Michael Raymond Cramer

We retained Michael Cramer specifically to help collect an unpaid construction balance and protect our lien rights. Based on our experience, I cannot recommend him, particularly for any matter involving a time-sensitive filing deadline. We initially contacted Bailey & Galyen on May 12–13, 2026 and... paid $150 for a consultation with Mr. Cramer, which took place on May 14 at approximately 1:30 p.m. During that consultation, we disclosed the circumstances of the matter and all relevant dates. Mr. Cramer advised us that, under Texas law, we had until June 15, 2026 to file the lien and that we would be entitled to seek 18% interest from the homeowner. We relied on that advice and hired the firm. On May 18, we paid $1,800 and signed an engagement agreement for a demand letter. My partner followed up on May 21, May 22, and May 27 because we were very conscious of the lien deadline. We were eventually informed that the demand letter had been sent by certified mail on May 21, giving the homeowner 15 days to pay while, as we understood it, still leaving time to file the lien. The homeowner did not pay. On June 2, we specifically authorized Mr. Cramer and the firm to proceed with filing the lien. We signed another agreement and paid an additional $1,850, which included the filing fee. Beginning June 9, my partner repeatedly called and emailed trying to confirm that the lien had actually been filed. More than a dozen calls and emails were made. We were repeatedly told that Mr. Cramer was in court and would call back the following day. Those promised calls did not happen. This continued despite the fact that Mr. Cramer had advised us of the June 15 deadline and had already accepted our payment specifically to file the lien. Mr. Cramer finally called us on July 24. During that call, we learned that the lien had not been filed. This is what I find so unacceptable about our experience. We did not simply consult Mr. Cramer and then fail to take action ourselves. We specifically retained him to handle the lien, signed the requested agreement, paid the requested legal fee and filing cost, and repeatedly contacted his office to make sure the filing was completed before the deadline. Despite all of that, the lien was not filed, and we were not timely informed that it had not been filed. The consequences to our company are potentially significant. Instead of having the security and leverage of the lien we hired Mr. Cramer to protect, we are now left pursuing potentially costly litigation against the homeowner. Even if we prevail, we may then have to pursue collection without the remedies and leverage that a properly filed lien could have provided. What makes the situation particularly frustrating is that my partner was actively trying to prevent exactly this from happening. More than a dozen calls and emails were made seeking confirmation. Had we simply been told before the deadline that Mr. Cramer was not going to file the lien, we could have attempted to find another attorney or explored other options. Instead, our repeated attempts to reach him went unanswered until well after the deadline he had given us. I cannot speak to Mr. Cramer’s handling of other clients or other types of cases. I can only describe what happened in ours. Based on our experience, however, I would not recommend Michael Cramer for a construction lien or any other matter where meeting a statutory deadline is critical. When an attorney tells a client the applicable deadline, accepts payment specifically to complete the filing, and receives repeated communications asking whether it has been completed, I believe the client should be able to rely on the attorney to complete the work or immediately communicate that there is a problem. That did not happen in our case, and we are now dealing with the consequences.