I recently came across a study by the New York State Bar Association that says that each year, New Yorkers experience a total of 2.5 million legal problems per year for which no lawyer is available.  Some of these people do nothing at all, others try to do it on their own.

Both of these groups concerns me, and should be cause for worry on the part of every lawyer.

Consider this: if someone has a legal problem and does what I like to call the, “ostrich in the sand,” routine, that person invariably ends up getting raked over the coals.  They get evicted, their bank account gets frozen, the kids don’t get child support, the house is lost to foreclosure.  Choose your poison, the end result isn’t ever good.

Don’t believe me?  Talk to any one of the millions of American homeowners caught up in the foreclosure crisis and ask them if they’ve got the money to hire a lawyer to adequately defend them – particularly in the specialized area concerning the transfer and securitization of mortgage obligations.  Take it from a lawyer who actively defends foreclosure cases when I tell you that it ain’t gonna happen too often.  Simply put, the cost of private counsel in these matters is prohibitive to many homeowners.

Now let’s flip to the other side of the fence and talk about pro se litigants.  Look, I understand why someone would “take the law into their own hands,” and either bring a lawsuit or defend one without a lawyer.  But there again, when looking to specialized fields of law such as bankruptcy, credit card lawsuit defense and consumer protection work the waters are murky indeed.  So much of this stuff is impossible to understand unless you’ve gone through years of education (and spent a bunch of time learning from the feet of the masters).

Once again, think I’m wrong?  Go to your local civil court one morning and watch the consumers who bother to show up to defend lawsuits brought against them for credit card debts.  Most of these lawsuits are filed without any lawyer review, without proof that the debt is truly owed by the consumer, and without any sense of how the amount demanded was calculated.

Many of these cases could be easily won if only the consumer had some amount of legal representation and background knowledge.  Instead, people either fail to show up to court to defend themselves or use, “I can’t pay you now,” as a defense.  Neither one of these is a good tactic to use.

And don’t get me started on consumers representing themselves in lawsuits against harassing bill collectors and credit reporting agencies.  They don’t.  Period.

I’m not saying that self-help isn’t effective sometimes.  In fact, there are many excellent resources available from companies such as Nolo to help guide consumers in helping themselves.  But the reality is that for many, not having a lawyer at all is the kiss of death for their legal needs.  They’re left in the dark, relying on unreliable sources of information and cobbling together defenses and causes of action that may not be legally viable.

So what’s the solution?  There are a few options:

1. Increased funding for legal aid and legal services programs.  This is a great idea, but if you talk to anyone who works in legal aid or legal services you’ll find that they are understaffed, underpaid, and overworked on basic matters being handled for the truly poverty-stricken (criminal, eviction, child support and domestic violence).  Besides, is it the place of legal aid and legal services programs to provide representation for the middle class?  Nope.
2. Create a workable framework for unbundled legal services and limited representation.  By allowing and standardizing unbundled legal services for consumer protection and bankruptcy work, consumers have the ability to gain basic knowledge and a cost they can more readily afford.  Lawyers end up charging less for basic aspects of their legal representation, but would potentially make up that loss through the increased amount of business (you have more time to take on more matters if you’re spending less time on each one) and lower staffing needs (you don’t need to hire more courtroom lawyers if you’re not handling the depositions and trial work).  Lawyers providing unbundled legal services would also be able to be brought back into a matter later on (presumably at full fee) if it was required by the facts and circumstances of the case.

As you can tell, the business model of unbundled legal services is one that fascinates me.  It can be a cornerstone of a virtual law firm, it can serve as an additional profit center, and – most importantly – it can enable a lawyer to do more good work for more people, which is good karma.

What do you think?  Sound off in the comments below – I’m anxious to hear your opinions.

Photo courtesy of scion_cho.