Lawyers Near MeWashingtonKing CountyKentSouth 259th Street
8407 S 259th St, Kent, WA 98030, USA
I contacted Mr. Wimer for an initial consult. The case was involving construction law, I hired a licensed & bonded contractor who damaged my property & then hid that damage. Before my initial consultation I thought that Mr. Wimer would be honest & give me decent legal advice. I had all the evidence, time line, & was in the process of getting verification of my initial home structural inspection report. Mr. Wimer’s did not take the evidence copies I provided him, which I thought was strange. Sadly, Mr. Wimer provided no new information or new legal advice during my consult. He advised to continue what I was already doing; (getting the verification & additional information of the structural inspection done on my home prior to damage). At the end of the consult we came to a verbal agreement that he would represent me once I got the home inspector’s affirmation letter. When asked about taking the case on contingency he stated he would consider it, & he would contact me back once I had the inspection report. Unfortunately, Mr. Wimer had another agenda. There were three MAJOR concerns that I had with Mr. Wimer which are unethical at best & at worst could jeopardize his law license. 1) I asked if Mr. Wimer would take my case based on contingency, though we (my son & I) would provide all legal court costs & retainer fee’s, etc. if the case went to court. Mr. Wimer stated, “We will discuss that more once you have contacted the home inspector.” However much later, Mr. Wimer later admitted that he had no intention of taking it on contingency. If he had stated this upfront I would have left immediately & not shared our case with him. 2) Mr. Wimer nor his scheduler ever disclosed that he charged for his initial consult. After we (my son & I) were done providing the basics of our case & evidence; Mr. Wimer proceeded to tell us casual stories of his life experiences wasting precious time that he then charged for. While this was polite conversation, I find this type of behavior unethical, especially in light that I was charged for his story telling. I never found out I was being charged until I received the bill in the mail. These casual stories he elected to tell wasted valuable time I was charged for, and he refused to work with me on this wasted time. 3) When I informed Mr. Wimer that I had successfully gotten the home inspectors statement. I left numerous messages which were never returned over a period of 3-4 months. Unbeknownst to me, Mr. Wimer had decided to drop my case without informing me. I only found out about it by a fluke chance. During that specific time, Mr. Wimer stated that he never had any intentions of taking my case on a contingency basis. I felt that Mr. Wimer was at best dishonest because I had specifically addressed this issue at the beginning of the consult, & would have ended the consultation right there. Instead Mr. Wimer misrepresented himself implying contingency was a legitimate option. When I tried to resolve the issues about Mr. Wimer dropping my case without notification, his initial non-disclosed consult charge, and his intentional wasting of time on non-pertinent case materials, he refused to discuss this. The only time I ever received a response was when I sent in a physical letter. In his correspondence Mr. Wimer was confused & extremely mistaken over what occurred at the initial consult, such as my son offering to pay for the retainer, office costs, & court fees incurred & NOT the initial consultation fee. Mr. Wimer later claimed this was disclosed, yet if I was told this, I would never have scheduled an appointment. Sadly, There was no written contract presented, something any reputable professional would do. This is something that is a basic requirement for ALL contract law. There was no explicit or implicit contract at the time of my visit. I likely would have been within my rights to not pay, yet I was ethical and paid to provide this evaluation here. I recommend you seek professional legal advice elsewhere.
For residents across Washington state, seeking legal advice can be a critical step in addressing various personal and business matters. When faced with legal questions or disputes, connecting with an attorney who can provide insight and potential pathways forward is often a priority. Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S., located in Kent, Washington, is a firm that offers legal services to those in the local community and beyond.
The firm aims to provide legal assistance, and individuals seeking their services often reach out for initial consultations to discuss their specific circumstances. Understanding what to expect when engaging with legal professionals is important for anyone in the Washington region navigating a legal issue. While client experiences can vary, the firm's presence in the local legal landscape means they are available for inquiries and discussions regarding potential legal needs.
