2010 Law Firm E-billing Survey Report
Law firms’ usage and satisfaction with e-billing systems
ALM Legal Intelligence
A division of
ALM Media Properties, LLC
120 Broadway, Fifth Floor
New York, NY 10271
Executive Summary
Between January 20, 2010 and February 22, 2010, ALM Legal Intelligence conducted an online survey relating to
legal e-billing systems which was sent to ~20,000 law firm professionals. Total responses were 997 for a 5%
response rate. (See page 2)
Benefits/Drawbacks of E-billing Systems
Two in three respondents stated that the major benefit of e-billing systems is the speed with which their firm can
submit invoices to clients. Around half cited the ability to check approval status and receive faster payment as a
benefit. (See page 3)
More than half of respondents stated that having to pay a fee to use certain e-billing systems is the primary
drawback. Around half believed that waiting for client approval of timekeeper rates and adding UTBMS task and
activity codes to time entries are disadvantages of some systems. (See page 3)
Most Preferred and Most Widely Used E-billing Vendors
When asked to rank e-billing vendors based on overall satisfaction, the highest number of respondents chose
Serengeti by a margin of nearly 4-to-1. The next tier of vendors was comprised of TyMetrix, DataCert and
LexisNexis. (See page 4)
There was also a large gap between the top vendor and other vendors in the ratio of best-to-worst rankings.
Serengeti’s ratio of “Best” vendor rankings to “Worst” vendor rankings was 28:1, compared with TyMetrix at 6:1,
Bottomline at 5:1 and DataCert at 4:1. (See page 5)
The most widely used e-billing vendors were: Serengeti (69% of respondents), TyMetrix (53% of respondents),
LexisNexis (47% of respondents) and DataCert (43% of respondents). (See page 7)
Law Firm Comments
Respondents provided a wide range of comments on each of the e-billing vendors which are listed in detail at the
end of this report. (See page 8)
Survey Methodology
Between the dates of January 20, 2010 and February 22, 2010, ALM Legal Intelligence conducted an online
survey relating to the e-billing systems used by law firms to submit invoices to their corporate clients. The survey
was administered via email invitation and a confidential, web-based questionnaire.
Respondent Demographics
Invitations were sent to approximately 20,000 billing managers, executives/partners, IT professionals, and
administrative staff at law firms. The total number of usable responses was 997 for a 5% rate of response.
Responses were well distributed across all firm sizes, with 49% from small firms (1-49 attorneys), 37% from
medium firms (50-499 attorneys) and 14% from large firms (500-1,000+ attorneys).
Firm Size
(based on no. attorneys firm‐wide)
Total
Respondents
Percentage of
Respondents
Solo practice
40
4%
2 to 9 attorneys
155
16%
10 to 49
288
29%
50 to 99
131
13%
100 to 499
236
24%
500 to 999
68
7%
1,000 +
70
7%
Grand Total
997
100%
A significant number of responses came from American Lawyer and NLJ-rated “large” law firms
(AmLaw 200, NLJ 250 and Global 100 ranked firms).
Firm Category
(based on 2009 ALM “Lists”
±)
Total
Respondents
Percentage of
Respondents
AmLaw 200
133
13%
NLJ 250
163
16%
Global 100
70
7%
Key Findings: Benefits of E‐billing Systems
Two in three respondents find that the major benefit of e-billing systems is the speed with which their firm can
submit invoices to clients. Around half believe that the ability to check approval status and receive faster payment
are also benefits of some e-billing systems.
Benefits/Advantages
Total
Respondents
Percentage of
Respondents
We are able to submit our invoices more quickly
648
65%
We are able to check the status of invoice approval
570
57%
We receive faster payment from our clients
469
47%
We are able to resolve bill disputes more efficiently
202
20%
We get fewer requests for spending reports from clients
94
9%
Other (see sampling of comments below)
148
15%
Note: respondents could select more than one benefit.
In addition to the advantages set forth in the questionnaire, respondents cited other advantages including:
“Ability to communicate with clients through status reports and updated budgets.”
“Provide billing information to multiple persons in client organization.”
“Saves printing and mailing costs.”
Key Findings: Drawbacks of E‐billing Systems
More than half of the respondents find that having to pay a fee to use certain e-billing systems is the top
drawback. Just under half believe that waiting for client approval of timekeeper rates and adding UTBMS task
and activity codes to time entries are also disadvantages of some e-billing systems.
