Comment from Former Legalmatch Salesperson?

This comment showed up today as a response to my original LegalMatch post, Why I’ll Never Use Legalmatch. I express no opinion on the comment’s validity, but food for thought if true:

Unfortunately, I was one of the salespeople at Legalmatch. For a very short time. (There are hundreds of us, and most of us were lied to as much or more than the attorneys.) Most attorneys did not have great success with the service, although they hid that from the sales people. The reason? People shop for free advice or post their cases for fun. They rarely hire an attorney. Yet, there is enough volume of these non-cases being posted to keep justifying the demand for “more attorneys” – i.e., more “allocations.” With high volume/high pressure sales tactics, extreme turnover of commission-only salespeople, and the real difficulty many attorneys have in getting clients, Legalmatch keeps getting people to sign up and hand over thousands of dollars. (Non-refundable once you’ve used the system – read the contract. And just try to get your money back from them if you’re unhappy.) Not a big surprise to me that Shubov was indicted.

8 Responses to Comment from Former Legalmatch Salesperson?
  1. Maryanne Dailey
    July 13, 2004 | 3:17 pm

    I agree that their are some definite drawbacks, however, I have recently discovered that the posting program for clients has been lengthened so that only seriously committed (potential) clients bother to post. In fact, it seems as though the entire program has had a face lift after the exit of their CEO. They must be trying to rescue their rep. I was thinking about not renewing, however, because of these changes I have had a steady increase of good cases from them, and have made my investment back and then some.
    oh well.

  2. Maryanne Dailey
    July 13, 2004 | 3:17 pm

    I agree that there are some definite drawbacks, however, I have recently discovered that the posting program for clients has been lengthened so that only seriously committed (potential) clients bother to post. In fact, it seems as though the entire program has had a face lift after the exit of their CEO. They must be trying to rescue their rep. I was thinking about not renewing, however, because of these changes I have had a steady increase of good cases from them, and have made my investment back and then some.
    oh well.

  3. Bob
    August 24, 2004 | 11:49 am

    Legalmatch–Earlier this month I turned down their offer to renew for close to a 100% rate increase over last year. The return I got last year on LegalMatch did not justify it. I still had about two weeks left on my paid-for subscription when I told them I was not going to renew. They went ahead and unilaterally terminated my paid-for account as soon as I told them I was not going to renew, vindictively depriving me of the last two weeks of the service. I will never, ever recommend that any lawyer do business with these people. The fact that their CEO got indicted for criminal business practices does not surprise me at all.

  4. Bob
    August 24, 2004 | 11:51 am

    Legalmatch–Earlier this month I turned down their offer to renew for close to a 100% rate increase over last year. The return I got last year on LegalMatch did not justify it. I still had about two weeks left on my paid-for subscription when I told them I was not going to renew. They went ahead and unilaterally terminated my paid-for account as soon as I told them I was not going to renew, vindictively depriving me of the last two weeks of the service. I will never, ever recommend that any lawyer do business with these people. The fact that their CEO got indicted for criminal business practices does not surprise me at all.

  5. Joshua
    September 30, 2004 | 12:00 am

    What’s behind the creation and operation of LegalMatch is one of the purest forms of evil I’ve ever encountered. Shubov is as crooked as they come! But it’s not just the (x)CEO – who is still running the company – it’s the whole operation. It would make the Russian KGB look like boy scouts. Of course, any attorney or person concerned about their reputation would RUN not walk from LEGALMATCH. All said, I can’t feel too bad for the attorneys who join (and especially those who rejoin!) – because with all the public warnings out there stating the true nature of this business and the people who run it, anyone who gets ‘sucked-in’ is a fool who didn’t do even a cursory amount of due diligence. And you know what they say about a fool and his money!

  6. Tracy
    September 29, 2007 | 5:45 am

    Here’s a 2007 update to LegalMatch. My wife and I have a successful Family Law Practice located in the second busiest county in the country for divorce. We scanned pages of LegalMatch cases before we joined. Five months, and 225 responses later, we have yet to retain a single case! This has been a frustrating nightmare for us, full of requests for pro bono work or free information, and no help from the company. In fact, LegalMatch will not provide us with any statistics, reports, or information about activity on these “cases”. The friendliness stopped when our complaining began.

    We recently sent a demand letter for our money back and I will update you on their response.

  7. lynette
    November 21, 2007 | 1:52 am

    Not suprised about your 2007 experience – could have told you as much in 2004, when I was a salesperson. Check out the local San Francisco Superior Court filings from legal match – appears their new gig is to trap attorney into contracts and then sue them for amounts due. They seem to continue to evade a class action for fraud. Wondering when it will catch up to them. Of course, the two founders are attorneys and understand the psychology of attorneys – who would bother to pursue a legal action (especially with the provisions of the Legalmatch contract) given the time and money stresses on most practices. Awaiting the time that Legalmatch finally (deservedly) collapses under its own deceptive weight. Too bad they will have ripped off thousands before that happens.

  8. lynette
    November 21, 2007 | 1:54 am

    Not suprised about your 2007 experience – could have told you as much in 2004, when I was a salesperson. Check out the local San Francisco Superior Court filings from legal match – appears their new gig is to trap attorney into contracts and then sue them for amounts due. They seem to continue to evade a class action for fraud. Wondering when it will catch up to them. Of course, the two founders are attorneys and understand the psychology of attorneys – who would bother to pursue a legal action (especially with the provisions of the Legalmatch contract) given the time and money stresses on most practices. Awaiting the time that Legalmatch finally (deservedly) collapses under its own deceptive weight. Too bad they will have ripped off thousands before that happens.

Leave a Reply

Wanting to leave an <em>phasis on your comment?

Trackback URL http://www.nonbillablehour.com/2004/05/legalmatch_from.html/trackback