Not Free

The Michigan Attorney Discipline Board affirmed a 90-day suspension and restitution

The six-count formal complaint filed by the Grievance Administrator alleged that respondent committed professional misconduct in his consumer credit protection practice. The complaint set forth general allegations regarding respondent’s practice that essentially alleged that he made dishonest, inaccurate, and/or misleading misrepresentations about his fees and services in his advertising, in particular how his fees and costs were to be paid; he failed to communicate with his clients in general and in particular with regard to settlement terms, including the settlement amounts agreed to by respondent, usually without the knowledge or prior consent of his clients, and his receipt of settlement funds, from which he would take all of his fees and costs, usually leaving nothing left for the client.

The board

The panel found that respondent had a “troubling pattern of practice, which was designed to deceive unsuspecting and/or unsophisticated clients who had been subjected to debt collection actions and/or inaccurate credit reporting into signing engagement agreements with the mistaken belief that they would receive ‘free’ representation,” when in fact they would not.

…Upon careful consideration of the whole record, the Board is not persuaded that the hearing panel’s decision to order a 90-day suspension with restitution and a condition was inappropriate.

(Mike Frisch)