George L May

George L May billed us for "research" he claimed to have performed but he never provided the results to us. For many months he has refused either to provide the results of the "research" or to refund our payments for the "research" even though the payments for "research" amount to <25% of his total ...billings. In addition, May would often not respond for days or even weeks to our emails containing questions or requesting information even after repeated attempts to contact him. Even without providing the results, May still insists we owe him his final bill which is for communication he did not make to us and is ~5% of his total billings. On one invoice we noted two charges for May's paralegal to perform “legal research re: seller’s duty to inspect and disclose; memo to George May”. Two things are especially significant regarding these two items: #1 That May would have to do research to confirm an opinion that he had already assured us was correct and which was his inducement for us to hire him originally. #2 That May never forwarded to us the memo his paralegal prepared. On another invoice we noted three charges to “review disclosure statutes, conduct legal research, and review disclosure statement cases”. The same two things are especially significant regarding these items on this invoice: #1 That May would have to do research and review statutes and review case law to confirm an opinion that May had already assured us was correct. #2 That May has never forwarded to us the results of his efforts; not even a list of the disclosure statement cases he presumably reviewed. On another invoice we noted two charges for additional legal research re: “Homeowner’s Warranty Act” and “bat infestation issues”. Once again, we have not ever received any written correspondence from May documenting the results of these efforts. On another invoice, May charged us purportedly to “correspond with client providing statutes of investigation and cases”. However, it is clear from our documented exchange of emails with May that no such communication took place prior to the invoice or any other time. Instead May offered excuses for his lack of communication and promised to respond within a week. Now nearly a year later May has never responded. Recently, in response to my continued requests for a refund, in which I pointing out that no consumer should pay for services not rendered, May said the following by email: "I don't tell you how to practice the Engineering profession, please don't lecture me on how to practice law." "It must be wonderful to have the luxury of retirement in which you can write letters complaining of the quality of professional services, report the professional to his state board, be completely rebuffed by that board (May's opinion only), and still have the temerity to insist that you were right and demand a refund of fees. Such is the nature of the great human drama. If you don't like getting our bills, then pay us what you still owe us and you won't be bothered anymore." My responses to May included the following: As I have described in my previous correspondence to you, I do not agree that I should pay for uncompleted work because you did not document the results of your work and provide the results to your client. I have tried repeatedly but unsuccessfully to explain to you my concerns regarding your lack of responsiveness but you apparently still do not understand what my complaint against you is about. My complaint has nothing whatsoever to do with “how you practice law”. Rather my complaint relates to a fundamental principle of all business transactions including those between attorney and client: i.e. the customer / client does not pay for shoddy merchandise or services not rendered or work not completed. So I believe May did not act honestly, responsibly, ethically, or in good faith in this case and any prospective clients should go elsewhere.