Drawbacks/Disadvantages
Total
Respondents
Percentage of
Respondents
We are charged a fee to use the e‐billing system
534
54%
We had to input timekeeper rates and wait for client approval
458
46%
We have to code all time entries (UTBMS task & activity codes)
452
45%
It was time consuming to set up
424
43%
We don’t have sufficient notice of billing problems/reductions
306
31%
The vendor required changes to the LEDES standard
266
27%
We had to retain a consultant/hire staff to implement/use
96
10%
We have to recover e‐billing system fees indirectly from our
clients (e.g. charging as an expense, charging higher hourly
rates, giving lower discounts)
93
9%
Other (see sampling of comments below)
288
29%
Not
Note: respondents could select more than one disadvantage.
In addition to the disadvantages set forth in the questionnaire, respondents cited other disadvantages including:
“Downloading each invoice individually rather than in bulk.”
“Invoices rejected without notification, then too old to resubmit.”
Key Findings: Top Vendor Ranking
When asked to rank e-billing vendors based on overall satisfaction, the highest number of respondents chose
Serengeti by a margin of about 4-to-1. The next tier of vendors was comprised of TyMetrix, DataCert and
LexisNexis.
Number of “Best” Vendor Rankings
NOTE: Chart only includes vendors that received 100+ responses.
417
107
100
79
45
21
13
Serengeti
TyMetrix
DataCert
LexisNexis
BottomLine
Bridgeway
Mitratech
In addition to the list above, respondents included the following e-billing vendors who each received less than 100
responses:
Additional Vendors
Number of “Best” Vendor Rankings
Allegient
33
CSC
8
TrialNet
8
Legal Solutions Group
5
Visibillity
5
Key Findings: Ratio of “Best” to “Worst” Vendor Ranking
There was also a large gap between the top vendor and other vendors in the ratio of best-to-worst rankings.
Serengeti’s ratio of “Best” vendor rankings to “Worst” vendor rankings was 28:1, compared with TyMetrix at 6:1,
Bottomline at 5:1 and DataCert at 4:1. Some vendors had more “Worst” rankings than “Best” rankings.
Ratio of “Best” to “Worst” Vendor Rankings
28:1
6:1
5:1
4:1
3:1
1:1
0.5:1
Serengeti
TyMetrix
Bottomline
DataCert
LexisNexis
Bridgeway
Mitratech
NOTE: Chart only includes vendors that received 100+ responses.
In addition to the list above, respondents included the following e-billing vendors who each received less than 100
responses:
Additional Vendors
Ratio of “Best” to “Worst” Vendor
Rankings
Allegient Systems
17:1
Legal Solutions Group
5:1
Visibillity
5:1
CSC
4:1
TrialNet
4:1
Key Findings: Average Vendor Ranking
The average vendor rankings were consistent with the “Best” vendor rankings: Serengeti (1.8), TyMetrix (2.5),
Bottomline (2.5) and DataCert (2.8).
Average Ranking (1=”Best” Vendor / 6=”Worst” Vendor)
NOTE: Chart only includes vendors that received 100+ responses.
In addition to the list above, respondents included the following e-billing vendors who each received less than 100
responses:
Additional Vendors
Average Rankings
TrialNet (14 responses)
2.2
Visibillity (12 responses)
2.4
Allegient Systems (99 responses)
2.5
CSC (27 responses)
2.9
Legal Solutions Group (25 responses)
2.9
1.8
2.5
2.5
2.8
2.9
3.6
4.0
Serengeti (687 responses)
TyMetrix (532 responses)
BottomLine (156 responses)
DataCert (432 responses)
LexisNexis (466 responses)
Bridgeway (196 responses)
Mitratech (173 responses)
Key Findings: Most Widely Used System
The most widely used e-billing vendor was Serengeti (69%), followed by TyMetrix (53%), LexisNexis (47%) and
DataCert (43%).
When broken down by firm size, there were significant variations in the use of certain systems. For example, the
use of TyMetrix, LexisNexis and DataCert by small firms (1-49 attorneys) is roughly half the rate such systems are
used at large law firms.
