Rocket Lawyer ready for UK launch
One of the US’s biggest legal brands has confirmed it will enter the UK market from next month.
Rocket Lawyer, which offers a do-it-yourself online template as well as referrals to a 25-firm panel, will go live from the end of November after a digital marketing campaign. It is the second US online legal shop to come to the UK, following rival LegalZoom’s announcement last month of a tie-up with QualitySolicitors.
Mark Edwards (pictured), corporate vice-president of Rocket Lawyer UK, said the intention is to replicate the company's US market share in the UK.
Online documents offer individuals and small businesses a fixed-fee service in family law, wills, probate, property issues, employment and corporate law.
Clients whose enquiry is too complicated – or who want extra reassurance – are referred to panel firms chosen from across England and Wales. Edwards said 10 firms – most already operating a fixed-fee service – have been selected for the panel, with talks ongoing with more than a dozen others.
They will not pay a fee for the referral, but will be expected to give a free 30-minute consultation and offer a 33% discount to clients who have come to them from Rocket Lawyer. The firms will keep their own name.
‘We’re unlocking the bottom end of the market that’s not currently being served,’ said Edwards. ‘A lot of the population is used to getting a lower-cost option if they do it themselves – if [law firms] are overcharging for something quite simple I expect we will take business away from them. There are a lot of people out there not legally protected – two-thirds don’t have a will – and that’s our target market.’
Edwards, a business development manager at LexisNexis before joining Rocket Lawyer, expects most customers will opt to pay an annual fee for the service, with the most basic package starting at ‘tens of pounds’.
Most marketing has come through emails and paid-for promotion on online search engines, but next year will see a ‘more visible’ advertising campaign.
In the US, Rocket Lawyer has three million visitors to its site every month, leading to hundreds of thousands of documents being completed. The company was launched five years ago in San Francisco by former corporate lawyer Charley Moore.
Comments
With the new brand ready to
With the new brand ready to launch I trust that the Law Society will ensure all necessary steps are taken to warn the public about the dangers of vulnerable members of the public over relying on internet templates and "call centre law"
Would doctors allow a situation to develop whereby a rival body offers templates on how to undertake surgery?
I recall some years ago being asked to advise on the effect of a Rent Act tenancy until I appreciated that the tenancy was drawn up in accordance with New Zealand law!
Why just vulnerable members
Your comment suggests that the information in these documents is not credible; do you have inside knowledge? Or that only vulnerable members of the public should be protected from these rogues, not ALL members of the public.
Whereas there is no doubt that there are some online will companies that may not be robust, RocketLawyer in the US offers a credible alternative to the provision of legal services and is there any reason that the UK version wouldn't?
Would Google back RocketLawyer to the tune they have if there was to be any doubt over credibility?
NHS Direct
No one is suggesting that particularly complicated legal work should be carried out bty the public online. NHS Direct does not offer templates on how to undertake surgery.
Dear Modern Lawyer Your title
Dear Modern Lawyer
Your title suggests that anybody that argues against you is a meber of the Luddite Community
Please refer to the article on the tie up by Quality Law with the USA legal tepmlate Brand
Templates are dnagerous encourage lazty thinking and provide flase comfort to the public
Not all modernity is good
Not all lawyers are Luddites
Troubled lawyer I have absolutely no problem with anyone arguing sensibly but I found the comment posted by placidlawyer to be somewhat dramatic.
You say that “Templates are dnagerous encourage lazty thinking and provide flase comfort to the public” could I, respectfully, suggest that your spelling and poor grammar indicates that it might be you who is being lazy? Perhaps you are a member of the Luddite community that you refer to, most computers now have a quick and simple spell check facility.
Modern Lawyer Did you not
Modern Lawyer
Did you not spot the fact that the contents of the blog were mispelt as a spoof?
Where is your sense of humour?
Troubled lawyer's comments are perhaps indicative of a troubled mind brought on by those lawyers like you preaching modernity but only as a smokescreen for ditching professionalism in favour of naked commercialism
Yawn! Another marketing firm
Yawn!
