BROAD AND CASSEL BILLED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR INCOMPETENT WORK ON A SIMPLE DEBT COLLECTION CASE Miami Florida

This matter has been resolved to my satisfaction, and I have no current dispute or dissatisfaction with Broad and Cassel. 

     On June 10, 2015, Broad and Cassel's attorneys sent us a letter demanding that we retract the "defamatory" statements we made in our Ripoff Report on Broad and Cassel.  In order to avoid litigation, we are revising our Ripoff Report.  Following is our original Ripoff Report on Broad and Cassel with our changes shown in bold.

     My wife and I hired Broad and Cassel ("Broad") for a simple note collection case.  The case was to collect money owed on a $300,000 note on which no payments had ever been made.  A simple case, yes?  Nonetheless, Broad botched (botched--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) this case and charged well over $100,000 for its incompetent (incompetent--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) efforts to collect on the unpaid note.

     As a direct result of Broad's incompetence (incompetence--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad), Broad received well over $100,000 from us, and we received nothing from the debtors.  The people who owed us $300,000 got away without having to pay us one penny.  But, Broad made sure to collect over $100,000 from us for their incompetent (incompetent--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) services.

     Some of the mistakes (mistakes--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) made by Broad were so basic (so basic--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) that we doubt that a first year law student would have made them.  For example, Broad filed a Motion for Sanctions too early, and the Motion was therefore denied.  This caused delays (delays--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) in our case, which, in turn, gave the debtors enough time to hide their assets and become judgment proof.  A most basic, stupid error (basic, stupid error--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) on the part of Broad.  

     Broad also added my wife to the creditors list when one of the defendants in the note collection case filed bankruptcy.  However, the creditor had not listed my wife as a creditor.  As a result (result--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) of Broad's stupidity (stupidity--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad)  and incompetently (incompetently--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) having listed my wife as a creditor in the bankruptcy, and thereby having corrected a major (major--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) error of the debtor's attorney at our expense, my wife was precluded from pursuing furhter collection efforts on the $300,000 note.

     We could go on ad infinitum about Broad's excessive (excessive--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) and inappropriate (inappropriate--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad) billings and incompetence (incompetence--solely in our opinion and contested by Broad), but it is just more of the same.  For more information on Broad and our complaints against Broad, we suggest you access the Florida Bar Association's file on Broad and its attorneys, including the extensive complaints we filed against the Broad attorneys.  The Broad attorneys against whom we filed complaints included Mark Raymond, Rhett Traband, and Francisco Armada.