Serengeti (687), 69% TyMetrix (532), 53% LexisNexis (466), 47% DataCert (432), 43% Bottomline (169), 17% Bridgeway (196), 20% Mitratech (173), 17%
All Firms
Total: 997 responses
Serengeti (108), 78% TyMetrix (93), 67% LexisNexis (83), 60% DataCert (90), 65% Bottomline (12), 9% Bridgeway (64), 46% Mitratech (173), 17%Large Firms (500+ attorneys)
Total: 138 responses
Serengeti (285), 78% TyMetrix (254), 69% LexisNexis (202), 55% DataCert (211), 57% Bottomline (70), 19% Bridgeway (88), 24% Mitratech (67), 18%Medium Firms (50‐499 attorneys)
Total: 367 responses
Serengeti (286), 59% TyMetrix (174), 36% LexisNexis (126), 26% DataCert (123), 25% Bottomline (87), 18% Bridgeway (44), 9% Mitratech (173), 17%Small Firms (1‐49 attorneys)
Total: 483 responses
Vendor Comments
Respondents provided the specific comments regarding the following e-billing vendors that received more than
100 responses.
Bottomline
Bottomline Legal exchange is good but not as well organized as Serengeti Law. I would rather not have to go through LEDES and just print a PDF and send it. Bottomline (Legal eXchange) website reasonably easy to upload and navigate, printing reports (deductions taken) cumbersome Bottomline is by far my least favorite ebilling system. Notifications are not sent when there are issues with our invoices so I have to check the system for problems several times a week. I also find that our clients that use this system take several months to approve and pay our invoices Bottomline Technologies‐ easy to work with, but cannot add matters or edit submissions. Difficult to navigate system, not intuitive or user friendly Easy to use and understand except the way we have to transmit receipts. Fairly easy to use. Only client‐specific guideline issues make it tedious. Fairly simple to use Have to check back after 24 hours or longer to see if invoice accepted I don't know why it's not more popular with clients, it's a smooth system. I would like to be able to add my own users, but have no complaints about the responsiveness and helpfulness of the vendor's support staff. Invoice submission is good. Invoice status follow up has detail available on website. Notifications are not so good (emails are spam‐like). Appeals are manual via email. Legal Exchange ‐ allows for editing of submitted invoices to correct minor errors Legal Exchange ‐ it is very hard and confusing to navigate. Legal Exchange ‐ MANY clients use this one, again VERY user friendly Legal Exchange ‐ problems: no approval notification emails, matter name field not LEDES normal ‐ one matter per invoice is not sensible Legal exchange ‐ This site offers many options ‐ able to view status of bills, print bills submitted, track why short payments, ‐ easy to use Legal exchange bottom line. One of the worst systems I have worked on (we e‐bill on several sites). Absolutely 0 feedback from the system if and invoice has problems, system hangsup constantly, difficult to research information regarding billing history. Legal Exchange. Can be easy or horribly difficult. All depends on how the client uses it. Legal eXchange. Slow and feels archaic. Invoice submission results are not displayed immediately and require a minimum 2 hour delay. In addition, there is no notification for invoices that are rejected during the Review phase. "Silent" rejections put onus on law firms to spend man‐hours on follow‐up. legal Exchange/Bottom‐line Technologies (1) Legal Precision (4) Litigation Advisor ‐ we run several clients of these three programs Matters must be preloaded prior to billing and of the 4 clients using this system, only one does so beforehand (will cause a delay in payment over 90 days at times), file rejections do not trigger a notification, must load the file and then a few days later remember to log back in to submit the file, can not load an expense file at the same time as the LEDES file, not good communication between clients and Legal Exchange most difficult to enter. Customer support is extremely slow, takes days to get back with you. Poor direction and communication Requires a lot of follow up. Slow for your invoices to show up after you submit. Doesn't notify you of your invoice being rejected in their system. Slow submission/verification, always issues with rate cards This is the worst e‐billing system that I have worked with. It takes forever to get an invoice to go through the review process and notifications are not sent to you if there is and issue. This system is okay but requires secondary submission of invoices which wasn't communicated so invoices aged waiting for submission to the client. Too vague in description of errors making it hard to fix. Too many missing matters. Process to have company fix things too tedious. Use of multi‐site has created logistics headaches for us. User friendly Very nice program, easy to use Very straightforward Visibillity, difficult to use, difficult to submit invoices (too many steps) We are not notified of reductions.We have just been set up on this system recently. One of the drawbacks is that you have to check back in to see if invoices are approved rather than receiving notification by e‐mail if it was approved or if there is a problem. I think we do have it set up now though where we are notified if there is an error. But, you still have to check back in for approval.
