1 /5 conchelsms: I was actively involved in the estate planning process for my father, who was the named client in our engagement with The Estate & Asset Protection Law Firm. Although he was the formal client, I paid for the services and participated in all meetings, decisions, and document reviews to help protect our family’s interests.
We hired the firm to assist with creating a revocable trust and related documents. Unfortunately, our experience raised serious concerns about the quality of legal guidance and overall client service.
From the outset, we hoped to be treated as a united family—a father and son with a long-standing relationship and shared goals. Instead, we felt early assumptions were made about our intentions, rather than efforts to understand our dynamic. Though disappointed, we gave the firm the benefit of the doubt and proceeded.
Those initial dynamics seemed to influence the engagement throughout. We believe some advice was shaped more by assumption than by our input.
We later discovered provisions—such as language allowing the firm to appoint a Trust Protector—had been included without our knowledge or consent. This was not explained in advance and was only found through our own review. When we asked to allow beneficiaries to vote on this role, we were told it wasn’t permitted. A second attorney later confirmed it was perfectly legal and commonly used when requested.
We also encountered inconsistent billing. We were quoted a certain price but later asked to pay additional fees. After raising concerns, the charges were removed. While we appreciated the correction, it made us wonder how closely other clients are reviewing their billing.
In several areas, we felt the firm’s advice didn’t reflect my father’s actual wishes. Rather than tailoring the trust to his stated goals, we were steered toward provisions that seemed based on firm templates or internal preferences. The result was a lack of transparency and flexibility.
The tone of communication often felt overly defensive. We were warned that asking for changes could lead to additional legal fees, which felt more like a deterrent than part of a collaborative process. We came for estate planning—not litigation.
We ultimately hired a second attorney, who confirmed our concerns and helped us revise provisions to better reflect the client’s intent. Many issues could have been avoided with clearer communication and more client-focused service.
We believe this firm may be more accustomed to working with elderly clients who don’t have active advocates. The process felt passive by design and not suited for families seeking thoughtful collaboration. We encourage others—especially adult children assisting aging parents—to attend all meetings and read every line.
Most troubling, one attorney proposed including a coin flip clause to resolve trustee disputes. This was not a joke—it was suggested during a serious legal planning discussion. We found this highly unprofessional.
While others may have different experiences, we cannot recommend The Estate & Asset Protection Law Firm based on ours. If you choose to engage this firm, review every document carefully, involve a trusted advocate, and don’t hesitate to seek a second opinion.
