Phillip W. Harris - James D. Lia - Budget Legal Center fraud, illegal practice of law RIPOFF Los Alamitos California

This firm is very sorry for any acrimony that this has caused complainant, but this firm rebutes her aspirions and accusations. It was very difficult to initially research this issue as complaintant does not identify herself; however, this is ((( name redacted by ROR)))retained this firm to complete a Chapter 7 bankrutpcy filing; the petition was filed ((( case number redacted by ROR))) and was duly discharged on June 6, 2006. The terms of retainer were fulfilled in a professional and expedient manner as has been the case in the thousands of bankruptcies that this firm has prepared.
This firm, its attornies and employees further propound:
1. We are a (2nd floor) tenant of Washington Mutual Bank, who occasionally allows us to use a 1st floor office for clients who have a mobility issue as xxxxx does.
2. We are not a paralegal business; Budget Legal Center is a professional law firm, acknowledged by both the Corporation Commissioner of the State of California and the California State Bar Asso.
3. xxxx acknowledges that she paid us by two credit card checks, which she later elected to put into the bankruptcy; in essence, she paid this firm no money for her bankruptcy. xxxxx: how were you "ripped-off"?
4. xxxxx has shown histrionics of making complaints and aspirtions of people around her. Without embarrassing xxxx, I have saved most (if not all) of our emails from her that talk about people breaking in to her apartment and stealing silly things, bizarre remarks about her landlord, and discussing lawsuits on government agencies for "elder abuse" and "emotional trauma".
Again, we are sorry for whatever perceived acrimony this has caused xxxxxx, but this firm denies any wrong doing as the complainant received the services percribed that lead to a successful discharge of her debts.

This firm is very sorry for any acrimony that this has caused complainant, but this firm rebutes her aspirions and accusations. It was very difficult to initially research this issue as complaintant does not identify herself; however, this is ((( name redacted by ROR)))retained this firm to complete a Chapter 7 bankrutpcy filing; the petition was filed ((( case number redacted by ROR))) and was duly discharged on June 6, 2006. The terms of retainer were fulfilled in a professional and expedient manner as has been the case in the thousands of bankruptcies that this firm has prepared.
This firm, its attornies and employees further propound:
1. We are a (2nd floor) tenant of Washington Mutual Bank, who occasionally allows us to use a 1st floor office for clients who have a mobility issue as xxxxx does.
2. We are not a paralegal business; Budget Legal Center is a professional law firm, acknowledged by both the Corporation Commissioner of the State of California and the California State Bar Asso.
3. xxxx acknowledges that she paid us by two credit card checks, which she later elected to put into the bankruptcy; in essence, she paid this firm no money for her bankruptcy. xxxxx: how were you "ripped-off"?
4. xxxxx has shown histrionics of making complaints and aspirtions of people around her. Without embarrassing xxxx, I have saved most (if not all) of our emails from her that talk about people breaking in to her apartment and stealing silly things, bizarre remarks about her landlord, and discussing lawsuits on government agencies for "elder abuse" and "emotional trauma".
Again, we are sorry for whatever perceived acrimony this has caused xxxxxx, but this firm denies any wrong doing as the complainant received the services percribed that lead to a successful discharge of her debts.

This firm is very sorry for any acrimony that this has caused complainant, but this firm rebutes her aspirions and accusations. It was very difficult to initially research this issue as complaintant does not identify herself; however, this is ((( name redacted by ROR)))retained this firm to complete a Chapter 7 bankrutpcy filing; the petition was filed ((( case number redacted by ROR))) and was duly discharged on June 6, 2006. The terms of retainer were fulfilled in a professional and expedient manner as has been the case in the thousands of bankruptcies that this firm has prepared.
This firm, its attornies and employees further propound:
1. We are a (2nd floor) tenant of Washington Mutual Bank, who occasionally allows us to use a 1st floor office for clients who have a mobility issue as xxxxx does.
2. We are not a paralegal business; Budget Legal Center is a professional law firm, acknowledged by both the Corporation Commissioner of the State of California and the California State Bar Asso.
3. xxxx acknowledges that she paid us by two credit card checks, which she later elected to put into the bankruptcy; in essence, she paid this firm no money for her bankruptcy. xxxxx: how were you "ripped-off"?
4. xxxxx has shown histrionics of making complaints and aspirtions of people around her. Without embarrassing xxxx, I have saved most (if not all) of our emails from her that talk about people breaking in to her apartment and stealing silly things, bizarre remarks about her landlord, and discussing lawsuits on government agencies for "elder abuse" and "emotional trauma".
Again, we are sorry for whatever perceived acrimony this has caused xxxxxx, but this firm denies any wrong doing as the complainant received the services percribed that lead to a successful discharge of her debts.

Hello Timothy:

Thank you for taking time out of a busy professional life to respond.

Mr. Harris owns a paralegal service and is not
"employed" by the attorney in question. Therefore, he was not acting as "intake".

Part of the reason for Mr. Lia being on probation is he alleged at hearing he was incompetent, remorseful, and had severed ties with Mr. Harris.
Further, papers were sent back as not being properly filed. NO copy has ever been given to me by alleged law firm.

As any fraud is reportable, I have submitted facts to the trustee and appropriate other officials.

Thank you for wishing me luck and I DO hope for the best. Sad for them, as I had planned several legal procedures relevant to senior planning, etc.

I could well be wrong, and hopefully some others who are more knowledgeable in this field than myself will give you some responses, but I see no malpractice here.

You set forth three issues:

1) The office is not ADA compliant, so they are using the facilities of a bank downstairs.

2) Mr. Harris is coordinating your case even as he is not a licensed attorney.

3) Mr. Lia is on probation, and is not timely responding to your communications.

Your first concern is easily dealt with, and I'm not really sure why you are bothered by the use of the bak facilities. Many, if not most attorney's offices are located in the upper levels of office buildings. Good attorneys accomodate their elderly and handicapped clients by making arrangements to use ground level conference roooms. Nothing at all wrong with that and, in fact, it is this very arrangement that defeats and ADA claim.

Mr. Harris is probably a paralegal, or some other sort of legal assistant. MANY lawyers/firms do their client intake via paralegals. The paralegal gets all the pertinent information and delivers it to the attorney in a very efficient manner. This saves the attorney's valuable time, and probably saves you money as well. In fact, this arrangement is probably part of the reason that your bakruptcy was so cheap. So long as the paralegal is not advising you on legal matters or filing papers that are not authorized by the attorney, I don't think he is actually practicing law. And since he is not actually practicing law, he is not engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.

Furthermore, it is perfectly reasonable for calls to the attorney to go through the paralegal. The paralegal will note your concern and deliver it to the attorney so that he may address it properly. If the concern is something that the paralegal can take care of, it's better for him to do so because his time is worth less money. If the concern needs the lawyer's attention, then he can take care of it, but your legal fees will escalate in such a case.

In my firm, clients are billed at $85 per hour for the time of a paralegal, and between $150 and $400 for the time of an attorney. Wouldn't you want the paralegals to handle all the aspects that don't require the time of an attorney?

But the fact that Mr. Lia is on probation for assisting in the unauthorized practice of law is a bit sketchy, especially when combined with your facts. You may well be correct in your assessments.

The appropriate advice at this point, then, would probably depend on the outcome of your bankruptcy. If it is loused up, you will probably have a pretty solid case for legal malpractice.

If it ends up the way it should, then you are in an "all's well that ends well" situation, with no damages, and therefore no real basis for a lawsuit. In this situation, a letter to the state bar would probably be your best bet.

Best of luck to you!