Bridgeway
Can't view invoice after submission, only status. Dead tie for last place with DataCert! Awful system! From the law firm's perspective you can't see any of the invoices once they are uploaded, they send you a text based error report that are generally not easily translated. And it costs money! Do not notify you when something rejects Easy to use and there is ownership of information by both the client and ebilling system. Excessive fees Good technical support I don't have many issues with Bridgeway Lacks a searchable list of available matters, requiring too much independent outside communication between clients and law firms. Like DataCert, control is with client. Saves time if client is efficient. Little to no information regarding invoices or payments. minimal use so not easily ranked No access to client matters or approved timekeeper information!! Almost a 24 hour turnaround for confirmation on e‐bill uploads ‐ unacceptable! No invoice status, no matter information, no timekeeper information, and for some clients, no emails to the firm on approval/rejection. Might as well mail or email the bills. Not enough information on web site, can't see invoice and deductions, can't tell if processed Not much here. Every process seems to require two steps. If an invoice doesn't pass part one (which isn't automated) there is no notification, and it can sit. Can't edit invoices on the fly. Notifications come through the client, not directly from the system. The people I've talked to on the client end didn't care for it either. Very bare bones. Notification regarding whether the invoice was accepted is too long. Not much information besides approved or rejected on site, no explanations as to why rejected. Only have one client but it's been hassle‐free. Perhaps a more difficult client would find a way to make this system a pain. Only use this system for 1 other client, it seems to be relatively easy to use. We haven't had any issues. Only used briefly ‐ no real comments or concerns poor status info, timekeepers etc, doesn't work well with EBillingHub Provides a list of invoices with status, but no information re: reason for rejection, etc, easy to use when submitting bills. Basic. Reporting functions could be better and less confusing. Overall, though, a simple portal that allows at least a simplified view of invoice statuses. Simple, fast, easy access. However lacks a little bit in the "invoice status" area. Some of the worst problems we have revolve around Bridgeway's systems, needed LEDES specialization, w/ SmartInvoice can't check timekeepers, rates, matters or invoice status Submission is okay, but the review of invoice status can be confusing, and there is no detail to invoice rejections to follow up on. Sucks, poor design and bad implementation. This system is very basic and easy to use but there is a limited amount of information available to our firm regarding outstanding invoices. Too many processes Used it a few times ‐ it was easy to submit the invoices (currently not using it) user friendly Works well once you iron out the kinksDataCert
A glorified email program. This is nothing more than a third party forwarding an email with an invoice file attached. Very crude. But has feedback/communication during all steps of invoice submission, review, and approval. absolutely horrible, no pros at all, cons: terrible interface with simply a mailbox for submitting invoices into a black hole, no matter view, specific ShareDoc matter # is required, but now way to retrieve that info with contacting client, requires client‐specific task codes instead of UTBMS codes Access to client matters, approved timekeepers, and invoice status information is ONLY provided if the client allows same, which is a huge drawback!! None of our clients tied to this e‐vendor permit access to information.Awful, least amount of information, it is like a DOS system with a windows front that we have to pay for! Big charge, no status info, can't easily tell whether an invoice is even submitted. By far. The most easy to navigate, quick in & out, set‐up's are not bad at all. And now with their new "report" web site to check on invoice status it's even better. Although I think it should be mandatory for all client to participate and show this kind of information on the "reports web site. Currently about half of clients participate. We are still in the dark on those who choose not to use this second system. Cannot track invoice status and we are charged a fee Cannot review detailed billing history Can't check on the status of anything Can't track invoices except for a few clients that use the reports features
Certificate requirement per PC is not helpful for multi‐office usage. Certain Browsers are not compatible. Invoice status follow‐up is not available. Submission detail is not available. Charged for the service ‐ we used it for one client in the past (not using at the moment) Charges everyone for the privilege to use their system and does nothing to add value to the ebilling system Charges vendors to submit invoices, very expensive. Not much information obtained after submitting the invoice. Control is with client which saves time if client is efficient. Fees charged to us are outrageous. Cost of per client fee per year is high. DataCert does not have very good reporting capabilities. Otherwise, the system runs decently. DataCert is easy enough to use but we don't like that you can't go back in to view historical data. DataCert is very easy to use and provides instant feedback when invoices are submitted. They also send alerts when our invoices are approved or reduced. I do have a couple of issues with this system. My primary issue is the $3k that we are charged yearly to use this system for each client. We have had situations where we actually billed less than $3k to a client (several times) so we end up paying to do work for the client. Because of this we have actually stopped working for a couple of clients that require that we use this system. My other issue