Crap lawyers in a torte case... | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Crap lawyers in a torte case...

Hey guys,good news.

I Contacted Diamond and Diamond who referred me to Neinstien and associates, because they have much experience with cases like mine where the client is unhappy with their current representation.
Greg Neinstien happened to be no.1 on the lawyer ratingz.com website.

He said he will cover any outstanding money's I owe them, and it is poor practice to take any part of benefits paid to people by the insurance and it is not how THEY operate..

We will see how it goes, I'll update.
 
jeffjones said:




He signed a contract saying 30% of ALL benefit including insurance.
Click to expand...

And since the benefits are geared to simply provide necessary service, that leaves them without the financial wherewithal to get by. Definitely a huge mistake to have signed that, but not something I would have ever expected. Maybe a retainer up front and a percentage of the settlement, but I would never expect to have to give up money from benefits cheques.

I agree with those who are saying pay them off, then dump them.
 
Hi Alex,

I was actually going to suggest Oatley & Vigmond, Thompson & THompson or Neinstein. In my adjuster career I have found that they were actually really good to work with.

Your expenses for housekeeping, caregiving and attendant care SHOULD have been paid within 30 days of submission. If they weren't, than interest should have come in to play at a rate of 2% prior to Sept 1 2010 and after Sept 1 2010, 1%.

Have you been to an insurer's exam yet? Is there a formal stoppage in place for your benefits? IF not, then you're still entitled to further reimbursement.

There are plenty of ****** paralegals out there who don't care about your case or are only in it for the money, and for soft tissue claims, that's all they're good for. It sucks you got stuck navagating the system without a proper guide. It sounds like the paralegals did not do their due dilligance in contacting the claims adjuster to get your benefits paid.

I hope your claim gets placed back on track ASAP
 
Hehe, now I get your screen name..

Thanks for the kind words, Greg Neinstien sure made me feel confident, he said he will cover any outstanding bill at PLZ for me, for the time being. Very professional and I wish I had found them or similar much sooner! Oh well, live and learn.
 
"I was actually going to suggest Oatley & Vigmond, Thompson & THompson or Neinstein. In my adjuster career I have found that they were actually really good to work with."

I could not find Thompson and Thompson ,I think they changed to Thomson Rogers. They seem Like a really good choice and I contacted them but they did not get back to me yet. Oatly&Vigmond also have a detailed, informative website and look to be IMO a good firm for consideration. Goldfinger did get back to me but he seemed to lose interest but offered me a free consult anyway. Diamond and Diamond referred me to Neinstien whom already got back to me at that point.

I have all of the paperwork from Neinstien ready to sign, and as soon as I drop it off I will have retained them. I don't feel at this point that there is any need to meet with other possible lawyers, I really think there would be little difference which of these firms I go with. They all seem excellent but Neinstien seems eager to take our case.

Thank you for sharing that you have had good experiences with Nienstien and it is good to know they are respected by insurance company's (your's anyway).

All these mentioned firms deal strictly with personal injury, while PLZ dabbles in many branches of law and IMO have little experience with these matters, moreso in corperate and realestate law. They should have never accepted my case nor any other personal injury case as all they are interested in is how much money they get out of it with minimal effort. For example, I only once ever saw or spoke with an actual lawyer, always with a paralegal.

Lastly, We refused further homecare, attendent care, housekeeping and childcare after 3 months because we had not received any compensation at that point, even though it would have been welcome. It took six months to get anything but we still get letters from insurance stating things like "attendent care allowance 90 000, therapy 100 000 benefits remaining". Actually getting it in time for it to be useful, is another matter completely, the PLZ should have done a better job to ensure our recovery assistance was more seemless.

Thanks all,
 
krrakt said:
Hey guys,good news.

I Contacted Diamond and Diamond who referred me to Neinstien and associates, because they have much experience with cases like mine where the client is unhappy with their current representation.
Greg Neinstien happened to be no.1 on the lawyer ratingz.com website.

He said he will cover any outstanding money's I owe them, and it is poor practice to take any part of benefits paid to people by the insurance and it is not how THEY operate..

