Client
Update to reply from Mark: A lot to unpack for the attempt to explain the situation, while asking to confirm what really happened. I will do my best to recant our perspective, and why we feel the interaction was not very professional and influenced my review and disposition. When I called your office I explained to the staff intake person, that I was looking for legal advice for an employment issue for someone to find out if they should file a claim. Pretty standard. Your staff at that point did ask to speak to this person directly, and I put them on the phone within several seconds of the request and they were on the phone the entire time answering questions. We did request that I be allowed to be on the call, so we both listened to the intake questions from your staffer on speaker phone while they answered. I witnessed each question was clearly heard, and clearly replied to as the interview was conducted. Where the interview started to have issues, was when the replies to the questions were repeated back by your staff inaccurately which caused confusion. The questions were scripted and not difficult, but the staff person seemed particularly confused as if she wasn't listening at all to the answers and wasn't engaged in the interview. That's the real issue here. The staffer would repeat the answer back with something completely different than what was actually said to her. This led to a lot of unnecessary back and forth based on the lack of attention to the answers being provided. As I was listening along and hearing this obvious lack of care and attention, I tried to simply help clarify here and there but the staff person would just talk over both of us and that made things even harder to just answer the basic intake questions and allow us to start talking about the actual issue we called about. Once we finished explaining the legal situation and provided the details of the issue, we were told to hold as she would take the question to see if more discussion would be prudent. In about 30 seconds the staffer came back on the line and said to obtain the employee handbook, and look for answers on a government website. She then said there's no actionable issue even though the article on your website states the opposite as if she was providing a legal opinion. At this point I asked about the article on your website since she said you could not help us, as we were confused. At the end of your article it states the following. "don't hesitate to reach out to the experienced legal team at BLG. Our knowledgeable attorneys specialize in employment law and are dedicated to helping individuals like you navigate complex legal matters. Contact us today for a free consultation." Perhaps our reaction to the 30 seconds we were given to consider the issue and make that determination was interpreted as unhappiness or negativity, but we viewed it from our end as a lazy effort in providing a free consultation. We got what we paid for as you stated, as we paid nothing for such service. Any rational person looking for advice on a specific legal topic, would recognize this article as your firm having experience and expertise, or you would think. Throw that in with the words "free consultation" and you have a willing engagement from a potential client. Either way that is what happened and I only wish you took as much time to actually review and reply to our legal question, as you did to this review of our experience. That would have been something and probably would have earned a much better review. Besides I recognize now you are an accident injury attorney but offer a suite of other services and perhaps our issue isn't your strongest area. I replaced my previous post to make space to explain this in such detail, since you felt it necessary to hash it out here rather than reach out privately which is also pretty amateur and unprofessional in my opinion and should serve as a warning to others for how you reply to resolve issues with potential clients.