UPDATE RESPONDING TO THE ATTORNEY’S REPLY AND CORRECTING THE RECORD: This update is based solely on contracts, billing statements, and written communication. None of the facts below were disputed in his response. TRUST FUNDS & CONTRACT TERMS: Neither contract I signed authorizes absorbing my remai...ning trust balance. I reviewed both the hourly retainer and the later fixed‑fee agreement. No clause allows trust funds to be absorbed, rolled into, or applied toward monthly installments. When I asked for clarification, no section was cited because none exists. I was told to pay $9,500 to replenish the trust when I still had $5,039.50 remaining. When I said I couldn’t pay another $9,500 upfront, the fixed‑fee monthly plan was offered instead. MONTHLY CHARGES WITHOUT CONTACT: I learned I was being charged monthly regardless of contact only after requesting an accounting twice. When I realized I had been paying for months of no work, I asked for the remaining trust balance to be returned. Only then was I told it had been rolled into the installments, despite no such agreement in either contract. The fixed‑fee contract used “installments” in one section and “monthly fee” in another without clearly stating I would be charged monthly whether or not any work was performed. COMMUNICATION PATTERNS: Communication was consistently steered away from written records. Even simple emailed questions resulted in phone calls instead of written replies, which prevented a clear written history. This is why I emailed outside the firm’s system whenever possible. LOSS OF PORTAL ACCESS: My Clio portal access was removed after representation ended. My former advocate still allows full access to every message, document, and billing entry in the same portal. In this case, the entire matter disappeared from my account. Fortunately, anticipating this, I downloaded everything beforehand. PPT SCHEDULING & PARTICIPATION: I have a documented text thread with the paralegal showing the full sequence of the final PPT scheduling. The district first proposed Nov 5, five days after my contract ended, and I was told the attorney would not attend. When I asked to schedule within October, the district offered multiple dates and I was told the attorney would be out of the country for all of them. We eventually secured an October date. The attorney attended but kept his camera off, did not participate, and did not address the one issue I identified as my priority before the meeting. I emailed the next day documenting this lack of advocacy. RECORDS & FOLLOW THROUGH: After reviewing the records the district sent to his office, I identified multiple critical documents that were missing and raised those omissions several times. They remained unaddressed, and no follow through occurred on his end. As a result, I had to file both a federal FERPA complaint and a State complaint myself. That was not the outcome I expected after two years of paid representation. SUMMARY: My experience did not match the cost or the advocacy promised. Communication and engagement dropped after intake. Calls were said to be recorded but none were provided when requested. When I tried to record calls myself, the attorney refused to continue, so I switched to email. During the first contract, he attended one PPT; the district made changes I had been requesting for years. In the second year, even with over $5,000 left in trust, I was billed $9,500 to replenish it. Across two years I paid $13,675, including months billed despite no contact. A PPT was scheduled after the contract ended and I was told he wouldn’t attend. When moved inside the contract period, he attended with his camera off, barely participated, and did not advocate for the one issue repeatedly raised. Based on my experience, the level of commitment I received did not match the trust or financial investment.