- Report: #602518
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Jacques duChastel de Montrouge
Jacques duChastel de Montrouge5925 av. de l'Esplanade Montreal, Quebec United States of America
Jacques duChastel de Montrouge My lawyer screwed me, nuff' said Montreal, Quebec
*Author of original report: If all else fails...
*Consumer Comment: wrong attribution
*REBUTTAL Owner of company: corruption everywhere
*Author of original report: Screw him
*Consumer Comment: Thanks, but no luck
*Author of original report: Not too late...I hope
*Consumer Comment: Others aren't so lucky
*Author of original report: Case closed
*Author of original report: Took long enough...
*Consumer Suggestion: Don't Give Up
*Author of original report: New development
In 2004 I had sold items to a customer totaling $4850.00 which were to be paid for by monthly post-dated cheques dated from 2004 until 2008. I had also loaned items to this same customer totaling $250.00. My customer declared bankruptcy in 2006 but did not accurately report his debt with the bankruptcy trustee. He also refused to return any of the merchandise that I had either sold or loaned him.
I had contacted Me. Jacques du Chastel de Montrouge, based on a colleagues recommendation, to hear my case and see if it was legally viable. I had asked him during our introductory phone conversation if he charged for the first consultation, to which he replied no.
I met with him, not at his office but at a nearby caf, and after examining my case he said it was winnable and that it would cost me $500.00 to draft the motion and file it in court, and that any additional fees would be from his percentage of the money we would collect.
He failed to advise me if my business registration was up to date. Though it was my responsibility, since I dont have a secretary I have to check my paperwork myself, and I had more urgent matters to attend to. By his own admission, he simply assumed that it was up-to-date and did not bother to ask me during our first and second meetings. When he started the proceedings, he noticed this discrepancy in the business registry and brought it to my attention. I resolved the issue, but this omission on his part caused a delay in the proceedings, which at the time I figured was relatively minor.
After renewing my business registration, giving him the documents and paying the $500.00 invoice, he was incommunicado for a few weeks. I was later told that it was due to hospitalization.
He then sent me another invoice for $950.00 where he was charging me for our first and second meeting, our phone and Email conversations and the drafting and filing of the motion. I disputed this, on the grounds that the first meeting was supposed to be free of charge, that he never mentioned that he was charging for phone and Email correspondance, that the prices of the fees were never discussed and agreed upon and that the $500.00 fee was supposed cover the legal paperwork. He also wanted an additional $1,160.00 to cover possible contingencies such as skip tracing, contestation of the claim, etc. This in addition to the 25% he wanted from the money collected if I win the case.
Needless to say, I found this highly unreasonable since he refused to file the motion until the extra money was paid, and since he failed to list the prices of the fees in advance, this gave me the strong impression that he was just squeezing me for money and that perhaps the case was unwinnable. In which case he seriously mislead me.
After doing some calculations, I reasoned that $269.53, on top of the $500.00 already paid, was reasonable considering his lack of advance notice. I also took care of the skip tracing myself. He was again incommunicado and this time even his phone service was disconnected, leaving me to think he went out of business and that my case was abandoned. I was able to reach him later and he agreed to the aforementioned amount. He was to send me the invoice but I had to call back to remind him to do so, as I was preparing my tax returns at this time.
He sent the invoice in February and I paid it and was waiting to hear from him. I called him back to inquire how the case was progressing and he expressed surprise that I was still interested, since he (again) believed that I wanted to close the file. I replied that I had never expressed any such desire and that he please look into the matter. I have come to believe that his medical condition, in this case type 2 diabetes, may be affecting his judgment. His response was to send another invoice demanding the balance of the $950.00 he initially charged me, even after he agreed to and accepted the extra $269.53
In summary: He lead me to believe that my case was winnable under applicable law, asked for a set fee, received the money and after many delays for which he is partially at fault, he went back on his word and charged me extra money for services without consulting with me first and he refused to pursue the case unless I paid him the extra money. He repeatedly failed to list the prices of the fees in advance and when I confronted him about his apparent dishonesty, his characteristic response was to act disingenuously. Just today I found out from the local Bar Association that the time delay to file a complaint again a lawyer is 45 days, which would most likely explain why me took his sweet time getting back to me after I paid him.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 05/12/2010 10:15 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Jacques-duChastel-de-Montrouge/Montreal-Quebec-H2T-3A2/Jacques-duChastel-de-Montrouge-My-lawyer-screwed-me-nuff-said-Montreal-Quebec-602518. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.