is that I am unable to check the status of our invoices that are submitted through DataCert on their site. DataCert seems to be easier than the other listed service we use. DataCert support is incredibly helpful and friendly. They respond in a timely manner. Dead tie for last place with DataCert! Awful system! From the law firm's perspective you can't see any of the invoices once they are uploaded, they send you a text based error report that are generally not easily translated. And it costs money! difficult to get information on bill, no reporting capability Dislike the high flat fee just to submit our invoices with no consideration as to amount of billing we do with the client Do not have access to invoice / matter / timekeeper information for most clients Do not use anymore, but liked. Disliked how hard it was to view any information on the invoice once submitted. Does not accept back up documentation, charges upwards of 2.25% based upon invoices submitted. Does not do much which makes process easier Drawback‐Individual invoice submittal‐can not research invoices/history Easiest system to use with fewer rejections than most. However, we have no view into the invoice status. Easy set up. Good communication but poor ability to review status electronically. Easy submission process, immediate on‐line information about bill rejection and reasons. Easy to submit ‐ but becomes a problem if a timekeeper isn't already set up and you can't just set them up but have to contact the client and wait for who knows how long for that to happen. Easy to upload but no feedback about the status of the invoices submitted. Easy to upload, but found it hard to submit invoices as numbers on DataCerts end took too long to come into effect Easy to upload, but would like to be able to see invoice status. Easy to use and understand Easy to use but no details, history, reports, etc. Easy to use but the log function is a little confusing. No options for reports unless the client purchases it. Easy to use but there is no way to check on information like timekeepers and matters. Easy to use but very expensive Easy to use, but there's no way to track anything once the invoice is delivered. This system has little to no benefit to the law firms, like the introduction of the graduated/limited subscription option. Easy to use, don't have matter and timekeeper maintenance, but expensive, the only one who charges. Easy to use, hard to look up info. Easy to use, instant feedback, fast
Easy to use, once we get client side setup. Immediate verification of successful uploads. Easy to work with Everything is manual as we have to adhere to their LEEDS file format, can not upload any other type of doc i.e Word, Excel Excellent Except that they charge us for the PRIVILEGE (not)! Expensive Expensive to use, no report capabilities available extremely easy to use Fairly easy to use. Fast processing and reasonably clear messages. The best information in emails of all systems, clear and thorough. If I could see invoice status directly, the only thing keeping it from neck‐and‐neck with Serengeti on my list would be the cost difference. Wonderful support people. Fastest system ‐ immediate feedback, can't follow status of submitted invoices. Fees extremely high and no screens to view status of payment Generally pretty easy as long as the client takes care of their end of the deal (adding matters, setting up timekeepers) Good system but doesn't have a status screen to search for errors/rejections & they don't provide sufficient notice of errors and reductions. Hassle to use Have not used in awhile ‐ when we did use it, it was not user friendly Horrible system I dislike the additional charge for cumulative submissions, the reporting features need improving, i.e. download of active matters, sometime there is descrepancy between pending, approved or rejected invoices reports. It takes awhile for the reports to update. I like the fact that I get an immediate approval from DataCert. The system is simple to use and the tech support was excellent. I loved these guys, we haven't used them in years It costs $3,000 per year and requires too many codes, but is very user friendly. It costs us, and we do not have the ability to check the status of the invoices It is just for submitting invoices so it is simply but I wish I can check older submitted invoices. It’s okay. Just signed up, haven't started using yet, but it is expensive. Know immediately if accepted, but no way to check on approval status. Large fees like the ease of use, but no options other than submitting invoices Little to no information regarding invoices or payments. low maintenance for user, problems relatively easy to resolve with their drill down method most expense to use, easy to upload to Never get an error message. Very fast to submit. No feedback on invoice status NO INVOICE VALIDATION REPORTING AND OBSCENE FEES No knowledge of this vendor No way to track invoices after submission to see status not as many bells and whistle with this program Not preferred at all not very user friendly Once set up ‐ easy to use. Trouble remembering what steps needed to be done to resolve issues though ‐ help section not expansive enough. One of my most disliked e‐billing vendors of all. Charges to use them and do not provide any information in their system. Only 30 days of history available online. No access to see available matters or timekeepers. Only E‐billing service used. Too expensive!! osos numbers required and not always supplied or easy to obtain Process time is better than the other vendor used but response from Customer Service response time is quite slow and some reps have been rude as well. Quick and easy. Help desk does a good job communicating. Rates #1 because you attach and it goes, very little effort from the biller, and we have yet to encounter much in the way of problems or rejections. It lets you know status of transmission and notifies when invoice is approved ‐ which is good since you can't get into the "guts".
