This reminder came when one of my law school classmates offered me a partnership because his law partnership dissolved, and he wants to have a functioning law office.
I broached the idea of Metrolaw.
This is not a new thing. As a matter of fact, this has been going on for years already in Manila.
The Metrolaw concept provides a law office solution for lawyers without the hassles of overhead.
There is a monthly subscription fee. With this monthly subscription, a lawyer can have secretarial services, coneference facilities for clients, computer access, mail services, etc. There wil be an office address within the center of commerce in Ortigas, phone and fax facilities.
This would be a good alternative to putting up a law office which will required overhead expenses like utilities, rent, secretary, etc.
However, before a lawyer subscribes to this Metrolaw concept, he should make sure he knows what are the inclusions, and those which will be on a pay-per-use basis.
One advatange with the Metrolaw office solution, is its flexibility.
The service can be customized in accordance with the lawyer's office needs.
If I were to relocate to my hometown physically, this Metrolaw concept would I think be practical because I can maintain a "law office" in Manila, even if I am based somewhere else.
This would be practical, instead of maintaining my own law office and be saddled with overhead expenses.
I would customize it in a way that the secretary would be "on-line" with skype or yahoo messenger so I can keep in touch throughout the day.
This should be something my classmate should consider, with his predicament now.
By the way I recall that my Canadian client, was physically based in Vancouver, and he had an "office" in Washington D.C.
When I called his D.C. office, a secretary was there to answer. I also sent correspondences to that D.C. office. I even gave that as an office address for clients in Eastern U.S.A.
I later learned that it was an office similar to the Metrolaw concept.