Civility in Pricing

Over the last little while I've been thinking about how lawyers earn their pay.  Most do so by billing by the hour.  Not such a bad deal for the lawyer, especially when the amount of time to be spent on the case is unknown.  On the client end though, not such a good deal.

Where else is a professional -- providing professional services -- able to look a client in the face and say "I charge a whole lot an hour and I haven't any idea what this is going to cost you in the end."?  I wouldn't put up with that from my dentist or my mechanic.  These professionals say upfront:  "Your crown will cost $1,200.00."  (No limit on time.)  "Your timing belt and water pump replacement will be $1,000.00."  (Quoted price provided before the work begins.)

And yet, so very many lawyers continue to charge in one-tenth billable hours.  I suppose this is based in the "tradition of the law."  Rooted in the notion of:  "We've always done it this way."  Where's the progress in that mentality?  How about being open and honest with cost?

I have a client now who was originally given a flat-fee cost for the proposed legal service.  The client was unable to come up with that amount of money.  The "compromise" was to switch over to the outdated -- and unknown -- billable hour situation.  By the conclusion of the case, the client may end up being "billed" roughly the same amount as quoted -- upfront and in the open -- for the flat fee.

Where does this leave the client?  I imagine that the client will feel manipulated into paying "additional retainer" when the "initial retainer" runs out.  I imagine that the client, when given the initial retainer amount (half that of the flat fee), conceptualized the case costing one half the flat fee -- despite the wording in the representation agreement.  This doesn't feel right to me, but that was what the client wanted.

Starting with my very next client, I will no longer be "compromising" on the representation agreement.  I will openly price the case based on the client's needs and goal.  I will be more like the dentist and the massage therapist and the mechanic.  Of course, things can change:  An open-pricing of, let's say "$X for your divorce which includes a, b, c, and d." could morph into "$X plus $Y because we have learned since the beginning of the case that you now want e and f."  This is like the dentist who finds the need for a root canal after inspection of the tooth to be crowned.  Or, the converse could happen.  The client could hear "It is no longer $X.  It is $X minus $Z because you do not need d."  This is akin to the mechanic who finds your vehicle does not need a new water pump, just the timing belt." 

Comments?

What do you think?  Would knowing the cost upfront make a difference to you?  What experiences have you had with lawyers and their billing?  Ready for a change?