the representation.  The attorney may find there are unforeseen facts or circumstances that make a flat fee impossible or impracticable.
2. An unforeseen circumstance may cause the case to be more expensive than the flat fee.  The attorney may end up having an uncollectible fee if the cost exceeds the flat fee.
3. The client doesn't understand how the fee was set because it wasn't set with them in mind.  The attorney is resentful because the fee turned out to be too low for the amount of time and effort expended.
4. If the fee is set too low, the client may feel that the attorney isn't giving their case the attention it needs.  If the fee is set too low, the attorney may not give the case the attention it needs.
5. If the fee is set too high, the client may feel taken advantage.  If the fee is set too high, the attorney may gain a windfall.
6. The client and the attorney need to have a frank and detailed discussion about the scope of work, but they don't  The attorney and the client need to have a frank and detailed discussion about the scope of the work, but they don't.

Capped Fee Pros

1. The client knows the maximum amount they will be charged.  The attorney knows the maximum amount the case is worth.
2. Well, that's it for the pros.

Capped Fee Cons

1. This is the worst of all worlds, for both the client and the lawyer because it is essentially an hourly rate in which the lawyer simply doesn't get paid for their time if it exceeds the cap.  Why is this bad?
2. The client doesn't really get a windfall, because if the fees exceed the cap, there is a real risk the attorney may put the work on the back burner.  The attorney has no incentive to make that client a priority once they reach the cap.
3. There is no personalization of the fee to the client. There is no personalization of the fee to the client.
4. Just like hourly fees, there is no discussion about expectations and scope of work.  The attorney has no idea if they're making money, and in all likelihood, they are losing money.
5. Because the only upside of a capped fee is for the client, the attorney who offers this kind of fee is either a friend or a relative of the client, or really insecure about the reasonableness of their fee.  The client doesn't want an attorney who has no confidence in the reasonableness of their fee.

How Much Will My Divorce Cost? Part Two of Four - The Hourly Rate

Thanks for wading through Part One of this series.  Gird your loins for Part Two.

There are four main ways an attorney in the Trenches can bill for services:  hourly rate, flat fee, capped fee, fixed fee/value billing.  There are also combinations of the two, such as an hourly rate with some items charged as a flat fee, but we're not going to be talking about those.

Most clients who enter the Trenches hire an attorney and pay an hourly rate.  What that means is that the attorney charges for the time it takes them and their staff to complete a task.  It has the benefit to the client that they know how much the attorney charges per hour.  It has the benefit to the attorney that they know that everything that they do for the client it quantified.  Beyond that, what are the pros and cons of using an hourly rate here in the Trenches?

Pros

1. The client knows that every time they call the attorney, they are going to be charged. The attorney knows that the client knows that every time they call, they'll be charged, so they won't call too much and monopolize the attorney's time.
2. The client knows exactly what they are going to be charged for the time the attorney spends on their case.  The attorney knows how much to charge for every task. because it all gets charged the same.
3. The client just has to be concerned with paying the monthly bill for their attorney's fees.  The attorney can spread out receipts because they're based on time, not the case.
4. The client doesn't have to come up with a large sum of money up front.  The attorney can get a client signed up for not a lot of money, so more people will retain the attorney.
5. A more expensive attorney probably takes less time to do a task, so they're no more expensive than a cheaper attorney who takes longer. A more experienced attorney can charge a higher rate.
6. The client can determine what is and is not important to them based on the fee.  The client has no knowledge of what is appropriate to do or not to do and so a decision on process based on the hourly rate for the services may not be informed. 

Cons

1. The client knows that every time they call the attorney, they are going to be charged, so they don't call the attorney.  The attorney doesn't know vital information because the client didn't want to be charged to provide it.
2. The client has no ability to budget for legal fees because they vary based on the amount of work done.  Because the client has no ability to budget, the attorney may not get paid in full each month.
3. The client has no control over the amount of fees charged in a month. The attorney controls the amount of fees charged in a month by the amount of time they spend on a case.
4. The client doesn't want the attorney to pursue an issue because they don't have the money.  An attorney may limit the issues they pursue if they know the client has limited means (it shouldn't happen, but sometimes it does).
5. Every task is worth the same, no matter if it involves high skill and creativity, or simply churning out a form.  Every task is worth the same, no matter if it involves high skill and creativity or simply churning out a form.
6. Because a client is charged for time spent by the attorney, time spent waiting for a hearing, waiting for a judge, waiting for the other side in mediation, all increase the client's cost because they're being charged for the waiting. The attorney feels pressure to do work for other clients while waiting so they don't charge the client they're waiting for, and miss an opportunity to connect and learn more about the case. 
7. The attorney has no incentive to be efficient; being inefficient is more profitable.
8. The client is surprised by the amount of the fee.  The attorney spends years collecting the fee.
9. The client doesn't appreciate the value of the legal advice and expertise. The attorney doesn't appreciate the value of their legal advice and expertise.
10. The client may run out of money and have to enter into a settlement they don't want because they can't afford to keep negotiating.  The attorney may not have the money to explore all avenues of settlement.