[costello]

I work at a law school, and I just had a chat with one our students who will be graduating soon. He mentioned he works for Kansas Legal Services, a organization that provides free and reduced price legal services to low income people. My son used their services while he was appealing his denial for disability. I thought they did a crap job for him, and I told this student so.

After my son was denied disability, we went to KLS which accepted his case. They interviewed him and looked at his medical records then sent him a letter stating that even if everything he alleged was true, it wouldn't prevent him from working, so they weren't going to represent him anymore.

I have to admit I was a little panicky when I got that letter. I mean my son was pretty psychotic at the time. It would have been difficult for him to hold a job. So, I called his case manager and asked her if she thought he was capable of working, and she agreed with me. No way he could hold down at job at that time.

So, I went out and found a "real" lawyer (i.e., he expected to be paid). This lawyer looked at his medical records and called me and told me that my son's records were too sketchy to support his claim. So I called the case manager, and she and her supervisor sat down and spent an entire day fleshing out his records. The lawyer took that file to SSA and got my son's disability application decided in his favor without even going to a hearing.

So, I told this student that KLS didn't impress me much and shared that story. What he should have said was, "I'm sorry to hear that. We feel like we do an excellent job, but sometimes cases slip by us. I'm glad to hear you were able to get it resolved in your son's favor."

What he actually said was that one can't expect decent legal services if one can't afford to pay, that the letter my son received was a form letter, that the form letters were meant to be 'tactful' rather than actually informative because some of their clients are 'crazy,' and that it was the fault of the mental health center for not maintaining good enough records as they were supposed to.

I'm still feeling a little miffed on several levels. What a jackass! He may or may not know much about the law, but I can say for sure he knows nothing about handling people (which will be a definite minus when he's practicing law).

Then at the end of the conversation he tells me that KLS's funding is being cut, like I'm supposed to be sad about that. Who cares? An organization that holds itself out as providing free legal services for poor people but does a piss poor job of it because really you can't expect much for free.

[shezbut]

I am very sorry to hear about your experience with KLS. What a jerk your paid attorney was about it too! Sounds like your son's case worker & yourself are the ones that got the case approved. Those case workers with the counties are terrific!

I have been very lucky with my area's free legal services. SO lucky!! My hub (now ex) and I went through mediation pro-bono. We also had bankruptcy handled pro-bono through another attorney during our mediation. We just had to pay filing fees for the court...I think it was $100 or something like that. All of the involved attorneys and therapist were very professional and kind to us. I am very thankful for the terrific services we were given!

I hope that the services aren't cut much, so many people out there need them.

Best wishes and hugs to you...

[costello]

Originally Posted by shezbut

I hope that the services aren't cut much, so many people out there need them.

I'm glad you had better luck that I did. I work on the reference desk, and I get questions from people who can't afford attorneys. I do give them the number for KLS when it's appropriate, but I have to admit I wonder how helpful they'll be after my son's experience.

I agree that legal services for the poor are critically needed. I talk to people all the time who simply can't afford an attorney and desperately need one.

I just wish our law students weren't so arrogant. Maybe it's just because they're young. We tell them how smart they are (which I gotta say they aren't anywhere near as smart as they think they are), and they think that's all they need. It's not enough when you're going to spend your career solving people's problems. That's what attorneys do. They have to be able to listen and to communicate. And they need some humility, I think. I'm telling this kid - who's young enough to be my son btw - about my bad experience, and he's giving me this condescending little lecture about how I shouldn't expect adequate services for free. Why not? Why bother to hang out your shingle if that's your attitude?

And it's not "free" anyway. They get funding from somewhere. The taxpayer I'm sure is picking up a lot of the tab. So, they're getting paid. They should do their jobs.

[Vibe]

It sounds like the free legal services did not do a thorough job. However, both services gave you the same valuable information - that your son's records did not support him getting disability. This allowed you and your healthcare providers to more thoroughly fill them out so he could get disability.

The free services are bound to be limited because they can only afford to do the bare minimum (as demonstrated by fact that they're now shutting down due to lack of funding). Not even the paid lawyer was willing to take the case as is because he could not win it. He only worked with it after the records were modified. It would certainly be nice if they could spend more time and energy on every case but it seems like the resources just aren't available.

