ita !, considering the guy giving the advice is a lawyer, he isn't exactly a disinterested adviser. I always consider the biases of any source when it comes to recommendations, business or otherwise.

This was one of my first "I don't know you at all" clients. It was a $40, I'd stated clearly in emails payment upon completion, the contract stated payment upon completion, and she had been a PITA and wanted me to do multiple revisions when it was stated clearly that 1 revision was included in the $40 (that's my general per/hourly for the kind of write-up she needed then.)

I didn't get acknowledgement she'd received the deliverable; emailed to make sure. No response for a week; sent query about her getting the copy and sent invoice reminder. Nothing. One more week; reminder. Nothing. 3rd week; reminder and cut and paste of contract wording.

Got paid that day. Never a word from her again.

Revised my contracts to get a 50% down payment before I start work now.

And yeah, I work with clients on due dates, and most all my clients have been crazy-prompt, since I use PayPal for most jobs. BUT. She taught me a lesson.

I get not-paid often. Or at least I used to. But in my case, I don't think a lawyer would help because you can't get blood from a stone.

I think the legal advice is good-if it happens enough to justify the cost AND if your clients can but won't pay. I think a good lawyer would likely charge $200-500 for a letter telling someone to pay or else. So it had better be a big bill they owe.

Some clients owe me $2000-3000, but it's just not worth it to fight them. I just insist on payment up front now.

Or he's an expert, javachik. Depending on how you want to look at it. Could be either. Or both. Or neither.

In 23 years in business I have taken 1 customer to small claims court, myself. I have never been sued. Zero $ to lawyers. And yet, not a hobby.

That's like saying healthy people don't need health insurance. Surely, it's best to prepared, and just keep hoping you never need it.

But it isn't like health insurance. If the need arises, then I go hire a lawyer, I don't need to budget that there will always be a law expense. I don't need lawyer insurance. I do carry things like a huge general liability policy, workers comp coverage, commercial vehicle insurance, etc. All of those probably help me avoid needing a lawyer. I just don't agree that it needs to be an standard expense.

You're taking the insurance part too much to heart.

Just because you've never needed legal assistance in the past has no bearing on whether you'll need it in the future. You don't have to keep spending money on law you're not using--but having recourse to a lawyer and the funds to cover it seems like a pretty practical consideration when it's your company on the line...

I have no idea why the advice of budgeting so you can afford legal help when you need it generated this much foofurrah.

General reserves for the unexpected would cover legal as well as any other contingencies. My budget has some room the expected unexpected.

I am rather insurance avoiding by nature. I have liability on the vehicles but no comp or collision. I also have an extra vehicle and enough reserve to cover repairs. Over a few decades of driving this has saved me the price of a few cars. On 4 vehicles it saves over $500 a month.

There is more than one right way to budget for business or personal finances.

I don't think there's "foofurrah"; I think there are people disagreeing.