» Comments Regarding the June 2011 Blog
Phone: 813.657.9175
Lakeland: 863.802.8060

Comments Regarding the June 2011 Blog

The purpose, in part, of the Blog are the “Buyer Beware” observations on attorneys and non-attorneys alike. It appears many non-attorneys have little to no regulation for their advertisements and they can place unsupportable statements like “most successful”, “experts” and “most experienced” on their websites. For example, when considering Quikaid, Allsup, Binder & Binder and the list goes on, they all can’t be at the same time the “most successful” and the “most experienced”.

Also many claimants we are contacted by think an “advocate” is an attorney. Very few non-attorneys actually state “non-attorney” on their advertisements and the common threads are the words like “advocate” and “expert”. Full disclosure as a “non-attorney” is clearly lacking.

Pompous or not the truth and facts sometimes hurt. If a claimant has a well informed choice of a non-attorney representative versus an attorney representative the fear of those not fully disclosing non-attorney status is that “most” would choose an actual licensed attorney.

Comments Regarding the June 2011 Blog:

Bill Wright (bill.wright<at>quikaid.com)
Tuesday, August 23, 2011, 08:15 AM < 24.129.154.46 >
[ delete ] [ ban ip ]

Mr. Magann,

Please remove your negative posting regarding Quikaid from your website blog immediately. You know nothing about our company. We are not “posers”. We are 100% committed to Social Security disability representation and pride ourselves on our hard work we do every day to help people obtain their much needed benefits. Our corporate office is in downtown Saint Petersburg, FL. We are here every day from 7am – 7pm. I invite you to visit with us and understand how a real Social Security disability company functions. I assure you, you will be impressed and would learn a lot.

Bill Wright, President
Quikaid, Inc.
800-434-4364 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            800-434-4364     end_of_the_skype_highlighting

——————————————————————————–

LSR
Monday, August 22, 2011, 09:21 PM < 74.70.210.129 >
[ delete ] [ ban ip ]

There are attorneys and non-attorneys alike who do their clients a disservice. I have seen negligence in listening to claimants, developing evidence, delaying submission of evidence until a lower level denial, dropping claimants as clients who may have a difficult claim to prove to keep “win” rates up, etc. from both those that do or don’t have a JD.

Instead of maligning the majority of representatives that do excellent work in the same broad strokes with firms that might not offer quality advocacy, may I suggest you do readers a greater service by offering advice on how to weed out inadequate individuals be they attorneys or not? Your blanket hire “an actual attorney” advice offers no way for someone in need to determine if they’re obtaining quality representation.

I have met with literally hundreds of non-attorneys who write quality legal briefs; research the Rulings; case law, etc; look at every angle to provide the best possible representation. These representatives adhere to the highest ethical standards and make it clear to their clients that they are not attorneys, however they do provide quality representation.

Congress authorized a 5 year demonstration project allowing only non-attorneys who met rigorous standards to be eligible for direct pay. After those 5 years and a GAO study of the performance of those participating Congress saw fit to pass into law EDPNA’s.

I maintain we can all do our best for those we serve by learning from each other, as opposed to groundless prejudicial generalizations.

——————————————————————————–

nonattorney
Monday, August 22, 2011, 06:49 PM < 69.132.42.215 >
[ delete ] [ ban ip ]

Dear Mr. Magann,

Your statements show just how much of a professional you really are. While I understand your frustration of having national firms representing claimants, I can assure you that this is not the average. Just as being a pompous ass isn’t synonymous with being an attorney.

The fact is that those representatives that have taken the test for fee withholding do, in fact, better than Attorneys on average. We have higher success rates, and have actually proven our knowledge of the law- unlike most Attorneys who do more harm than good when they “dabble” because they “know administrative law.”

You are being misleading in your post. Being professional is supposed to be a hallmark of anyone who passes the bar. Why the attacks on EDPNA’s, and not on the companies themselves?

I hope that your clients don’t feed off of your anger, and that you win those clients cases who deserve it.

——————————————————————————–

Posted on Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 5:20 pm and filed under Social Security Law.

Comments are closed.

Website by SEO | Law Firm™, an Adviatech Company