No, I'm not in battle with my father. What he did has nothing to do with me and should not be. I was just informed from the secretary that they gave my father money to help him out of pity because my dad was begging for money. Whoever wrote out the check decided to write it out for $600, payable to ME, and give to my dad to sign on "my behalf" and take the money. Then, settlement distribution came...I was told $600 is deducted for an advance. If the lawyer, or whoever that has control over writing checks from the Firm, was helping my father out of pity (as the secretary said), why am I involved? Why was my name written on the check and not given to me since the check is for me? And in the end, why would I be deducted $600? If I didn't question, I would've been at a loss. "IF." Yes, I know legal claims require more than "what if." However, what about my privacy? What about forgery? What about the fact that check was written to me and I didn't sign it? The secretary and paralegal as well as the lawyer knew the money was for my dad (they said so).
So, I feel restoring the $600 to my account is an act of covering up for their mistake and wrongdoing behind my back. They weren't going to restore anything because they asked when I can come in to sign the settlement check. Talks of restoring $600 came after I complained about it, questioning what it was.
What do I do? Still, nothing I can do about it? Was I not wronged? Am I really making this a bigger deal than it is??
It is your decision whether to make a criminal complaint against your father. You know more about the nuances of that issue and potential remedy than anyone else. But as to whether you need to pursue -- civilly, criminally, or administratively -- the attorney who issued the check, my view is that you do not have a sound complaint against that person, based on what you have summarized as the facts.
What you call "covering up a mistake" can also be seen as making good on an error once the error is revealed and conclusively determined to have been error. Tell me, what are the alternatives to making good on an error? Just what would it take to satisfy you?
"It is against the ethics and opinions of all state bar associations around the country for a lawyer to provide a cash advance for their client. If she decided to provide you with money before a case has settled with the understanding you would repay her the loan after the case has settled she violate this code. If she decided to give you an advance she could face disciplinary action leading to being disbarred. No lawyer will or can loan you money."
I googled whether or not it is legal for a lawyer to give a client cash advance from settlement before case closes. It's illegal and unethical. The loan should have never been given out in the first place. So, by restoring $600 to my account, I should just forget what happened? What they (Lawyer and his team) did was wrong to loan out money, especially without even consulting with me ,THE CLIENT. What would satisfy me? I don't know consequences for lawyers who go against the law; however, I want him held responsible for (1) giving out a loan (2) giving out a loan without actually having discussed this with me in person or via phone (3) talking about my case to others without my permission (4) attempt to collect the cash advance by taking it out of my portion of the settlement.
How about this: ignore my free opinion and do exactly what you choose! There is no purpose served in you arguing with me. You don't need my permission or agreement. Just do what you want and let the chips fall where they may! I like it!