Lawyers and the art of splitting the difference…

Lawyers often get a bad rap, and I have one theory why that is, besides the myriad of personality flaws that they often possess. Here’s the deal… lawyers don’t have any legitimate emotional involvement in your case. Legal disputes rarely, if ever, have clear cut winners and losers. In my experience, the vast majority of disputes are solved by negotiating a settlement between the aggrieved parties, that, when done correctly, will disappoint both parties. Once you contact a lawyer to settle your dispute it is in the lawyers best interest to dispose of the case as quickly as possible with the most efficient and positive outcome for the lawyer and their client. For this reason alone using the legal system to solve these disputes should be a tactic of last resort, especially if you are hoping to recover money as opposed to some sort of injunction. Time is money, time is money, time is money. No barrister worth his salt is going to waste time fighting tooth and nail to get every last dime from your adversary. Every dollar that is eventually collected has a cost attached to collecting it. For example, let’s say you hire someone to complete $4000 worth of work for you and, very stupidly, you agree to pay the amount upfront. Of course the guy you contracted with never shows up and you’re out $4Gs. He doesn’t return your calls and e-mails and now you’re in a tough spot. 4 grand may not be a lot for some people, but it is for you, so you have to try to get it back.

Now you face a decision, one option is to hire a lawyer and threaten the guy with court. Of course, unless their your relative, no decent lawyer is really going to spend too much time fighting for $4000… they know this and so does the lawyer your adversary had to hire to defend himself. So the guy who didn’t do the work offers you 35 to 45 cents on the dollar and your super pissed, because the only fair thing is for you to receive the original $4Gs plus interest. But your lawyer is telling you to take the offer even though you don’t want to, and eventually you do. You might negotiate your way to 50 cents on the dollar but that’s about it. Why did this happen? You have to look at the issue from the barrister’s perspective, he spent a few hours looking at the facts and negotiating with the other lawyer to come up with your $2000 settlement offer. If you decide to play hardball and not take the offer your lawyer is going to have to bust his ass for a much longer period to, maybe, get the additional $2000. Then again he might bust his ass and end up with $1200, or even nothing. Lawyers also know that you’re full of shit, don’t feel bad everyone is, it’s the proverbial "one side of the story". They know that when presented with arguments from both sides no judge will give you all of the $4000. So the lawyer negotiates a $2000 settlement, your not happy about not getting the whole amount and the other guy is mad that he has to cut a $2000 check and pay his lawyer. In the end, everyone but the lawyers is unsatisfied.

The other option is to go down to the local sports store and pick up a wood baseball bat (aluminum will bend if you hit something with enough force, and then you’re stuck with a wet noodle), or head to the hardware store for an axe handle ("nothing like a good piece of hickory" – the Pale Rider). You also might want to wrap the handle in tape for a better grip. Now apply the chosen implement to the appendages of the guy that stole your money. In the end you’ll get your money back and at least one person from the original dispute will be satisfied with the outcome. Raging vandalism (do you know bologna will remove the paint from a car?) will also work for the more passive aggressive out there. You won’t get your $$ back via vandalism, but if done right, satisfaction is guaranteed.