[costello]

Originally Posted by Vibe

It sounds like the free legal services did not do a thorough job. However, both services gave you the same valuable information - that your son's records did not support him getting disability.

Actually the free service didn't tell me that. If they'd said that, I wouldn't have had a problem with them. What they said was that even if everything my son claimed was true, it wouldn't prevent him from holding a job. In other words, they told us he didn't have a case. (They were telling us that 'tactfully' in the words of the law student. They may have been 'tactful,' but they were also wrong wrong wrong.)

The fee-based attorney said that he might very well have a case (which he did, as it turned out), but that the medical records didn't support it. And since the medical records are god on a disability claim, the medical records would need to be fleshed out.

What it comes down to is that the attorney at KLS didn't know his business. And this kid is telling me that I should accept that that's ok, because their clients are poor folk who can't afford to pay. That's B.S., and it's unacceptable. Instead of defending a poor job, he should have just said he was sorry to hear they'd screwed up. Why is that so hard?

[Nobodyandnothing]

Where I live, legal services for the poor are funded through attorney licensing fees and the lawyers working there are very busy. Priority goes to criminal cases. SSDI cases are pretty specialized. Just like you can't expect a lawyer in private practice to specialize in everything, you shouldn't expect it from a legal clinic. There are lots of attorneys who do SSDI appeals on a contingent basis. Is there some reason you did not try one of these first?

[Nammu]

I happen to agree w/ Costello. It matters not that it is a free service, they took the case, looked at the records and they could see the medical records were not well filled out. They had a duty to inform their client of this. Pro bono(for the public good) or paid, exciting or boring, when safe or when in danger when legal services is engaged they have a duty to justice. Sadly many do the minimum time so they gain the experience to get a foot in the door to make money. Without understanding for a moment what the law truly is supposed to be in our country, blind to the color of money.

Too many seem to think working at places that serve pro bono gives them some kind of personal get out of bad karma free card(it doesn't, when you do it for the wrong reasons). When you volunteer or serve the public good you do so because it is the right thing to do, not because it looks good on your resume. It sounds to me like that kid is putting in his time because its the only way he'll get a job elsewhere.

[Nobodyandnothing]

I have some things to say but I just better let it go.

[costello]

Originally Posted by sidestepper

It matters not that it is a free service, they took the case, looked at the records and they could see the medical records were not well filled out. They had a duty to inform their client of this.

Yes. Thank you for understanding that. Once you take on a case, you have an ethical duty to follow through appropriately. You're not obligated to take the case. (You're not even obligated to continue representing the client after accepting the case - although in some cases you may have to persuade a judge that you should be allowed to step down. And the judge in rare cases may order you to continue - more likely in a criminal case, I think.) But you are obligated not to give bad advice.

We have a law clinic, and we don't take every case that walks through the door. We can only handle so many cases. And we only take on certain kinds of cases. And I believe we only take low income people. Anyone who falls outside of those parameters is turned away. But we don't say, "Sorry you have no case." We say, "Sorry we can't help you. You'll need to find an attorney elsewhere."

To me it's the exact equivalent of a doctor treating a patient for free, botching the treatment, then saying, "What do you expect for free?" It's irrelevant that the next doctor fixed the damage. Do it right or don't agree to do it at all.

In my son's case, it worked out ok, because I intervened and asked more questions. But what of all the people who get similar letters and give up?

[costello]

Originally Posted by Nobodyandnothing

Where I live, legal services for the poor are funded through attorney licensing fees and the lawyers working there are very busy. Priority goes to criminal cases. SSDI cases are pretty specialized. Just like you can't expect a lawyer in private practice to specialize in everything, you shouldn't expect it from a legal clinic. There are lots of attorneys who do SSDI appeals on a contingent basis. Is there some reason you did not try one of these first?

KLS takes no criminal cases.

The law student used the 'we're so busy' excuse too. But they're not obligated to take any case. If they have too many, they should just say 'no' to any additional cases that walk through the door. They could even make a decision not to take any SSDI cases, if they wished. They've chosed to make this a part of their services. They don't get to get off the hook with by pleading 'too much work' or 'we're not specialists.'