We will see how it goes, I'll update.
Click to expand...
That's friggen GREAT news!!! I love that they are going to cover the balance at the previous lawyer!!!

Sounds like they'll really kick some *** for you!! :D

-Jamie M.
 
I thought it was a very cool move,

So I guess there are lawyers who will work for 8 years for free. Although I'm sure only ones that are confident enough in their skills, enough to know it will more than pay off in the end....
^
not directed towards you btw..

What's a "sprocket":confused: anyway..
 
Last edited:
krrakt said:
I thought it was a very cool move,

So I guess there are lawyers who will work for 8 years for free. Although I'm sure only ones that are confident enough in their skills, enough to know it will more than pay off in the end....
^
not directed towards you btw..

What's a "sprocket":confused: anyway..
Click to expand...

Your first lawyers did a poor job managing your expectations, but what i am starting to see is a lot of unrealistic expectations.

You went to a new lawyer, offered him a new client and in a day you think he is mr. wonderful?

I wish you well, but you might want to hold off on your snarky comments about someone working for 8 years without pay, because if you think you found that guy you are in for a ****** surprise.

firstly, all the best litigators in the country go hourly, because contingency fees are about one thing and one thing only, quick settlements, you take a case thats a slam dunk, convince the injured guy that its gonna be a fight, ask for a high percentage, then settle in 3 weeks. Lawyers on contingency fees almost never go to trial, and as a matter of fact, over 95 % of all cases never hit trial (Ontario statistic).

The fact of the matter is, every single one of them would settle for 100, rather than to go to trial for 120. If you are expecting the latter, you better get off your contingency fee arrangement.

PS - Lexpert and Chambers Global are the only rating agencies I trust for lawyer competency. A quick seach on Lexpert shows 35 personal injury lawyers listed in Toronto of which 7 are from Thompson Rogers.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the input.
Nothing is set in stone as I havn't signed anything yet so my options are still wide open.
I sure wish I knew about the Lexpert and Chambers Global ratings long ago, I dont recall the name in all my searches.
I am aware that 95% of cases do not go to trial, actually thought I read 97% somewhere. I hope we dont need to go to trial to get fair compensation, but this lawyer said to me today that he is prepared to go to trial if necessary.
I wish Thompson Rogers got back to me, I will try again.
I did not say anybody was "mr wonderful", I simply said it is great of them to cover the PLZ bill, and he seemed eager to take on our case. Also I will report later on how it goes.
These are subjective statements from my point of view, Nothing I've said is necessarily fact. Just my point of view.
I also value your comments as I know that I can get over excited about things and perhaps the facts can be unclear to me at times. So thanks for the helpful enlightnment and the rating agency information..
 
Last edited:
Good luck on your case. I hope it all works out for you. Neinstein is a good firm. I've worked with them on a few serious cases. Thompson & Rogers is a good firm. They protect their client's interests without being a-holes about it. I've referred a couple of claimants to them when I noticed they were struggling with their claim. It's technically a conflict of interest, but, screw it.
 
Hi,

Thanks, it is re-assuring that Neinstien is held in high regard, I decided to go ahead and retain him.

Also aparently he will be on the Lexpert list this year although he does not think it is much of a big deal, "Just a popularity contest between lawyers" he said.

Hopefully my experiences here and the comments from everyone will help others who are injured find good quality representation right off the bat.

If you cross reference lawyerratingz.com with the Lexpert list to find an attorney, I doubt someone could make a poor choice of council. I sure wish I did in the begining.

Conflict? I did not see anything:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
krrakt said:
Hi,

Thanks, it is re-assuring that Neinstien is held in high regard, I decided to go ahead and retain him.

Also aparently he will be on the Lexpert list this year although he does not think it is much of a big deal, "Just a popularity contest between lawyers" he said.

Hopefully my experiences here and the comments from everyone will help others who are injured find good quality representation right off the bat.

If you cross reference lawyerratingz.com with the Lexpert list to find an attorney, I doubt someone could make a poor choice of council. I sure wish I did in the begining.

Conflict? I did not see anything:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Did you go to the office on Bay st, or Finch ave?
 
