They Even Charged Me For The Stamp
Print This Post
I got a bill from a lawyer today. The bill was for a few hundred dollars - nothing unusual or unreasonable for the services rendered. But at the bottom of the bill, under “Disbursements”, there was the following: “Postage: 0.52″. The postage, I assume, is for the stamp on this bill.
My dentist doesn’t charge me for postage. Neither does my doctor, my accountant, or anyone else who ever sends me a bill. Sure they build it into overhead, but that’s not the issue. Only my lawyer sends me a bill that charges me for the stamp they use to send me their bill. And this is pretty much all you really need to know about why so many people have such strong negative feelings about lawyers. Honestly, I’m getting really tired of feeling ashamed of my profession.
This is the Trackback URI
/images/rss.jpg)
alas, and sadly, I fully agree. Although $0.50/page photocopying is even worse. I heard of a client, plaintiff in a wrongful dismissal suit, telling his lawyer that he’d gladly go to Kinkos and do his own photocopying at $0.02/page and then bring the results back to the lawyer.
As a law student, the recent flood of negative press and comments about my future profession is disheartening and concerning.
Does it speak to greediness or poor marketing? I’m biased, but I think it’s the latter.
For the last seven years, I have only billed real third party bills as disbursments. No stamps, phone calls, faxes, photocopying -unless supported by invoice by Kinko’s or the like, or anything else. Clients pay for my legal services and not my operating costs.
The sad thing is that the Law Society allows this nonsense about billing for operating costs to continue.
I do the same thing, Michael. It seems the right thing to do. And clients really seem to hate being chanrged for operating overhead.
I don’t understand the *business* argument for billing for a stamp. It makes you look like you bill for work over value. What client wants that to pay for that proposition?
Rob; Good for you. Too bad more clients don’t demand our billing scheme. Clients pay enough money for legal services, they don’t need to pay for the freight.
Jason; Agree with you entirely. But few legal consumers look at it that way. Maybe I should start blogging about it more?
I agree with the irksome nature of charging for the stamp, Rob, but to your profession’s credit it’s not the worst of this type of thing - which is sad commentary.
One that really bothers me, in the Toronto area at least, is the 407 ETR Toll Highway. Never mind charging for the stamp, they charge for the whole invoice, as well as a lovely “no transponder” fee. Using the thing for one exit will cost you around $5.90 - never mind that the fee for the service itself (that is the simple per KM cost of using the road) is at most $0.176/KM.
That’s - wait for it - the *definition* of highway robbery.
Then, there are the “system access fees” that wireless providers charge in Canada. These are about $7/month and are for *nothing more than the cost of the carrier doing business*. People think that they are a tax, or Government fee or something. Nope. It’s just revenue, carved out to make the sell price look lower.
I could go on…
That fee drives me bonkers. Oligopoly fee, AFAIC.