Events at Myler Disability which is now a division of Trajector, are fascinating to people like me. That plus the lack of other news in the Social Security world has led me to post a good deal about Trajector this week. However, it's best to understand that while Myler's 2020 revenues were $48.48 million, the total Social Security attorney fees paid in 2020 were $1.08 billion, meaning that Myler only had about a 4% market share. Could a larger entity like Trajector expand that market share? Perhaps, but maybe most claimants prefer to have someone local represent them. Maybe most prefer to meet with their attorney prior to the date of their hearing.
Jan 6, 2022
About A 4% Market Share For Trajector
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Myler/Trajector may be good at what they do, but they still rely heavily on legal assistants/call center employees. I have met Myler attorneys and they seem competent and professional. However, my understanding is that all the attorneys work from home, making in-office client consultations impossible.
@ 9:28 You are right. But Trajector has strategically placed good attorneys at key locations across the nation. So those is fairly big sized markets have localish attorneys. It is those little remote locations where they suffer like Needles, CA, Tuba City, AZ, Ketchikan, Alaska, etc. Those markets are where a local attorney with an office are invaluable.
What? When was the last time you had an in office meeting with a claimant. We have not for almost two years. With video hearings using Teams and office prep with Zoom probably forever there is no need to sit next to or across the table from a claimant.
While sitting down with a claimant in the office happens less frequently, I still want to meet my claimants even if it's only for a few minutes in the parking lot. When I meet the claimant I'm in better shape not to take the case instead of taking it and pulling out before the Hearing (as some of these big law firms do). I do meet with the claimant when they sign the 1696.
I agree that local is better. I do not say that because I am local. I say it from 43 years of representing claimants before ALJs who I know and who know me. I also say that because of the personal attention a local attorney can give to a claimant. We know the local physicians. We can direct the claimants to the local clinics. How could a call center in Utah do that for clients several states apart?
From time to time, I have picked up good cases that Myler (and other "national" firms) have dropped after being denied at the hearing. I have taken those cases to the Appeals Council and Federal Court. In all of these cases one point is made by the clients. The point is that they were not properly prepared for the hearing. In several cases the attorney called them the night before the hearing and briefly talked to them. In other cases, the clients saw the attorney at the hearing office and talked with them for about 10 to 15 minutes before the hearing.
In one of the cases that I took to Federal Court the hearing with the Myler attorney lasted 11 minutes. Much of that time involved the ALJ asking demographic questions. The attorney asked a few questions, failed to ask for a consultative examination and failed to cross examine the vocational expert witness.
I have always believed that we (Attorneys for SSD claimants) should not be a potted plant in the hearing room. We are not at these hearings to go through the motions. I know that some ALJs are harder than others. My efforts with those type of ALJs is to being up points that the ALJ can commit error.
I feel bad for deserving claimants who are underrepresented in this field.
The fact that Myler made $48 million in fees is mostly based on the numbers of cases they probably handled.
When Binder was in operation nationwide, I heard similar complaints, i.e., lack of preparation, attorney did not know the medical records, attorney did not advocate at the hearing.
This is a field that demands volume to be profitable. It also demands personal attention to the client and to detail to be professional. It is hard to accomplish those goals with infinite numbers of cases.
"This is a field that demands volume to be profitable. It also demands personal attention to the client and to detail to be professional. It is hard to accomplish those goals with infinite numbers of cases."
This sums up why the fee cap needs to be raised.
@ Anon 1:24. Very well said. I always tell my Trajector clients that if you NEED to personally go into an office to talk with your attorney then we are probably not the firm for you.
There are many tremendous local SSD/SSI attorneys like yourself. We have used some to make court appearances here and there. Dan Bott really was trying to give you the opportunity to expose these poor Trajector attorneys. We welcome it. But really is it another attorney's business to tell another attorney how to handle their staff? It is kind of up to the client to decide on representation.
Like I said, the top 4 SSD/SSI disability firms account for maybe 10 percent of the entire market share.
Why not have all the big and small disability firms along with NOSSCR put more pressure on the bloviating SSA political nonsense.
@anon1:24 You captured my thoughts, exactly. I am a rural county seat lawyer who has represented claimants for 45 years. I have seen at OHO sites lawyers walk into a waiting room and have an introductory meeting with the client 30 minutes before the hearing. From what I have been told by clients who had unfavorable experiences with other attorneys, most of the disappointments are associated with large national firms or associations of disability representatives. However, not every "local" lawyer is the answer for a client's needs. A valuable lawyer is an attorney who has both in-person contact with the client and has acquired by experience or study familiarity with disability law.
Post a Comment