Complaint Review: Manchanda Law Firm / Rahul Manchanda - 2029 Century Park East California
- Manchanda Law Firm / Rahul Manchanda 80 Wall Street, New York, New york 2029 Century Park East, California U.S.A.
- Phone: 212-968-8600
- Web:
- Category: Lawyers
Manchanda Law Firm / Rahul Manchanda Provided poor representation and misrepresented itself. 2029 Century Park East California
*Consumer Comment: Notice of Subpoena
*Consumer Comment: Notice of Court Proceeding
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
Ripoff Report
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
I contacted Manchanda law firm after my brother was arrested and detained awaiting deportation. I explained that he did not commit any crime and was simply walking down the street when stopped. Raul called and said that this was a very easy case and before I know it we will have him released and home. He sounded good but I was to become aware that his ego far outclasses his law skills.
So, I signed a retainer and paid $5000 up front for their services. Needless to say that this was a huge mistake. First they told me to inform my brother not to sign anything, not to take voluntary departure and then let them handle it.
We had a court date on Dec 23rd and Manchanda informed me that they will have to fly a lawyer out of NY to CA to represent us but they clearly list a CA office on their website so when I asked about why a lawyer needs to be flown from NY they skirted the question. One of the main reasons we chose Manchanda was because they had a west coast office.
When the lawyer flew out she then advised us that we should take voluntary departure but by then it was too late as an expedited departure was issued on dec 12th without our knowledge. Raul insisted that we knew and withheld this information which is totally wrong because it was never explained to my brother and because of the advice from Manchanda my brother said he won't sign anything and with ICE not explaining what it was we had no clue.
Not only that but when the attorney was here in CA she mentioned she had another client to see that day. Why did I pay $1000 for her to fly out here if she had another client?. Why wasn't this cost split?. These are questions Manchanda so conveniently never answer.
Why would he tell us not to take Voluntary departure then change his mind when it is too late.
After the last phone conversation with a Manchanda lawyer it was determined that there is not a lot they can do besides file a petition to stop the deportation but he will not do that until we pay another $3800. Why was I not informed of the running costs and only recieved a bill after persistently asking for it? Why did they go over the $5k without informing us that we were over?
Then the bill was ridiculous in what it listed. For a 20min phone conversation they charged us $1050.
This company left us in a worse state than when we started and then try to put it on us and say it was out fault and we withheld information. By checking this website it is apparent that this company has a reputation for this sort of practice. Thankfully I have a new lawyer and they are fully aware of Manchanda's record.
Steve b
Murrieta, California
U.S.A.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 01/05/2009 05:33 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/manchanda-law-firm-rahul-manchanda/2029-century-park-east-california-90067/manchanda-law-firm-rahul-manchanda-provided-poor-representation-and-misrepresented-itsel-408365. 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. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:



#2 Consumer Comment
Notice of Subpoena
AUTHOR: MAN ESQ - ()
SUBMITTED: Monday, October 27, 2014
Re: MLO - v.- Younglawyer et al.
New York State, Supreme Court, Kings County Index No.: 506175/2014
Please be advised that a court proceeding has been initiated regarding this posting in which the plaintiff seeks to learn the author’s identity by subpoena. The lawsuit is in the Supreme Court, State of New York, County of Kings, located at 360 Adams Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201. Any parties objecting to this request may do so anonymously by responding herein and must state the basis for such objection in accordance with applicable law. Objections made in bad faith or without merit may be subject to a motion for contempt of court, attorneys’ fees, or court ordered sanctions against the poster. The basis for the lawsuit is a defamation action against the defendants.

#1 Consumer Comment
Notice of Court Proceeding
AUTHOR: MAN ESQ - ()
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Please be advised that a court proceeding has been initiated regarding this posting in which the plaintiff seeks to learn the author’s identity. The lawsuit is in the Supreme Court, State of New York, County of Kings, located at 360 Adams Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201.
The caption is set forth below:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS -------------------------------------------------------------------X MLO,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
“YOUNGLAWYER”, “ANONYMOUS[1]”, “CLINTON”, “NYC ATTORNEY”, “DEEDEE”, “GRACE W.”, “ANONYMOUS[2]”, “J.AHMEDI”, “STEVE B”, “MARYIO07”, and John Does 1-9, names fictitious representing the anonymous posters of defamatory content described herein,
Defendants. -------------------------------------------------------------------X
|
Index No.: 506175/2014
|


Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.