Question
Hello,
I live in the Pricey Paradise: California
Settle Back ... this is a lengthy post!
I do research and correspondence for a law firm as an outside service. With my employer's approval, I recently performed the services of demanding compensation in a product liability matter resulting in approx $75,000.00 in property damage. This work was done on behalf of my significant other's landlord. Prior to my involvement in the matter, the landlord's own dealings with the manufacturer had accomplished only the "go pound sand" response. The landlord had even foolishly sent the defective item, the sole piece of physical evidence on which the entire case rested, back to the company for "evaluation.” None of his numerous attempts to contact the upper management, demands for settlement, nor were his requests for the return of the defective piece acknowledged once the company had the item in possession.
The landlord asked me if I could do anything on his behalf and, again with my employer's blessings, we agreed on a fee for my services. Given the personal relationship involved, I had said that if MY efforts did not gain any results I would not charge for the services. I performed the necessary correspondence, gathered the information, researched the replace cost of damages, drafted the demand, and was the contact agent through whom all the initial dialog with the insurance company was handled. I also did a substantial amount of research regarding product liability laws b/c I was initially advised by my employer (whom I believe was mistaken on the details of the events leading to the loss) to approach the claim on the grounds of reverse condemnation. I, however, felt the matter was better addressed as straight product liability and, after I presented my "case" to my employer, he agreed this particular case did meet the specific points required by product liability.
When I met with the insurance investigator to examine the scene I refused to allow him to take possession of the piece I had recovered from the manufacturer. It was obvious he was under direct orders obtain the sole object of evidentiary value and he literally tried to bully me into letting him have the item but I stood firm. While I was on vacation for several weeks, just following that meeting, the investigator and the insurance company -in direct violation to protocol and my specific prohibition- contacted the landlord directly. They lied saying numerous attempts to contact me were ignored (their excuse for circumventing me) I had my business cell phone with me at all times while traveling and while others were able to reach me repeatedly not once did I receive any calls from anyone involved in this case. Nor was there any mail awaiting me when I returned. My vacation was planned a year ahead of time; thus no surprise to anyone. Nor did I leave any details pending unhandled prior to my departure.
The investigator also sent the landlord a UPS-readied box with instructions to send the item as per MY instructions. There was also a form with an erroneously detailed description of the piece the landlord was to sign. Had he done so he would have dated the purchase of the defective item some 6 years earlier than the actual date? The investigator, during the interview, had tried a number of times to get Carl to stumble on the date of purchase/installation. I find it hard to believe he could so quickly forget the piece was only weeks old when it failed. Furthermore, he had a tape recording of the Q&A with the landlord.
I was a bit disturbed when I found all this out. It is always problematic when a client goes around to the defendants for obvious reasons. Carl said he took matters into his own hands while I was on vacation since he had come to the belief I am "too inexperienced" to properly handle this matter. A laughable comment considering the whole matter would have been a slam-dunk if he had only followed my recommendations when the damage occurred. I strongly advised pictures of the scene & the damage. He did not bother. He did not have the 'juice' to get anything from the manufacturer and would not even have his evidence if not for my efforts. To top it all off, he has never had the "chutzpah" to discuss any of this directly with me. Out of diplomatic consideration for my S.O's position as tenant, however, I gracefully bowed out. I merely was waiting for the settlement to be paid before submitting my bill. I believe either the insurance company convinced the client to deal with them directly (they never want legal counsel involved) or he decided he could keep extra monies if I was out of the picture. My fee was factored into the settlement demand as legal fees
The landlord claimed all the damaged property was his and that he had disposed of it due to mold & such. I have since found out half of the property belonged to some tenants AND the damaged goods were secreted elsewhere on the property at the time of the investigation. I was furious about the deception. I am even more furious over my belief the landlord is attempting to screw his tenants out of the money due from the settlement. The others are being told the matter was dropped, denied by the insurance company, and they are simply S. O. L. He claims the Insurance Company’s "expert" states the matter is null & void b/c the defective item was installed in a manner not consistent with its intended purpose. All this being a crock of crappola. I specifically researched their initial claim of misapplication. I spoke with inspectors, contractors, and my employer about misapplication and all agreed the insurance company was simply throwing it against the wall to see what would stick. The investigator agreed ON TAPE the misapplication claim would never stand up in court.
Tho' my S.O. & I amicably have parted ways, I have been kept abreast on the matter 2nd hand via the tenants with an interest in the case. The landlord has contradicted himself and flat out lied to the tenants to whom money is due when asked for updates. I am dead sure on this point. Since I was being asked to clarify the convoluted BS, being handed out I wanted to be absolutely certain i was getting the facts as they were presented to these other people rather than forming an opinion or rendering advice based on faulty information. Therefore, when I became suspicious, the landlord was being less than truthful to these people; I provided each of them mini recorders on loan from the office. The landlord, unaware of being recorded, arrogantly underestimating the intelligence of his audience, and blissfully ignorant of my continued behind the scenes monitoring of the situation, has concocted the most unbelievable pile of horse hockey to shovel out to those who are awaiting the settling of this case. Evidently, believing the one source of legal information readily available to the tenants, ME, out of the picture, he felt secure in his dissemination of BS. The crap he has told is so fraught with contradictions, distortions, and bald-faced lies; it is an insult to the intelligence of even persons of diminished capacity he expects them to swallow it! I have the sinking suspicion he has settled with the insurance company and is keeping the addition $40,000 owed to the tenants for damage done to their individual property. Property that, for all intents & purposes, was in the landlord's care. Furthermore, the location of this storage was solely under the landlord's dominion & control with absolutely no independent public/tenant access. Thus, the liability for that property is his.
What I would like to know is:
a) Is there any means by which I can obtain confirmation a settlement has been paid without requiring a court order or filing a show cause against the landlord or direct contact with the insurance company? (ie private investigation etc)
OR
b) since all initial correspondence indicated a "retainer" with my firm (tho' I have no idea what story the landlord told the insurance company regarding his counsel &/or subsequent lack there of), the fees I was charging were under the amount legally mandating a formal retainer agreement, and all parties (the client, my employer, & myself) had prior agreement the attorney was acting as a consultant but still named as counsel (a formal retainer agreement only becoming necessary should it be determined formal legal action was required), yet no "substitution of counsel" has been presented to me; do I have the right to contact the insurance company to determine the disposition of the case for the purposes of potentially filing a lien.
If so, I would appreciate any advice regarding the best manner in which I should approach this.
If not, I am open to suggestions as to how I should proceed from here...
I would like to make it clear AT NO TIME did I ever represent myself as an attorney or otherwise certified legal representative to anyone. I am always very careful to inform people I am merely a liaison for my employer; all my work is reviewed & approved by my employer prior to it being mailed, filed, etc. In all aspects of my work, I am conscious of the fact I represent my employer's firm and conduct myself accordingly. I would never cause harm to my employer either ethically or legally.
In case you are wondering, I would normally approach my employer for this advice but he is unavailable for the next month or so while overseas on a personal matter. I am eager to move on this matter before it grows cold. I must admit I am also curious what sort of response I will receive from this site.
Thank you for your kind attention...
I look forward to your sage advice!
Jennie
Answer
Try paring it down to a paragraph.
Otherwise, sounds mostly like UPL.
Claimlaw