Seems easiest to use and no fee is charged to the best of my knowledge. If there is a problem with an invoice, I can work it out with the client instead of it simply being denied ShareDoc QuickInvoice ‐ manual input of amounts. Not preferable for high volumes. Simple and easy. You get notified immediately of any rejections and can usually fix yourself. Simply if all you want to do is submit an invoice. No control or access to what has been submitted. Solid system. Needs to add/improve tracking and reporting capabilities. Submission is easy but provides no additional information. Any information regarding the rates, matters and status of submissions is usually difficult to get from the client
submit the bill ‐ no set up work required ‐ ease of use, no matter set up ‐ basically emailing bill ‐ no rates
The vendor charges us a high fee for use of the system, and the system provides no useful information to firms. Cretinous. This is the absolute worst. They charge you for the privilege of billing for services you've rendered, and the client (a Fortune 50 Company) will not reimburse the cost or allow us to recoup the expenses indirectly. Also, the program is terrible and doesn't even allow us to track submitted invoices, payments, and so on. The User Interface is the worst. This one charged a fee. We have since discontinued using. Too complicated to use Too expensive and way behind the times given the expense, however, their system is easy to use, gives excellent communication regarding problems with the invoice and has finally started having reporting options for timekeepers and invoice status (although it's primitive) TOO EXPENSIVE!!!! unable to appeal or check status ‐‐ only use for submission of invoices Uploading an invoice in DataCert is easy once you have done the first part. Turning the invoice into LEDES format. The complicated of this process is the codes list since it is confused and also there are limitations for the timekeepers. Very difficult when used because client used it like a VPN connection VERY EASY BILLING ‐ UPLOADING INVOICES Very Expensive service, but since our client uses this Vendor, we were required to use them. Very limited benefits and functions on our end Very user friendly, have multiple clients Very user friendly, submission is quick We know right away if there is a problem We only upload invoices on this website, it's easy to use. wish we could imput more than one invoice at a time. Works well with various billing systems and across various platforms. Would like to be able to have better tracking of bills, at this point really only able to upload bills and not able to track.
LexisNexis
Efficient. Drawback is: charge for usage. a bit cumbersome to navigate adding new timekeepers can be difficult ‐ two many screens Cannot support alternative billing arrangements. CL has moved up on my list with the improvements made to timekeeper additions and changes. Clear error messages, generally quick and detailed in the emails. The "staffing list" still needs a lot of work, though. Still, LexisNexis Examen has the best support people of all the vendors, and you have to go a ways to beat DataCert's support. Complicated CONFUSING TO USE Constantly improving and evolving, especially regarding website performance. However, certain features feel overly sophisticated and pedantic, such as the Matter Acceptance/Fee Offer ritual. Also, the effective dates of rates are problematic and inflexible. Counsel Link is the most cumbersome and difficult system to use. It has ways on handling invoices that do not make sense from a law firm billing perspective. It does not accommodate fixed fee billing in any of the standard formats. It is overly geared towards nit‐picking a bill. It's use of fee offers is confusing and unclear at best. It's very difficult and cumbersome more often than not. CounselLink is our least favorite vendor. The system is extremely slow and cumbersome. There are too many screens to navigate through in order to be able to submit an invoice as well as make sure all pertinent data is set up correctly to be able to submit invoices. CounselLink sends email confirmations whether the invoices is valid or invalid. The technical support team is helpful. It is easy to navigate the site, and easy to upload documentation.CounselLink support has been found wanting whenever we have questions. Cumbersome site (fee offer protocol) and block billing protocols always enforced. Good part is editing online. Difficult to use Do not like the redundant requirements for timekeeper lists, i.e. fee offer plus staffing list. Don't like at all ‐ have not been able to get a bill to submit through this system since my arrival at this firm. Still email my invoices to them. Don't like the activation step ‐ too time consuming. The site takes longer to navigate than others. don't like this one at all Don't use very frequently, seems the receiving end (insurance adjusters) can't get it together downside is you have to re‐access system to get status of invoice approval/payment. Drawback no Invoice recap‐must search for any reductions Dreadful "Fee Offer" set up, like cutting teeth to get new timekeepers approved!! Difficult time narrative constraints (time increments required for each phrase of a time entry)! Easiest to use Easiest to use and make corrections when necessary ‐ Support staff very helpful. You can view the invoice without having to open the LEDES file. Easy set up. Good support services easy to use Easy to use and understand Efficient. Drawback is: charge for usage. Emails confirming receipt aren't always sent to me and some bills get