Raskin & Berman

Thank you for your letter of February 7, Please note that this matter should be addressed to me and not to Mr [redacted] I cannot really reply to this complaint in detail without without revealing information which, as an attorney, I am required to keep confidentialin brief, Mr [redacted] hired our firm in order to evaluate whether his debt problem could be resolved through BankruptcyWe prepared his bankruptcy schedules based on information he provided usWe reviewed the nature and value of his assets, which included substantial funds which might not be protected in bankruptcyIt was impossible to reach a final conclusion on this issue because the issue had been treated differently by different Bankruptcy Courts, and there is no controlling authority in Rhode IslandWhen we explained this to him he instructed us to open settlement discussion with his primary creditor so that he could compare settlement possibilities to the risk he might take in filing bankruptcyUltimately this resulted in a settlementHe paid us a flat fee of to handle this matter and we have charged him nothing beyond the agreed fee

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response submitted by the business and have determined that the response does not satisfy or resolve my issues and/or concerns in reference to complaint # ***
"As expected, Mr*** is being less that candid in his response; he failed to explain his reasoning for not thoroughly researching the matter presented with, prior to assuring me that I would be totally protected from any jeopardy to any assets; and did not have any involvement in opening any settlement discussions with anyone, as that had already taken place.In closing, Mr*** has not heard the last of my displeasure with his unprofessional, deplorable, and conning "tricks of the trade", as the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island (the Board) is also being made aware of such unethical conduct, which tarnishes the legal profession.Respectfully,*** ***"Thank you

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response submitted by the business and have determined that the response does not satisfy or resolve my issues and/or concerns in reference to complaint # [redacted]. 
 
"As expected, Mr. [redacted] is being less that candid in his response; he failed to explain his reasoning for not thoroughly researching the matter presented with, prior to assuring me that I would be totally protected from any jeopardy to any assets; and did not have any involvement in opening any settlement discussions with anyone, as that had already taken place.In closing, Mr. [redacted] has not heard the last of my displeasure with his unprofessional, deplorable, and conning "tricks of the trade", as the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island (the Board) is also being made aware of such unethical conduct, which tarnishes the legal profession.Respectfully,[redacted]"Thank you.

Thank you for your letter of February 7, 2018. Please note that this matter should be addressed to me and not to Mr. [redacted]. I cannot really reply to this complaint in detail without without revealing information which, as an attorney, I am required to keep confidential. in brief, Mr. [redacted] hired...

our firm in order to evaluate whether his debt problem could be resolved through Bankruptcy. We prepared his bankruptcy schedules based on information he provided us. We reviewed the nature and value of his assets, which included substantial funds which might not be protected in bankruptcy. It was impossible to reach a final conclusion on this issue because the issue had been treated differently by different Bankruptcy Courts, and there is no controlling authority in Rhode Island. When we explained this to him he instructed us to open settlement discussion with his primary creditor so that he could compare settlement possibilities to the risk he might take in filing bankruptcy. Ultimately this resulted in a settlement. He paid us a flat fee of 2400.00 to handle this matter and we have charged him nothing beyond the agreed fee.