Committee studies how qualifying providers may charge for referrals.

Addressing the ways qualifying providers can charge for matching clients and lawyers and determining whether services that connect lawyers and clients without charging either are covered by Bar rules are being considered by the Board Review Committee on Professional Ethics.

Committee Vice Chair Tom Bopp reported to the Board of Governors in July that the committee has directed staff to draft an ethics advisory opinion on how qualifying providers can charge for their services and has heard from two services--which primarily do referrals for medical services--that don't charge for connecting prospective clients and attorneys.

In a packed report, Bopp also presented to the board on first reading rule amendments governing how non-certified attorneys and law firms can say they are specialists or experts and reported the committee extended the time for taking member comments on a possible rule amendment governing misleading online advertising techniques.

The committee has been studying the ways private qualifying providers can charge attorneys for referrals. Under the current interpretation of Bar rules, services can only charge a fixed, time-period-based fee to participating lawyers.

However, a profusion of online companies and other providers have been using other methods, including charging the client a fixed fee for a specific legal service and charging a set amount to the lawyer for each case accepted by the lawyer. In the past, the Bar has held that is an impermissible splitting of fees with a non-lawyer.

The committee voted 8-0 that the draft should say that it would be permissible for qualifying providers to charge a flat fee per case referred to a participating lawyer and to charge a flat fee that differs depending on the type of case referred.

That would allow a different fee for, say, personal injury cases and family law cases.

The committee split 4-4 on whether it would be allowed to charge a flat fee for each case accepted by the participating lawyer and a flat fee per accepted case that varies depending on the type of case accepted.

The committee voted 8-0 that the draft should include a prohibition against a lawyer paying a qualifying provider a fee based on the perceived value of the case, a differing flat fee based on the perceived value of the case, or a fee that is a percentage of a recovery or fee charged by the participating lawyer.

The committee will get the draft proposed opinion when it meets again in October.

Also pending...