stuck in the system. Bill submission process itself is OK. Excellent Extremely convoluted system. One must navigate through multiple screens and expend a great deal of time to accomplish any change, however minor. I have had good experiences with their support, which is the only factor that merits a rank of 2. Fairly intuitive, problematic when billing is done by a user in one office for a matter in another office. Fairly user friendly. fast, efficient, good tech support getting better Good Invoice Tracking, Fair: Appeal Process Drawback: Matter Notification/Missing Matters Good system but is sometimes not to user friendly Great site, while we have to enter timekeeper rates, at least we can see who is approved. Hard to navigate, does not notify you of problems with invoices or timekeeper rates, customer service is sometimes rude and indifferent to your problems. Has improved with upgrades Hate it! Have had nothing but issues with this vendor. Hawaii GET tax causes several extra steps high maintenance. I do not use this one as much and find it not as user friendly. I like the ability to explain questionable entries/tasks at the time of submitting the invoice in order to clear up questions, or to withdraw the invoice, if necessary. The appeal process is not efficient ‐ often takes months for a resolution. If you are not used to this software, navigation can be difficult. In general, I am usually disappointed when I hear that a client is using CounselLink for their ebilling process. Our clients tend to have issues with using this system. I also find that the ebilling process is very slow on CounselLink. The timekeeper validation system in CounselLink is very slow and it can take up to a month to get an invoice posted in this system if there is a new timekeeper. It also takes much longer for our firm to be paid for invoices that are posted in CounselLink. I find that our clients often reduce our bills by time and costs that should actually be paid quite often. indifferent‐ not a great site but adequate. I would not recommend to a client looking into ebilling solutions. Invoice Submission and Review is good. Rate submission is time consuming, and doesn't allow for mid‐stream changes It seems that it requires a lot to initially set up matters or clients Just started using it, it looks ok so far. It was time consuming to Set up the system. we will see ... Legal Precision‐‐Travelers, the best I have used! love CounselLink marginal Most work needed to get timekeepers added, rates and approved fee schedules accepted.
no charges, extra maintenance in fee offers, Pending issue‐ have to keep checking as to status, good status info No fee charged. Payments are made promptly. Not as user friendly, but improving Not difficult and good for reports but not too sure about appeals. Not very user friendly not very user friendly, too many issues with not being able to activate the invoice. ok to use. OK to work with OK. Support is unresponsive, though. Only drawback is waiting for fee to be approved. Poor customer service Provides the most information regarding the billing statement's billing status towards payment. quick setup and easy to use. Seems like they are trying to build it as they go. Lack of transparency in terms of how they are actually handling things. Make big promises regarding functionality but fail to execute. Terrible ‐‐ Too many clicks. The fee offer system is a horrible means to manage timekeeper and rates, from the law firm's perspective. We have lost a lot of money because of this terrible system. The system is very redundant and somewhat confusing. Could be streamlined to make it more efficient for larger firms with multiple offices. The system rejects invoices inconsistently for wording but will accept others worded exactly the same. Their most recent upgrade put them on my preferred list. Prior to their new look & functions I was not to crazy about it. this is the worst program I have ever used This one requires a lot of client involvement and delays. Timekeepers have to be set up per matter, by the client, which is time consuming. This one seems to work the best This system is beyond cumbersome. I have yet to be able to find a benefit for using it. This system is easy to operate and it only demands a case number to submit the invoice. To complicated Too complicated to use TO COMPLICATED!!! Updating rate versions a pain, interface is confusing to most users user friendly, have multiple clients on site Very cumbersome to set up, and the "fee offer" process is horrible. It is not a very intuitive system from a user standpoint. However, lots of "stuff" that you can get to ‐ if you can figure it out. Seems to me like no end users were involved in the development of this product. Good notification, and editing on the fly. Very difficult to find your way around the system Very good system Very quick and efficient. I like this one very much. Very Slow Website, Don't like having to maintain a timekeeper data base very time consuming Very user friendly, plenty of information, keeps records, easy editing. 2nd choice We do not pay for it, but they use morons to review our time entries such that a time entry with a comma will pass, but the same entry with a semicolon does not get paid. I do not know if this is the vendor or the client. The system is much less workable than Serengeti, though. We have only used for one client but found the website quite clunky With continued changes and updates this is becoming much more user friendly with exception of fee offers, this is a pretty good system You can fix entries to the Ledes file in the system itself.
