Gives Tips On What to Look For.
Although it dates back to January 29, 2003, the State Bar of California has an Arbitration Advisory aptly entitled "Detecting Attorney Bill Padding."
To identify bill padding, the Advisory suggested arbitrators focus on three things when determining a reasonable fee:
1. Evaluate the team/staffing used on the mater,
2. Evaluate the work performed against the time billed, and
3. Look for certain patterns in the form of the work descriptions.
With respect to #1, overuse of associates or inexperienced attorneys as well as use of elastic phrases are both suspicious circumstances. On #2, watch lots of time being billed to document review. Finally, #3 drew lots of comments on invoice formatting that might suggest padding: (a) formula billing; (b) high minimum increments (.25 rather than .10) – this might increase time by 15-25%; (c) time estimates (such as entries always rounded to the hour); (d) block billing – noting this may increase time by 10-30%; (e) standardized work descriptions; (6) lack of detail; (7) wrong times or contradictions between different work entries (by the same timekeeper or other timekeepers at the same activity); (8) timeliness of invoices (lag between the event and invoice may be problematical); (9) lack of substantiation for use of experts and outside investigators; (10) charging for computer research at rates other than the pro-rated actual cost to the firm; and (11) including overhead items in a bill.