(Image credit: Getty Images)
Talk about putting useful information to work — our January 13 article, Billed 12 Hours for a Few Seconds of Work: How AI Is Helping Law Firms Overcharge Clients, riled up several readers.
The article notes that some law firms are using AI to produce — in seconds — documents that would normally take hours to draft. Yet, they’re billing for those hours as if the work had been done the old way.
This lit a spark under many who read the story and had “are you kidding me?” discussions with their lawyers.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more – straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice – straight to your e-mail.
Don’t be afraid to bring it up
Beyond saying, “I think you owe me a refund,” many readers reported that they went a step further. Not wanting to be dismissed with, “That’s our bill — pay it,” they researched their state’s bar regulations on charging for work that was actually performed — the time that was, in fact, spent on the task.
“Ben,” in Cleveland, wrote, “I found a shopping list of violations that could jeopardize her license to practice law. I don’t want to be accused of extortion or blackmail. I want to say, ‘AI was used, yet I was billed as if you had done the work yourself. I expect a refund for the unearned hours. You know the consequences if I file a complaint with the bar.’
“What if she replies, ‘Don’t threaten to complain to the bar, because that is blackmail, and you’ll find yourself in trouble.”
Ben absolutely can say that. Filing a complaint with his state’s bar would not be extortion, as there is a legitimate reason. I suggested this direct, yet more diplomatic, approach:
As AI was used to generate the material, all I am asking is for a refund of what I was overcharged and nothing more. I am prepared to file that complaint, but that is not what I want to do.
Our story also cited the destructive, inhumane, fraud-creating requirement for attorneys to bill 2,000-plus hours yearly to keep their job, which translates into expecting high-quality legal work to be produced 12 hours a day.
“Utterly impossible,” according to Dr. Luis Vega, professor of Psychology at California State University, Bakersfield. “This completely unreasonable and unachievable hour total finds decent people caught in a web of corporate greed.
“While there is individual variation, on average, four hours of intense focus is typically the most one can expect per day. It is called the Four-Hour Rule of Productivity.”
The responses to this issue, from attorneys in the U.S. and Canada, were touching.
From midsize to Big Law firms, lawyers phoned my office after 3 p.m. Pacific Time, which made it 6 p.m. on the East Coast, when most support staff had left for the day. (I ran phone numbers through a reverse look-up service to verify their origin, often seeing a photo and description on their firm’s web page.)
I listened as young lawyers poured out their hearts to me, some who had read this column throughout law school.
YouTube helps some lawyers cheat
I spoke with “Claudia,” “Rex” and “Tim” in New York, who teamed up on speakerphone. Claudia said, “When you used the term ‘sweatshop,’ that describes our job environment perfectly.”
Claudia chimed back in with, “You can’t fulfill a 2,000-hour yearly billing goal honestly. It is impossible. But YouTube billing tutorials by other lawyers showed us how to bill creatively — in other words, commit billing fraud!”
She directed me to a YouTube video where an attorney suggested billing whatever time is spent thinking about a client’s case — while taking a shower, driving to work, even sleeping.
“So,” Claudia continued, “when you wrote that the pressure and insane time demands destroy families and lead to divorce, burnout, depression and substance abuse, you have described most lawyers here — some are on their second marriage, at least.”
Tim observed, “Many attorneys who have been here for several years virtually have ‘I hate this place’ stamped on their foreheads. I do not know a single colleague who can claim being happy to come to work, despite the money.”
He added, “Not in our pre-law university classes nor law school was any of this reality ever discussed. I am looking for a job with the county or city because I do not want to become a statistic. I want a normal life, dinner with my family, taking our kids out for a trip to the park. I want to be a real husband and father, not someone who is married to the firm!”
A promise of change
One Kansas City, Kansas, law firm was different, though.
“Mr. Beaver,” “Monique” said, “your column is very popular here and is frequently discussed in office meetings. So when your AI story ran, there was quite a buzz!
“One of the partners called for a meeting and said, ‘We should send Mr. Beaver a box of Kansas City steaks. His AI story brought out into the open something we have all been aware of and, I’m sure, bothered by.
“‘Just so everyone knows, management gets it. We have been exploring old-fashioned ways to bill for services, just like Beaver referenced in his article. Please give us some time. Please trust us to make things better.'”
Dennis Beaver practices law in Bakersfield, Calif., and welcomes comments and questions from readers, which may be faxed to (661) 323-7993, or e-mailed to Lagombeaver1@gmail.com. And be sure to visit dennisbeaver.com.
