range from about $100 to about $500 for private-hire work.
So that is approximately between £62 p/h to £308 p/h; so fairly similar to the UK then.
Sup Jman,
$500 is just ridiculous, I've said that before, say it again.
While you don't have the 1/4 phone calls, I do bill .10 per email that I have to read and respond to with anything over Yes, no, OK on the way, etc. and the .10 is my travel, consultation, and phone rate, which is well under half of my forensic rate.
I've met two people I'd pay $400 an hour to (which I think should be the top) and they are by far the best I've ever seen without a doubt. I've also met people who actually charge $400 and I was grossly embarrassed for the person they were charging, because they were 5 or 6 years out of college, got MAYBE 10 cases a year and actually stumped on something so basic, that you'd throw your monitor if you heard their thought process. So what do they do, go immediately to the forums and ask. Then call the client with that answer without testing it or anything.
This is 2 tiered, so please make sure that you know I mean both. I also believe that if you are a life long investigator, or a lifelong computer geek AND you get hired on with alphabet soup to get your CART cert, then you are one of the baddest dudes on the planet. Last week I looked over the newest requirements to get and maintain the CART cert for a person, and it's grueling. From A+ to mock trial absolutely incredible.
As Larry D wrote the rates I have seen range from about $100 to about $500 for private-hire work.
I do not have court ordered work rates, but I presume it is very much driven by the region.
I have seen primarily three ways of charging - by data size, by the hour, and some hybrid of the two.
When by size, all charge by size on disk - this is an important distinction, specially if dealing with e-mail in .MSG or .eml format on a large-cluster drive.
When by hour, it is almost always full hour, instead of the 6- or 15-minute lawyer time.
To clarify; the rates that trewmte posted are the maximum rates that the UK government pay experts instructed in Legal Aid cases (cases where the defendant is deemed unable to afford their legal representation).
Most of the $500+ (yes, +) rates are from big-name firms.
Their clients are not paying for better service. They are paying for a better name.
Great replies to this thread. Thanks for joining in.
….actually stumped on something so basic…..
Without speaking out about that situation, how will it get remedied?
So what do they do, go immediately to the forums and ask. Then call the client with that answer without testing it or anything.
And that happens whether the person has an educational degree or not. Equally, whether s/he works in the public or private sector.
How many Politicians have we all found that make statements, which later the facts stated in them turn out to be statements which simply could not be true, that had been found to be cribbed from the interent, twitter, facebook or other sources; perhaps reference to the rumblings of "dodgy dossier" and "war" is but one example.
—-
The monetary factor is a focal point and there is an argument, but at the other end of the scale, where a person/company charges a low fee and still produces erroneous opinion/evidence. Is there any objection to that happening? By way of illustration, say the production of a "set fee" report that simply agrees with the other side - is that honest or the right thing to do?
The internet can be a powerful tool to be used for educational good. So if I were reading this thread for the first time and wanted to understand my value in the marketplace would it be essential in formulating how I see my worth to identify the distinctions about charging that fall between
- self-employed -v- employed?
- experience -v- inexperience
- private charges -v- public purse charges
- objective charging -v- subjective charging (is this one possible)?
Any additional titles or subsets for a particular title you can think of?
I have some difficulties with the math. 😯
I guess everyone of the pro's here has before or later whined a bit about the long hours of work.
365-2*52-(say) 40=221 (which is sound as at least here in Italy we conventionally calculate days of actual work per year in 220 days/year).
220*8=1760 hours/year
Since the issue is "long hours", I would say that 220*10=2200 hours/year could be reasonable, but let's go "midway", at 2000 hors/year.
Are you telling me that most of the experienced guys here do actually have a (gross) income of around US$ 250*2000=500,000 or more?
jaclaz
The rates i quoted are not full time employment, contract rates.
It is a trade off. Make larger hourly rates, but may not be full time employed versus full time employed but get lower rates. One has huge upside chance but just as much downside. The other offers less downside, but limited to no upside.
Someone might get a case in the private sector if they are solo and work 10 hours on the case for a $4k draw. If they are working for a big firm, they work the same hours, might be getting billed very close to the same rate, except the examiner is working for 60-80k at the firm with guaranteed weekly check.
I have some difficulties with the math. 😯
I guess everyone of the pro's here has before or later whined a bit about the long hours of work.
365-2*52-(say) 40=221 (which is sound as at least here in Italy we conventionally calculate days of actual work per year in 220 days/year).
220*8=1760 hours/year
Since the issue is "long hours", I would say that 220*10=2200 hours/year could be reasonable, but let's go "midway", at 2000 hors/year.Are you telling me that most of the experienced guys here do actually have a (gross) income of around US$ 250*2000=500,000 or more?
jaclaz
the examiner is working for 60-80k at the firm with guaranteed weekly check.
Well at the lower $60,000 p.a. that still equates to over £37,000.00 (UK) which is considerably higher (and reveals a large disparity) in comparison to the average UK counterparts.
Well, what I tried to introduce as they were not evident - at least to me - till now are the concepts of
- billable hours
- full vs. partial occupation
- work procurement
- total hours of payed work per year (which translates to gross income)
[/listo]
Since I don't believe that anyone here (or maybe a very few, elected, exceptionally capable and possibly also a bit lucky, ones) in the private/consulting sectors actually makes half a million bucks a year, it makes little sense to provide "partial" data (i.e. reasonable hourly fee without specifying how much work one can normally expect to get AND how much do you actually have as expenses - still yearly).
Till now it seemed that if you got a job in a company you could expect anything from US$ 40,000 to US$ 80,000 and maybe, if you are one of the few elected one US$ 100,000÷120,000.
Which puts the "top" at the most at three times the "base" wage.
Conversely, the "base" income for a "private/consultant" should be 1/3 of the "top" US$ 500,000, i.e. around US$ 160.000.
It seems to me like these latter numbers are very far from reality.
Without having people disclosing personal data, maybe we could put up FIVE polls (which are in themselves "anonymous") similar to these
#1 reserved to "employed" forensic experts "voting" how many hours per year they actually work
#2 still reserved to the above "voting" in which range is their gross income
#3 reserved to "freelance/solo" forensic experts "voting" how many hours per year they actually work/how many of them are "billable"
#4 still reserved to the above "voting" in which range is their gross income
#5 still reserved to the above "voting" in which range is their expenses
This way we could have some valid data, otherwise, more than comparing apples with oranges, which BTW is allright, see wink
http//
we are comparing peas with watermelons 😯 .
jaclaz