1200 bay, 7th floor.
 
OpenGambit said:
Your first lawyers did a poor job managing your expectations, but what i am starting to see is a lot of unrealistic expectations.
.
Click to expand...

A number of years ago I listened to an interview with a doctor representing the medical profession. The discussion centred on a woman in Hamilton who sued her doctor because she experienced pain giving birth and he said childbirth could be painless. She lost the case and had to pay all legal costs.

The interesting thing was the concept of realistic expectations. In the interview the doctor stated that he didn't doubt that the woman suffered from some pain but it was realisticly minor. Apparently the courts saw it that way.

The doctor went on to comment that he was a cancer specialist and if he failed to cure a patient could he be sued because he failed the patient's exectations?

As we go through life:

If a restaurant serves you lasagna that doesn't taste like your mother's do you have to pay for it?

If the weatheman says fair today and the picnic is rained out can you sue?

If a bar serves you a "Cold" beer that's 40F and you keep yours at 38F....????

If a client picks a service (Legal, medical, automotive etc) without doing reseach and the service maintains the same lousy batting average whose fault is it if the service is poor?

I'm talking generalities not this specific case. We only hear one side and the devil is in the details.
 
The short answer is that you can only recover on negligence. if they were not negligent, you can't recover even if you think the service wasn't what you expected.
 
PLEASE!!!! do not use diamond and diamond. they are crooked. they will offer you the world, and will do the bare minimum.

Also, in my experiences with Neinstein, they will wait until the last minute, after collections etc are involved, before paying out anything.

try to get in with thompson rogers, or oatley vigmond.
 
My neighbor's car was rammed from behind by another car and slightly hurt. After 18 months he received $70,000 and that's just a "pre-payment", he told me he expects over $100,000 more on the 2nd settlement, well his lawyer told him that, btw the lawyer took 30% of those first $70,000 and plans on taking another 30% of the $100,000.
 
vociferous said:
PLEASE!!!! do not use diamond and diamond. they are crooked. they will offer you the world, and will do the bare minimum.

Also, in my experiences with Neinstein, they will wait until the last minute, after collections etc are involved, before paying out anything.

try to get in with thompson rogers, or oatley vigmond.
Click to expand...

Well. its a done deal now. Neinstien it is. Your recomendations are the best choices available but unfortunately I did not know that at first and when I contacted them they did not seem eager to take my case which has already been messed up by another firm. Nienstien on the other hand has already cleared my bill with PLZ, lthough I'm certain to be paying for it in the long run. I feal they are going to stay on top of things for us. after all it can't possibly be worse than having a real esrate specialist FUBARing our case.

Thanks for the comments
 
nobbie48 said:
A number of years ago I listened to an interview with a doctor representing the medical profession. The discussion centred on a woman in Hamilton who sued her doctor because she experienced pain giving birth and he said childbirth could be painless. She lost the case and had to pay all legal costs.

The interesting thing was the concept of realistic expectations. In the interview the doctor stated that he didn't doubt that the woman suffered from some pain but it was realisticly minor. Apparently the courts saw it that way.

The doctor went on to comment that he was a cancer specialist and if he failed to cure a patient could he be sued because he failed the patient's exectations?

As we go through life:

If a restaurant serves you lasagna that doesn't taste like your mother's do you have to pay for it?

If the weatheman says fair today and the picnic is rained out can you sue?

If a bar serves you a "Cold" beer that's 40F and you keep yours at 38F....????

If a client picks a service (Legal, medical, automotive etc) without doing reseach and the service maintains the same lousy batting average whose fault is it if the service is poor?

I'm talking generalities not this specific case. We only hear one side and the devil is in the details.
Click to expand...

Aparently my expectations of getting insurance benefits after 3 months were not so urealistic, We are entitled to be re-embersed every 30 days according to the the adjuster.
Also I don't know the "other side" of the story as they (PLZ) not once gave us an update on our case, and only contacted me after I recieved my first benefits check , only to take a part of it, 7 months after the accident! I don't really see a valid reason besides inexperience or incompetence for this delay. I will soon know what they have actualy accomplished on my case and I will report on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom