Thanks, R Scott, your points are well taken, lawyers do love precents, but if all they are going to do is follow precedent, and if FCLDF has grown really fast, then a competent organization interested in efficiency, results, performance and low operating costs -maximized results for smallest effort- would have templates for the various situations in the 50 states. They could just plug in the specifics of each herdshare owner, stream line their whole process. It could be done in half an hour, they could spend their time on what ever they thought was more important.
Or, rather than offering an owner specific contract, they could have state specific templates available once a producer had paid the annual fee, then the new herd owner members could use the templates to make their own contracts. Instead they choose to offer an owner specific contract as a member service, but they do not choose to perform in a timely manner.
As for "customer imposed" deadlines, that's not really how it played out. He could have said he'd have it done any time he wanted. He could have named his timeframe, but did not. He asked me when I wanted it done, and I thought a week was fair, so I said a week, and again, he did not say he could not or would not. He agreed. That's a verbal contract between two parties. A verbal contract is binding until replaced by a written one. This lawyer is not one with enough integrity to keep his own verbal contract if the other party has no leverage. He already had my money.
He offered the contract as a member service, he did not readily provide the service. Three times he mislead me as to the progress of the process of writing my contract.
He did not start the thing until it was past due. He did not start the thing until I'd been through the neutral, the mild, then the leveraged reminders. That's more like a personality disorder than acceptable business practice, making others make you do something. Or, it's like a mother who has to keep up constant reminders to keep a young child on task. Theretically, the maturation process includes the internalization of responsibility, such that an individual does not need constant reminders from others to keep his word. Nor does he need lame excuses for shirking responsibilities.
.
It was not til I was downright insulting that there was any action.
So, though this may sound like I'm arguing, I am interested in an accurate portrayal of what was required of me, to receive what was freely offered, and posted as available at an advertised price.
It is very hard on me personally to have to engage in this kind of tactics. I'd prefer to avoid situations where another party lacks personal ethics and moral fiber. I could have written the contract myself, in less time with less aggravation. I found them, and joined as much to support them as to get the contract, then devoted my time to other things. Now, I regret the whole business, and regret the recommendations I gave out about this "wonderful organization", worth supporting whether you need a herdshare contract or not.
I think it is dangerous to accept this kind of non-performance as SOP for lawyers, even the ones who publicly champion a worthy cause.
IMO, to accept substandard performance as "normal" is to contribute to the erosion of the foundations of our human community.
IMO it's a community member's responsibility to hold others to moral and ethical standards.
And I am still interested in finding out if there are other herdshare owners who received different treatment. If FCLDF is a decent organization I'd like to know, if they are NOT, I want everyone else to know. If what you have to do to get the contract when you need it is to demand it early, and begin to harass the second it is past due, then again, I think that is something others might benefit by knowing.
Thanks for reading
Thekla
1
