When I was first introduced to the concept and structure of a virtual law practice, also known as cloud computing, it was love at first sight. I did my homework: researched and investigated the concerns and issues, and how they were being addressed in the evolution of SaaS (Software as a Service) platforms specifically designed for law firm use. Now it was love at second sight.
Then I read Legal Implications of Cloud Computing – Part One (The Basics and Framing the Issues) and realized that the outcry of concerns against practicing law in the cloud is based on a tradition of equating cloud computing with overseas data storage. At this stage, nothing can be further from the truth.
I practice on a virtual platform, and this is how it works. When a client wants to contact me, they either call me (what a concept!) or email me by using my encrypted contact form. There are several email services that provide encrypted/secured email services. I use Hushmail, and have found them easy, affordable and helpful.
My website includes a link called Client File Access. This link brings me to a program called Clio, an online legal practice management program using bank-grade 256-bit SSL encryption where data is stored in an enterprise-class, secured hosting environment. From then on, all communications are generated through Clio, which also stores all the information related to the case. My client receives their own username and password that gives them access to their own file, which includes all communications, documents, invoices and any other information related to their legal matter. The bottom line: you can practice law online with the same security as paying your bills.
Now, should you operate your online practice using unsecured web applications? No, although many attorneys have been doing so inadvertently for years (think about all those unsecured emails you been sending and receiving, all those google docs that have gone back and forth). Moreover, in her article Lawyers Should Not be Wary of SaaS and Cloud Computing, Niki Black makes the argument that paper documents are far more prone to confidentiality violations than online documents.
For more information, read Infrastructure: In the Cloud, which includes a long list of SaaS Platform providers for law firms and a great discussion of the topic, and the product information at VLOTech.com. In additional, there are many articles published on the website of the American Bar Association related to this issue.
The key to this, as with any emerging industry practice, is to stay informed. The benefits of a virtual practice (and cost is not the least of them) are too important for the future of your law practice to be ignored or dismissed for lack of adequate research.
If in your search you come across information that raises new or contradictory information, please include it in a comment here so together we can address it. That’s the power of this thing we call social networking!
Lawyers: do you have time and resource management dilemmas that require creative solutions? Freelance attorneys and advanced technology are here to help. Take advantage of new and exciting ways to have both a successful law practice and a great lifestyle! Click here to find out how!
Very nice. Good to hear how different lawyers are utilizing SaaS technology in their law firms to create virtual practices.
Loved the “love at second sight” comment.
What bothers me about the virtual law office concept is how to deal with the careless question. When client's meet with you at the office, they will often ask about tangential or completely non-related matters. This is just a casual question. You are the attorney, and you may know the answer.
The response often is, "I don't think you can do that, but I am not sure since I do not practice in that area." Or some variant thereof. It is understood that that both the question and the answer are not a serious review of all the legal issues, deadlines, statutes of limitations, etc. Yes, there is some peril in making any response but my retention documents spell out that representation is only on the matter hired and any other discussions are not legal advice and do not constitute representation.
But how do you handle this in a VLO environment? You are providing services on one topic and you get an email on another. It seems that there is no such thing as a casual comment or communication when it comes to email because everything is in writing.
Do you reply with, "the cost to answer your query will be $175 an hour with an estimated requirement of 2 hours?" That would seem to be off-putting. Clients want a relationship with their attorney. Not a defensive, "insert 75 cents for another three minutes." Although those born after pay phones disappeared may not get that comment.
Also, doesn't the "everything is recorded" type of law practice result in defensive lawyering that has driven up costs in the practice of medicine. If you put every answer in writing, doesn't that require a bar review quality response to last for the ages (with a cost to match)?
I am curious about how practitioners jumping into this brave new world handle these issues.
Not a lawyer, but it seems that even virtually you could pick up the phone and respond it a way similar to the face-to-face meeting. Email as per discussion.
Would that work?
It depends on what type of technology the attorney is using to practice law online. I've been working with my clients on a web-based virtual law office for almost four years now and I actually have more interaction with my clients online than I did working at a small firm and would meet with them in person. My clients contact me 24/7 when it's convenient for them to do so and I have a 24 hour response policy so they know I will get back to them in that time frame. I do answer those small, unrelated questions because it's good business and good customer service, and if I can't provide the answer, then I do my ethical duty and send them to an attorney who can assist them – whether that's a full-service law firm or another VLO.
If the technology allows the attorney to choose from different billing methods, including billable hour, recurring billing, fixed fee, or a combination of methods, then no, the attorney is not going to be charging token fees to provide a simple response to a client's question. I use fixed fees on my virtual law office with most of my clients. I've found that clients are actually very appreciative of the fixed fee and knowing how to budget for their legal services. I also provide billable hour fees for other projects and in those cases as well I do not charge for a response that thanks to the technology only takees me a couple seconds to get out to the client.
Another way to look at having everything "recorded" is that it can assist in protecting the attorney from malpractice. If the client ever questions that the attorney provided information or a response to their legal matter, that response and the client's comments as well are recorded with the date and time of the transactions. That protects the attorney from claims by clients that the attorney was not responsive to the client's requests – the number one malpractice complaint heard by state bars.
Also, depending on the technology used, you can really streamline your practice so that if you have written one response to a common question and see that same issue come up you can search for the similar case and not have to re-invent the wheel each time. What may have taken longer the first time an attorney handled it on the virtual law office may only take a couple minutes the second time. That efficiency can be passed on to the clients through more affordable fees.
An excellent article, very useful for understaing how the technology works. But I guess it will take couple of years before we use this in India