When considering any legal service, it's always advisable for local users to gather comprehensive information and ensure the firm's approach aligns with their expectations. Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S. offers a point of contact for those in Washington looking for legal counsel, and they are located in a convenient area of Kent for those wishing to schedule discussions.
### Location and Accessibility
Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S. is situated in Kent, Washington, providing a local presence for individuals and businesses seeking legal assistance within the region. Their office is located at 8407 S 259th St, Kent, WA 98030, USA. This address places the firm in a part of Kent that is generally accessible to residents from various surrounding areas within King County and the broader Puget Sound region.
Accessibility is a key factor when choosing a legal firm, and a local office can offer convenience for in-person consultations. The location on S 259th Street typically allows for relatively straightforward navigation by car, and depending on the specific building and surrounding infrastructure, parking options may be available. For individuals in Kent, Auburn, Federal Way, Renton, and other nearby communities, this location provides a physical point of contact for legal inquiries and discussions. While specific public transportation details are not provided, the firm’s presence in a commercial area usually means it is integrated into the local transportation network to some degree, aiming to serve the local Washington populace effectively.
### Services Offered
While the provided information is limited and primarily comprises client experiences, Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S. is a legal firm indicating that they handle various legal matters. Based on the context of the reviews, the firm appears to engage in areas where clients seek advice and representation, including:
It is important for prospective clients to clarify the firm's specific practice areas and ensure they align with their individual legal needs.
### Features / Highlights
Based on client feedback, interactions with Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S. highlight certain aspects of their operations. While experiences can vary significantly, the following points emerge from the provided reviews:
It is crucial for any potential client to ensure clear communication regarding all terms, fees, and expectations prior to engaging with the firm, and to verify all aspects of service agreements in writing.
### Promotions or Special Offers
Based on the provided customer reviews, Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S. does not publicly advertise specific promotions or special offers in the traditional sense, such as discounts on services or bundled packages. The focus of the reviews pertains more to the firm's consultation practices and fee transparency. One key area of discussion mentioned is the consideration of taking cases on a contingency basis. However, it is stated that Mr. Wimer later indicated he had no intention of doing so, despite initial discussions implying it was a legitimate option. This suggests that while contingency arrangements might be discussed, they may not be a readily available or consistently offered option for all cases.
The reviews also highlight that initial consultations are charged, and this fee may not be disclosed upfront. This is a crucial point for any prospective client to clarify before scheduling an appointment, as many legal firms offer free initial consultations as a promotional offer to attract new clients. Therefore, it is highly recommended that individuals inquire about all potential fees, including consultation charges, and clarify billing practices and fee structures in writing before proceeding with any legal services or consultations with Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S.
### Contact Information
If you are in Washington state and considering seeking legal advice, you can reach Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S. through the following contact details:
It is advisable to contact the firm directly to discuss your legal needs, inquire about their specific practice areas, and clarify all fee structures, including any charges for initial consultations, before proceeding with any services.
### Conclusion: Why this place is suitable for locals
For individuals in Washington, particularly within the Kent area, seeking legal advice, Wayne J. Wimer, Inc., P.S. offers a local point of contact for legal inquiries. While direct suitability can vary based on individual expectations and the specific nature of a legal case, the firm provides an opportunity for locals to engage in initial consultations to discuss their legal challenges. Their physical presence in Kent, Washington, at 8407 S 259th St, offers accessibility for those living in the surrounding communities, allowing for in-person discussions about their legal concerns.
Prospective clients are strongly advised to exercise thorough due diligence before engaging with the firm. This includes making explicit inquiries about all fees, such as consultation charges, prior to any meeting, and ensuring all agreements, particularly regarding representation and payment structures like contingency fees, are clearly documented in a written contract. For Washington residents, gathering complete and transparent information directly from the firm regarding their services, fees, and communication protocols is essential to ensure that their legal needs are met effectively and without misunderstanding.
