Michigan License Restoration Appeals – Why Those Who Have First Tried on Their Own and Lost Make the Best Clients – Part 2

In part 1 of this article, I began a more detailed explanation of why I’d rather represent a person in a License Appeal who has tried on their own and lost, rather than spend the time trying to convince a skeptic that they should use the services of a License Restoration Lawyer. In this second part, we’ll pick up that discussion right where we left off in the first part, and examine this from my perspective as the License Restoration Lawyer.

When that call comes in from someone who has tried on their own, and lost, they know, without fail, that they need guidance. They are, in every sense of the phrase, “all ears.” Once I explain that our first meeting will take at least 3 hours, and that’s only the beginning, they start to see that there is much more to this than they had at first realized, when they thought they could do it on their own.

Water boy2.jpgMany of those who previously used some Lawyer who said that he or she “does” License Appeals will have read many, if not most or all of my articles about the License Restoration process before they decided to call me. They frequently tell me that their old Lawyer didn’t tell them any of the things I go over in my articles, and are sometimes a bit angry about that, feeling a bit mislead. Happy as they are to be speaking with someone who knows this stuff, there is an understandable reticence on their part to hand over money to another Lawyer. It’s kind of like getting a bad nose job, then looking for a better Plastic Surgeon to fix it up; a person will be a bit skeptical of the whole medical (or in my case, legal) industry.

While I can’t turn back the hands of time and undo what’s been done, I can promise two things to anyone whose case I take:

1. If I take your case, it means I think it’s winnable. Given that I will close out 2010 with a 100% win rate (having done over 70-some Appeals), and that I always maintain a win rate of well over 90%, that promise is based upon experience, not just hope, and

2. I will do everything humanly and legally possible to make sure we prepare their case as best as can be done to insure a victory. There is nothing more that can be done, but doing any less is just plain wrong.

[Update: as of March of 2011, I have instituted a “Guarantee” that if I don’t win a person’s first License Appeal, the next is FREE. This guarantee applies retroactively to all Appeals Filed or Heard in 2011]

In the end, I wind up with a Client who understands that my advice is based upon real know-how. They don’t question me at every turn, looking for shortcuts. There are no shortcuts in these Appeals, period. Instead of having to explain why I say everything that I say, I have a Client in front of me who already knows how well things (don’t) go when they try and play Lawyer. Usually, they take notes (I make it a point to provide a pad and pen for every Client at our meetings) and seek to clarify what they don’t get right away, which is part of the process of doing this right.

In handling as many Appeals as I have, I’ve learned a lot. Interestingly, I’ve also learned a few about myself, too.

It has taken many years for me to perfect the kind of confident, self-assurance needed to take control of a License Appeal and guide the Client by the most direct possible to getting back on the road. In a way, I’m kind of like a tour guide; my job is to lead the way. A good guide won’t be persuaded into detour after detour, but will instead lead his or her charge in the right direction. This means, as much as anything else, cutting off a path that isn’t going in the right direction. I often note that people hire me to get to a specific destination, and have to let me lead the way. If a person would rather have a sympathetic ear, or shoulder to cry on, they could find a friend who would sit down with them and agree that the whole process sucks, and is unfair. While that indulgence may be free, and even comforting, it won’t get you anywhere. My job is not only to lead the way, but to quash any ideas that aren’t going to help us.

It took me a while to get to this point. Being as polite as I am, I had to learn that indulgence for the sake of indulgence is not only a waste of time, but obscures what’s important about preparing this kind of case. I suppose that this is a nice way (there I go, being polite again) of saying that I’m the Captain, and the Client is the passenger. I know the way. Follow my lead, and you’ll get where you want to go. Get in my way, and you’ll just hold up our arrival.

Again, this is why representing those who have tried and lost is such a breath of fresh air. These Clients have little interest in trying to impose their own beliefs or misconceptions on the way I handle a case. They tend to be “all ears,” and that’s why they win.

My disposition toward those whom I’m hired to help has also caused me to realize that, in retrospect, I may have very well been one of those more difficult “do-it-yourselfers” in other aspects of my life. While this doesn’t affect my Legal career, it has changed how I accept advice from the professionals in my life. If my CPA tells me to do this, and not do that, while I might be curious as to why, I now fully realize that he’s the CPA, not me, and that he knows what he’s doing. Any knowledge I think I have is more a case of “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing” than anything else. The same holds true for my dealings with Doctors. This does, of course, assume that the person you’re listening to knows their stuff. In that regard, however, I really have come to learn the value of the old adage “jack of all trades, master of none.” I would no more be interested in orthopedic advice from a dermatologist than I wold my dentist. That’s why I only work in a few areas of the Law. I concentrate in what I do, and I make it a point to be good at it.

License Appeals are the bread and butter of my livelihood. They are my specialty. When I speak with a prospective Client, I hope they know that. As much as I appreciate referrals, I am much more comfortable speaking with someone who has read lots of my articles, because I know that they know how much of a concentrations I have in this area of the Law. When I speak with someone who’s calling me because someone told them how well I did for the person who referred them, the first thing I do is have them log onto my blog and website and read some of my articles so they know that I know all about this stuff. I don’t ever want someone thinking that they’ve come to me as just some Lawyer who “does” License Appeals.

I hope the reader can now see why what might at first seem like a kind of smart-aleck, cold-hearted notion that those who have tried a License Appeal on their own and lost make the best Clients isn’t that at all. It’s a truth based upon the realities of dealing with those individuals.

Of course, there are plenty enough people who do not need to learn that lesson the hard way. Many of those who approach their eligibility date are more than interested in doing it right the first time, and are looking for quality, specialized representation in a License Appeal. It’s just that, given the number of cases I have been fortunate enough to get, I have about zero inclination to take a call from someone who needs to be convinced that they should hire a License Restoration Lawyer to handle their case. If I were to indulge those calls, and then add up all the hours I’d spend in any given year on them, simple math would show I’m far better off just letting them go for it on their own, then helping them out next time around.

In the next article, we’ll talk about the biggest problem those who have tried a License Appeal on their own have to overcome when they file their next Appeal. On top of having to do it right the next time, they are going to have to address and fix whatever problem or problems caused them to lose in the first place, and those problems can range from simple to extraordinarily difficult.