- Report: #1243410
Complaint Review: Hobbs & Olson L.C. - Salt Lake City Utah
-
Author Confirmed
Why?
Hobbs & Olson L.C.
466 East 500 South, Suite 300 Salt Lake City, 84111 Utah, USA
Phone:
801-519-2555
Web:
www.haolaw.com
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Hobbs & Olson, L.C. Hold on to Your Wallet...Disappointed...and Ripped Off...A Bar Card--Lincoln's License to Steal Salt Lake City Utah
I had a simple legal situation: I needed to obtain a temporary injunction to keep an unruly neighbor away from my property for ten days. I found the name of Attorney Sarah Orme on the State of Utah Bar site, in the looking for work column. To show the readers how simple it is to accomplish the filling out of the form, here's the link describing a Utah Temporary Stalking Injunction: ( https://www.utcourts.gov/resources/forms/civilstalking/).
Based on my brief interaction with Attorney Orme, she is not, in my estimation, ready to be handling casework on her own. The assignment was to file a form with the Court: she did not do that. I called a halt to her "work," and Attorney Orme shoots me a bill for $420!!!! I figured she had done about $250 worth of "work," but would agree to $300, to get my retainer back so that I might retain an attorney that I could trust to represent my interests effectively. By the way, I will state this, Attorney Orme has learned to do one thing quickly in a little less than four years as a member of the Bar--shoot off an Invoice by email, and make sure her senior partner runs over to cash a bank check in person at Bank of the West!! (Can you make payroll this week, Lincoln?).
Several attorneys that I have spoken to in the interim agree with the assessment that $420 is excessive in this circumstance, with no work to show for it, let alone a legal, executed and explained (principle of Informed Consent) Retainer Agreement.
Attorney Orme's boss is an attorney named Lincoln Hobbs. I sent him a settlement offer of $300. Judge this man's maturity and integrity for yourself. He sends a link from a "Ripoff Report" via Facebook as a response to a Facebook review I placed on his webpage. This person who wrote the "Ripoff Report" was overlooked, and was upset, rightfully and understandably, about not getting some monies refunded when I closed a professional practice over seven years ago due to medical disability. Sorry, Attorney Hobbs, that woman was "satisfied in full." Do you know what that term means, Attorney Hobbs, admitted to the Utah Bar in 1986? Hobbs claims that I defamed his associate, and that he will fight it everywhere. I have had an attorney review all my online postings. The standard for defense against a claim for libel is the truth. Opinion is not defamation.
Well, I don't mind spending another $100 (filing fee) to drag Attorney Hobbs, his partner Attorney Olson, and Attorney Orme in front of a pro temp judge colleague of theirs on a Thursday night for an hour and a half just to aggravate him out of his gourd. I think the three of them will look silly in that Small Claims Court, and, who knows, maybe I'll even win. (I'll be sure to call a friend who is a reporter on the city beat for the major daily to show Attorney Hobbs in action. I'm sure he will be posturing and pontificating over a couple hundred bucks that night). My considered opinion is that Attorney Hobbs is more concerned about money than a client's safety and that of his family's well being.
By the way, Salt Lake City, I filed the injunction myself. In no time.
My recommendation is to avoid Hobbs & Olson, L.C.. Stick with Van Cott, Kirton McConkie, Clyde Snow, the known entities, the "tried and true" firms. I was entirely disappointed. I am left to wonder about the quality of legal education in this day and age.
1 Updates & Rebuttals
Original Title Was Improperly Truncated
#2Author of original report
Thu, July 23, 2015
In order to clarify my report I include this statement:
1) The title was originally written and should have read: "Lincoln's License to Steal Away an Opportunity to Help Protect a Family's Safety."
2). In the second paragraph of the report, I was pointing out that, in my assessment, the associte attorney acted in an altogether deliberate manner that was just too slow, given the emergent circumstances. Indeed, I am confident, in retrospect, that I could have filed the temporary stalking injunction with the court more quickly pro se.
3). It may have been a quite coincidental set of circumstances that led to the electronic transfer of funds from my bank to Hobbs & Olson's just moments prior to the sending of the email invoice from Orme. However, a reasonable person is led to wonder as to the handling of such checks by these proessional lawyers. Orme may not have directly orchestrated the scenario, or she may have done so. I can not say either way with a degree of certainty.
$). Given that despite not having a formally executed retainer document a quasi-contractual relationship between attorney and client may exist, it always leaves a bad taste in the client's mouth when they are not sufficiently informed in order to consent to a mode of action in the legal setting/relationship. My estimation is that Attorney Orme has a long way to go in the effective communication with clients aspect of practice.
6). In the final paragraph I did not attribute the quote. It was from an experienced lawyer in Utah who encouraged me to report the activity to the State Bar, but also was giving me the quick 'I told you so' speech. The major firms, he maintained, are large, productive, and tried and true for certain reasons, one of which is keeping clients happy by seeing to it that clients are given the benefit of the doubt.
