Carol S. Baskin

In January 2013 I hired Carol Baskin to modify Child Support. I had evidence of my ex’s income (a recording/transcript of statements my ex had made “bragging” about her income). Carol said the evidence was admissible, she said it was “very good” and agreed to use it as the central evidence to compel ...my ex into a modification. Carol eagerly took my case. Carol began normally. Eventually we had mandatory Mediation. I presumed she would present the evidence I had to compel my ex to acknowledge her income. But Carol did not, telling me she thought we need to wait until “open court”--a full-blown trial. This is something she’d never told me before. After Mediation called Carol to tell her my thoughts and discuss our plan. She didn’t like that I was even asking questions. She was now telling me that in order to make our case we’d need lengthy and expensive depositions. And she said we shouldn’t use my evidence. (Quite a difference from what she told me originally…) But more shocking was her response to a specific question I asked her regarding the content of the recording I’d given her. She didn't know the the content of my recording/transcript. Carol then admitted to me she had not even listened to the “entire” recording. She’d merely been relying on my description of it. Carol also had her secretary tell me a “status conference” scheduled by the court required my attendance like a mandatory hearing; the secretary told me this after my work schedule was set and only days before that conference was scheduled. I was unable to change my work schedule and had to drop the work, about $2,000. During our “prep meeting” the day before this conference Carol admitted it was, in fact, not mandatory, but she’d “wanted me to attend”. I think this was a gross misrepresentation. I was finally more openly critical of Carol when she continued to pursue documents from opposing council I thought were unnecessary. On 14 MAY 2013 I emailed Carol the following, “If G---/K---- produce any new documents or information, please hold and file, as appropriate... I would like the opportunity to review and decide whether or not I should spend time (and money) to further pursue this. As we are now waiting for them to produce information for us, no other work should have to be done at this time. Thank you.” Despite these instructions she continued. And she was billing me for this work. I sent her another, clearer email on 5 JUN, “Please, under no circumstance do any more work on this case without first consulting me about any specific action. I would like a chance to first see any information K---- provides, then make a determination if I think that information is adequate or if I need to pursue further action.” In a direct response to this email, Carol wrote, “We HAVE to do [the work]. (emphasis added) I thought Katherine has let you know what was going on.” She was refusing to cease doing what I already told her was a futile push to get documents from my ex that we didn’t even need. (By this point we already had me ex’s tax and income documents—they confirmed exactly the income she had told me she was making). We already had all we needed to present a case in court.) Ms. Baskin was also condescending. For example, earlier in the case Carol had instructed me to provide a written narrative of events that would help explain our case. I did as she’d asked. But instead of responding about the details I provided, Carol sent me a terse email, “God bless you. You are certainly long winded.” Carol eventually refused to talk to me, dismissed my complaints of improper billing as “errors” to be dealt with by her secretary (who told me she was not able to deal with them). I had no choice but to fire her. She still refuses to discuss the billing, but has indicated she'll sue me for full payment.