Lloyd’s Must Pay Alleged Swindler Stanford’s Legal Fees, Court Says

March 16, 2010

  • March 16, 2010 at 1:14 am
    Hmmmm says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Lloyds is excluding because if the allegation is true there is no coverage. It is the same thing that happens with punitive damage exclusions – if no coverage then no defense. Am I missing something?

  • March 16, 2010 at 5:56 am
    anon the mouse says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Could this be a developing case of unintentional education when the attorneys are subjected to fee charge backs? If so will the attorneys in question be able to apply those chargebacks as continuing education? Then I suppose the attorneys could also write the fees charged back as business expense?

  • March 17, 2010 at 10:58 am
    Han Valen says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hmmmm:
    Lloyds is attempting to exlude in defense of allegations, not defense or payment of any fines of proven actions.

    That is to say, he hasn’t been found guilty of the swindling yet. Until he is found guilty, or admits guilt, he is contractually entitled to the defense of his innocence.

  • March 18, 2010 at 10:19 am
    Judie Bronsther says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Lloyd’s should make sure that the legal bills are reasonable and that the law firm is not deviating from acceptable billing patterns and practices. While the fees and expenses may be reasonable, given the magnitude of these bills, Lloyd’s should get a third party auditor to audit the legal bills. Accountability Services, Inc., a legal bills auditing specialist, has the proprietary software and the lawyers with expertise to properly audit legal bills and time records.
    What most people do not recognize is that giving an opinion on reasonableness of attorney fees involves a lot of preparatory work before final analysis can be done. You cannot simply only run a computer program that says X amount of dollars is the proper legal charge for a deposition and Y amount of dollars is the proper charge for a telephone call. A proper audit involves first, reconstructing generally how the case was handled; and then categorizing and breaking down the time records to find out what was done, by whom and for how long. The time records must be in a format so that they can be placed into a computer and totals and comparisons run. Only when detailed preparatory work has been done, can an auditor or legal fees expert look for efficiencies and inefficiencies in how the work was done. For example, until you have allocated to the taking of a deposition all of the time billed for preparation, attendance, and follow up on the deposition can you determine whether: Was there an excessive number of timekeepers working on the matter? Did timekeepers duplicate the efforts of others? Was there attorney rotation on that inflated the legal fees? Did the person with the proper billing rate perform the work? Was too much time spent in internal meetings?
    Founded in 1991, Accountability Services has grown into serving businesses of all sizes, including Fortune 500 Companies, international organizations and governmental institutions. The principal of Accountability Services is Judith A. Bronsther, Esq., who has written extensively on the subject of legal cost control and lectures on the subject. For more information on Accountability Services, go to http://www.legalbills.com or contact Accountability Services, Inc., at 212-245-0245



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*