Beware of verdict misrepresentation
After this firm lost the case with no betterment of my situation, I was informed as follows:
"They were prepared with diagrams showing your vehicles movement and were ready to testify that they had a clear and unobstructed view of the alleged [speeding] violation which would allow them to prove the violation beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, we were able to convince the Officer to amend the charge to California Vehicle Code 16028A [no proof of insurance], which is a non point violation. Congratulations!"
Initial charges were speeding, no proof of insurance, and tinted front windows. I had insurance at the time so this charge was of course dismissed with a $25 clerical fee.
Based on this firm's statement quoted above, either the speeding ticket was amended to the no proof of insurance charge, or the no proof of insurance charge was amended to itself. Either way, I WAS convicted of the speeding AND tinted window ticket. Nothing was amended, I got a point on my record, paid the government $547, plus this firm's steep $199 attorney fee.
Losing the ticket is not my point of contention, it is the installation of false hope in a client with no attempt to make amends.
Response from Pablo Fabian July 6, 2015
Daniel I want to personally apologize to you on behalf of the firm. After reading this review I went back to review the file and it appears that our case manager-who was only at the firm for a few days when she updated you-sent the wrong information to you, which we later corrected and contacted you to explain the result in plain terms. Our firm prides ourselves on excellent client communication and we fell short on your case. Had we known that you felt this strongly after we explained the honest mistake, I am sure we would have been able to make amends as we want all of our clients to feel as ease with the work we perform. Any miscommunication made was not intentional, nor would we ever try and misrepresent a certain result.