Precise Legal services

This case involved an evasive respondent and required multiple documented service attempts at different locations. During the process, the client stated financial constraints and declined additional investigative services such as skip tracing. Despite that, I continued service attempts using all information available and later located the respondent after alternative service proceedings had already been initiated. That additional attempt was made voluntarily and at no additional charge. Throughout the course of service, the respondent’s conduct raised safety concerns. On one attempt, law enforcement was contacted due to a credible safety issue. Despite these circumstances, service efforts continued professionally and in good faith to assist the client in moving her case forward. Once alternative service is approved by the court, it becomes a separate task with new legal requirements, including preparation of service materials, email service, mailing, and documentation. This was explained in advance, including that an additional fee would apply due to the extra time and compliance involved. The issue was not a refusal to proceed, but a disagreement over the additional charge for work outside the original scope. All pricing was clearly disclosed upfront, including separate stakeout pricing, a flat fee for restraining order service, and additional work quoted based on time and requirements. Extensive efforts were made in this matter, including attempts at multiple locations—more addresses than were initially provided—in an effort to locate a respondent actively avoiding service. This review reflects a fundamental disagreement regarding the value and cost of professional process-serving services. Clear fee agreements are essential, particularly in cases involving evasive respondents, safety concerns, and extensive field work.