<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: You can&#8217;t charge for that anymore</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.law21.ca/2008/07/09/you-cant-charge-for-that-anymore/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.law21.ca/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Comments+on+Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.law21.ca%2F2008%2F07%2F09%2Fyou-cant-charge-for-that-anymore%2F%23comment-&amp;seed_title=You+can%26%238217%3Bt+charge+for+that+anymore</link>
	<description>Dispatches from a legal profession on the brink</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 03:26:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Law Firm Tells Associates - Only Use Expensive Research Tool When Clients Paying &#124; Wolfe Law Group</title>
		<link>http://www.law21.ca/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Comments+on+Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.law21.ca%2F2008%2F07%2F09%2Fyou-cant-charge-for-that-anymore%2F%23comment-1434&amp;seed_title=You+can%26%238217%3Bt+charge+for+that+anymore/comment-page-1/#comment-1434</link>
		<dc:creator>Law Firm Tells Associates - Only Use Expensive Research Tool When Clients Paying &#124; Wolfe Law Group</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://law21.ca/?p=279#comment-1434</guid>
		<description>[...] law firms and lawyers have abandoned the practice of nickel and diming their clients, just flat out rejecting that firms should charge for these expenses.   Patrick Lamb publishes an entire blog on the subject (alternative [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] law firms and lawyers have abandoned the practice of nickel and diming their clients, just flat out rejecting that firms should charge for these expenses.   Patrick Lamb publishes an entire blog on the subject (alternative [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Law Firm Tells Associates - Only Use Expensive Research Tool When Clients Paying &#124; Wolfe Law Rocks</title>
		<link>http://www.law21.ca/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Comments+on+Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.law21.ca%2F2008%2F07%2F09%2Fyou-cant-charge-for-that-anymore%2F%23comment-631&amp;seed_title=You+can%26%238217%3Bt+charge+for+that+anymore/comment-page-1/#comment-631</link>
		<dc:creator>Law Firm Tells Associates - Only Use Expensive Research Tool When Clients Paying &#124; Wolfe Law Rocks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:04:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://law21.ca/?p=279#comment-631</guid>
		<description>[...] law firms and lawyers have abandoned the practice of nickel and diming their clients, just flat out rejecting that firms should charge for these expenses.   Patrick Lamb publishes an entire blog on the subject (alternative [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] law firms and lawyers have abandoned the practice of nickel and diming their clients, just flat out rejecting that firms should charge for these expenses.   Patrick Lamb publishes an entire blog on the subject (alternative [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.law21.ca/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Comments+on+Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.law21.ca%2F2008%2F07%2F09%2Fyou-cant-charge-for-that-anymore%2F%23comment-537&amp;seed_title=You+can%26%238217%3Bt+charge+for+that+anymore/comment-page-1/#comment-537</link>
		<dc:creator>John Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:20:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://law21.ca/?p=279#comment-537</guid>
		<description>It always all about efficiency. That’s why the call from clients for flat rate billing, they don&#039;t want to pay for inefficiencies.  How many firms still use a disbursement tracking system that requires you to enter codes to track a $0.25 laser print or fax. The money spent in staff time was more then the disbursement recovery.  The biggest inefficiencies are around paper handling, if your not paperless the staff count required will kill you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It always all about efficiency. That’s why the call from clients for flat rate billing, they don&#8217;t want to pay for inefficiencies.  How many firms still use a disbursement tracking system that requires you to enter codes to track a $0.25 laser print or fax. The money spent in staff time was more then the disbursement recovery.  The biggest inefficiencies are around paper handling, if your not paperless the staff count required will kill you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