Another marketing firm with the word "lawyer"in the title is launched.
Next!
Yawn! Another legal head in the sand reply
I recall back in the 90's significant rebellion from many in the legal profession to the new "email" yet now it is impossible to imagine life without.
Just as you now go online for car insurance whereas 20 years ago you would have used a broker, many will go online for legal advice.
Industries and markets change over time, advances in technology and innovation change the status quo; yet many believe that law is untouched and there are not better way of servicing clients.
Good luck to you I say.
Wasn't suggesting there
Wasn't suggesting there aren't better ways-just that this is yet another marketing scheme trying (struggling?) to distinguish itself from all the other similar schemes.
Competition is fine by me.
Poor humour?
Placidlawyer there is a spelling mistake in the first line of the post by troubled lawyer, and again in the second line, are those supposed to appeal to my sense of humour? The third line might be an attempt at humour, but how can one tell?
I can’t see that I am preaching, just suggesting we should keep an open mind on these things.
Apologies for the typo in my first post, should have used spell check!!!
33%
Is it me?
Why would a firm trade away 33% and 30 minutes advice? Even if there is significant volume, which I am sceptical of, then before you have really started your income is down a third.
I worry for lawyers who engage in the obsessive pursuit of work without examining whether it is profitable or not.
Amazing!
Jon
33% of 150%
I can't help but wonder whether being forced to offer a discount will increase publicised prices. If you list your charge out rate on the site as being 50% above your normal rate, but the time 33% is deducted, you charge the client the same as if they hadn't been given the discount.
My point is that such a generous discount is meaningless unless somehow Rocket Lawyer forces us to standardise the hourly rate we charge customers who don't come in from that source.
Additionally, much of the work that Rocket Lawyer customers would want wouldn't be the sort of work for which we would charge by the hour. I think most of us probably give fixed (or relatively fixed) fees for standard documents like a confidentiality agreement or a tenancy agreement.
Haha
"Clients whose enquiry is too complicated – or who want extra reassurance – are referred to panel firms chosen from across England and Wales. Edwards said 10 firms – most already operating a fixed-fee service – have been selected for the panel, with talks ongoing with more than a dozen others.
They will not pay a fee for the referral, but will be expected to give a free 30-minute consultation and offer a 33% discount to clients who have come to them from Rocket Lawyer. The firms will keep their own name."
Which 10 firms have just agreed to offer a telephone advice service FOR FREE to this outfit? The clients will just ring up for 30 mins then hang up. If they expect free advice having paid for the documents then I'm sorry but they ain't gonna be paying you any money for extras!
Suckers! You'd think by 2012 they would have seen this time and time again and learned!
Some DIY products already
Some DIY products already exist in the UK
Google DIYPPI for instance
Which one of you wears a hat?
rocket lawyer, placid lawyer, troubled lawyer, modern lawyer.. seems like there is a 'title war' over who can think of the most interesting name here. I wonder which one of you lawyers wears a hat to appear more interesting?
Well it least is shows that
Well it least is shows that elements of the profession are feeling liberated by the opportuning to put their point of view in a care fee joyous sort of way .
In between the jokes serious points are being made and although at time anarchic the medium is providing lawyers will the only effective forum to air their views in view of the perception fair or otherwise that they are not breing listened to
Cest moi
Actually I'm the most interesting lawyer. My name proves this as does my orange bow tie and wax sandals! By the way the end is nigh. We are doomed as a profession. Run for the hills.
Change that be
We are all aware that the way the legal profession charges its clients and recovers costs incurred is undergoing a large amount of change, mostly due by (supposedly) April next year, a matter of months for us. We all know we need to dust our internal policies and retainers off to check compliance and profit margins, so to me it would seem that this US firm is trying it's luck with this tactic in the UK. Whether it would be a form of worksource for a firm is something that has yet to be tried and tested here. See how it performs by this time next year I'd say...