More details (first response was written on iPad)1. Communication: for the first several months (Aug 2015 thru Oct 2015), the atty. (hereafter Michael S) were incredibly difficult to reach, returning calls /texts/ emails once every 7-9 days after numerous failed daily attempts to communicate
2. Fees: Micheal S. initial fees stated it would only cost an additional $4000 (add on package deal) to add my additional product to the existing patent process
for my other entity. This number quoted was far lower than the actual fees charged by Micheal S.
3. Invoices: Micheal S. repeatedly failed to provide invoices corroborating his fees. Once provided after weeks of protesting requests, he filed incorrect invoices including an extra $3000 fee that was already paid. He acknowledged the mistake as poor accounting on his part
4. Misrepresentation: Michael S. failed to clearly explain to my partner (hereafter Ken M) the full cost of the fees. Ken M. was under the impression Micheal S. was only going to charge 50% of what the end cost ended up being
5. Delays: Ken M. underwent surgery, other health issues, and needed funds for various domestic concerns which took priority. Ken M. clearly stated to Micheal S. and myself, that the fees will be covered when he can make payment. During this time period, Nov 2015 thru Dec 2015, it was difficult to communicate with us for payment arrangements
6. 1/28/16 Partial Remainder Payment: Ken M. paid Micheal S. a partial remainder payment on January 28th.
7. 2/3/16 Final Payment: Micheal S. received payment in FULL by February 3rd. Payment posted on the 5th.
8. Due Date: Micheal S. has been aware for some time that the due date was February 6th 2016
9. Non Termination - February 4th phone call - Micheal S. indicated that he has not terminated our relationship, but that going forward a retainer would be needed. He also indicated that he acknowledged payment has been received and he will fulfill his obligation to file the patent.
10. 2/6/16: Having called Michael S. from an alternative VOIP number, he answered the call he has otherwise ignored in the past. I repeated that the patent filing was due today, and he stated :“funny how when the deadline is here you are easy to reach”, then acknowledged receiving my texts (and subsequently ignoring them), then hung up saying he had other matters. This clearly indicates Michael S.:
1. acknowledged the payment
2. acknowledged the deadline
3. clearly suggests he is taking solace in avoiding us, suggesting vindictive behavior for delays in payment