Attorney Debt Settlement vs Traditional Debt Settlement
There are really 3 routes one can take when settling their debts: 1) Do it Alone; 2) Hire a Non-Attorney Debt Settlement Firm; 3) Hire an Attorney.
|
Alone |
Non-Attorney |
Attorney |
|
| Ability to Undertake Basic Negotiations |
X |
X |
X |
| Able to get a Deal, Any Deal |
X |
X |
X |
| Say the Correct Things |
X |
X |
|
| Third Party Oversight (other gvt agency) |
X |
X |
|
| Training & Supervision |
Debatable |
X |
|
| Bonded/Insured |
Sometimes |
X |
|
| Enhanced Negotiation Experience |
X |
||
| Advise as to Contractual Obligations |
X |
||
| Advise of Statute of Limitations |
X |
||
| Draft and Review Release Agreements |
X |
||
| In Person Legal Consultation |
X |
||
| Litigation Defense |
X |
||
| Collectors Required to Call via Federal Law |
X |
||
| Enhanced Ethical Requirements |
X |
||
| Advise as to Other Legal Options |
X |
||
| Price |
Free |
Highest |
Lowest |
Consumers can settle the debt own their own. The biggest benefit of going it alone are that it’s free and you can get a deal. Frankly speaking once you add in the fees of a non-attorney firm it is probably a break-even proposition.
However with both the solo and non-lawyer approach the consumer typically ends up paying more, receiving a smaller discount, foregoes real legal analysis and risks making the wrong financial decision as opposed to a skilled debt settlement attorney.
