An attorney needs to let you know if your case is worth pursuing, in accordance with your goals:…read more
I hired this attorney based on great reviews, having spoken to several. I was made to believe by Mr. Lamont, as with all of the attorneys, that I had an excellent case. A contractor said he would do certain work, I paid him, and he simply did not do it, and walked with the money. The Lamont staff seemed pleasant, he seemed articulate, but I was made to believe by Mr. Lamont that the approach suggested by the other attorneys I had consulted, starting by sending "lawyer letters" to the party I was having trouble with, was a waste of money. Mr. Lamont was going to immediately serve the other party with papers so he would have no time to cover his tracks, so to speak. This approach would be more costly initially, I was told, but far more effective. I beleived him and retained his services.
Two years later or so, the other party had successfully hired several lawyers who easily deflected and deferred any sort of settlement. Finally, it appeared to be time to go to court, or arbitration. At this point, Mr . Lamont made it clear that my chances of proving damages at any level were poor, that I would have to hire experts at a great cost, and likely would not get much of a settlement. He told me that all of my costs would essentially cost as much as I was likely to collect or more. I asked if my chances of collecting ANY money beyond costs had been just as clear at the outset, BEFORE he had collected his retainer and more several times. When pressed , he said that this outcome was indeed predictable. So I asked why he did not make this clear at the outset, and he offered that many people do not go into these lawsuits for money, but more to make their point, for the sake of principle. I asked if he had inquired of me at the outset if my goal was to reclaim money that had been taken for services not provided , or to make a point out of principle. No answer here. Of course, I had come to him to reclaim lost money, not to defend a principle. Based on information shared at this point, two years into the legal action, apparently no money to be reclaimed, I was forced to settle for enough money to make up what I had paid Mr. Lamont for two years of my wasted effort and time, plus less than 10% of my actual losses. AND for that privilege, I had to sign an agreement holding the other party harmless and stating that I could not so much as give the other party a negative online review for walking away with a LOT of money. So now others will be taken advantage of by the contractor involved, and I cannot help them.
If you want to pay for an attorney and have a similar result, stay in a case for years, providing documentation, etc. only to be told your case is not worth the money you have lost, this would be the man to hire. If you want an honest assessment of your case up front, and to be told that perhaps your case will end up costing more than it is worth BEFORE you pay the attorney (him) for several years, Mr. Lamont, in my experience, might not be an excellent choice. I think he is smart, but I think that this disclosure up front would have been not only appropriate and even critical, but absolutely ethically warranted. And it did not happen.