8407 S 259th St, Kent, WA 98030, USA
I contacted Mr. Wimer for an initial consult. The case was involving construction law, I hired a licensed & bonded contractor who damaged my property & then hid that damage. Before my initial consultation I thought that Mr. Wimer would be honest & give me decent legal advice. I had all the evidence, time line, & was in the process of getting verification of my initial home structural inspection report. Mr. Wimer’s did not take the evidence copies I provided him, which I thought was strange. Sadly, Mr. Wimer provided no new information or new legal advice during my consult. He advised to continue what I was already doing; (getting the verification & additional information of the structural inspection done on my home prior to damage). At the end of the consult we came to a verbal agreement that he would represent me once I got the home inspector’s affirmation letter. When asked about taking the case on contingency he stated he would consider it, & he would contact me back once I had the inspection report. Unfortunately, Mr. Wimer had another agenda. There were three MAJOR concerns that I had with Mr. Wimer which are unethical at best & at worst could jeopardize his law license. 1) I asked if Mr. Wimer would take my case based on contingency, though we (my son & I) would provide all legal court costs & retainer fee’s, etc. if the case went to court. Mr. Wimer stated, “We will discuss that more once you have contacted the home inspector.” However much later, Mr. Wimer later admitted that he had no intention of taking it on contingency. If he had stated this upfront I would have left immediately & not shared our case with him. 2) Mr. Wimer nor his scheduler ever disclosed that he charged for his initial consult. After we (my son & I) were done providing the basics of our case & evidence; Mr. Wimer proceeded to tell us casual stories of his life experiences wasting precious time that he then charged for. While this was polite conversation, I find this type of behavior unethical, especially in light that I was charged for his story telling. I never found out I was being charged until I received the bill in the mail. These casual stories he elected to tell wasted valuable time I was charged for, and he refused to work with me on this wasted time. 3) When I informed Mr. Wimer that I had successfully gotten the home inspectors statement. I left numerous messages which were never returned over a period of 3-4 months. Unbeknownst to me, Mr. Wimer had decided to drop my case without informing me. I only found out about it by a fluke chance. During that specific time, Mr. Wimer stated that he never had any intentions of taking my case on a contingency basis. I felt that Mr. Wimer was at best dishonest because I had specifically addressed this issue at the beginning of the consult, & would have ended the consultation right there. Instead Mr. Wimer misrepresented himself implying contingency was a legitimate option. When I tried to resolve the issues about Mr. Wimer dropping my case without notification, his initial non-disclosed consult charge, and his intentional wasting of time on non-pertinent case materials, he refused to discuss this. The only time I ever received a response was when I sent in a physical letter. In his correspondence Mr. Wimer was confused & extremely mistaken over what occurred at the initial consult, such as my son offering to pay for the retainer, office costs, & court fees incurred & NOT the initial consultation fee. Mr. Wimer later claimed this was disclosed, yet if I was told this, I would never have scheduled an appointment. Sadly, There was no written contract presented, something any reputable professional would do. This is something that is a basic requirement for ALL contract law. There was no explicit or implicit contract at the time of my visit. I likely would have been within my rights to not pay, yet I was ethical and paid to provide this evaluation here. I recommend you seek professional legal advice elsewhere.
Aug 01, 2015 · Paula DolinkoThis guys a real jerk. I sent a fax to him by accident (another company had the wrong fax number listed) and this guys faxes back, threatening to sue me. Unprofessional, when just a simple phone call would have worked to clear things up.
Jun 11, 2013 · Jeremy B
8407 S 259th St #203, Kent, WA 98030, USA
8407 S 259th St #101, Kent, WA 98030, USA
1314 Central Ave S #101, Kent, WA 98032, USA
1303 Central Ave S #201, Kent, WA 98032, USA
1303 Central Ave S #201, Kent, WA 98032, USA
1209 Central Ave S #180, Kent, WA 98032, USA
1209 Central Ave S # 207, Kent, WA 98032, USA
1316 Central Ave S STE 100, Kent, WA 98032, USA
610 Central Ave S, Kent, WA 98032, USA
606 Central Ave S, Kent, WA 98032, USA
333 5th Ave S, Kent, WA 98032, USA
604 W Meeker St #206, Kent, WA 98032, USA