Mitratech
Can't see matters, not enough controlled record keeping, easy enough to submit ‐ 4th choice Collaborati does not run single rule check, forcing continued maintenance and back checking on status, notion of requiring cost timekeepers to be entered and approved is ridiculous cumbersome file loading Does not supply enough information and is not interactive enough Don't like having to maintain a timekeeper database Error checking during submission is slow. Notification system is good. hard to navigate, NOT user friendly Is very difficult in some ways because we have discounts and write off timekeepers' time and have to go into the LEDES file and manually change each entry and then do an adjustment line at the end. Also have a problem with expenses not calculating exactly and having to make corrections in the LEDES file. It took a while to get this all figured out. It was also a problem knowing when invoices were accepted or rejected without going back into the software. They send emails now ‐ but they are still a lot slower than most of the others. They do not accept negative amounts in a line item which is a problem. Just started using this website. Seems relatively easy so far. Reports are clunky Least favorite. Too hard to get invoices through. Like it. Simple & easy to use. Notification are prompt & detailed. Like this website, easy to figure out. Can get payment status updates. Messy/confusing task code association requirements. Much better user interface than TyMetrix new system still have bugs. new vendor \ have not used it yet \ but was easy to set up Not bad, but needs some polish. Not very user‐friendly Quick and easy. really dislike this one Simply awful system!!! Some aspects are a little duplicative but otherwise, fine site. Somewhat new to us TERRIBLE!!! The error messages could use a little more clarity. Likewise, a support contact would be nice, when we DO have a question, often the client doesn't know the answer, but we have to go through the client for everything. This is fairly new, but I like it. Needs a little tweadking but not much. unable to bill multiple matters together, has been promising it, and it's holding up billing Very modern look and user friendly. However, it lacks sophistication and depth, and cannot handle multiple rate agreements between one client and law firm. We just started using this, and so far there have been lots of problems because the client has not resolved many of its initial transitional issues. We only use Mitratech's e‐billing system because we have TeamConnect but it is not a great system. Their software team has clearly not tested this software very well and we run into technical issues constantly. We only use this for a couple clients. Submitting invoices seems to work relatively easily but the setup of new clients has been a hassle.
Serengeti
#1 ‐ provides matter info, billing info, easy to navigate, helpful e‐mail notifications, prompt user support, attorney participation required 1. No fee charged 2. do not need to wait on timekeeper rate approval, 3. user friendly 4. can post WORD bill (no need for LEDES) A pretty fancy system, but can be a pain to submit all the necessary case management materials. In general, it is very hard for a large law firm to make sure all of its attorneys perform the required case management tasks on complex ebilling systems like Serengeti or LSS. A truly user friendly system. Wish all of them were like this one. Able to easily upload statements in pdf. Time delay in getting matters set up in system. Accepts Adobe files and back up documentation painlessly. No cost to me. Really easy to use. Accepts pdf docs, provides a lot of information, easy navigation through network, easy add/delete for new timekeepers, more vendor control over notifications/passwords, All the positive points are for this e‐billing system. Very user friendly and no add'l work for me As long as the budgeting and accruals modules aren't active. The attorneys do NOT want to login to fill out this type of information, nor do they want to login to even assign a delegate. Also, don't like the way the "Help" section directs you to the firm administrator who in all likelihood has no control over whether these modules are selected, or has any hands‐on knowledge of entering this type of information since he/she can't even see the same screens without access. Without these activated, this is #1. With these activated, it falls to the bottom of the pack. One of the big benefits, though, is that we don't have to pay to use it. Awful. Absolutely useless. Best on the market best system ‐ we pay no fee, and we can use word or pdf format for invoices. Best system, user friendly. By far the BEST Could not be easier to work with Customer Support issues Definitely my favorite ‐ no task or activity codes, quick and easy. Do not always require task codes. Has all the information you need, if the client handles their side correctly. Don't use a lot, too many steps DON'T USE ANYMORE BUT VERY EASY TO WORK WITH Drawback no Invoice recap‐must search for any reductions ease of use, no cost Easiest Easiest for all users ‐ admin staff, attorneys, etc... Though not as robust as those listed as 2. For the more complex cases the ones marked 2 work the best. easiest one we use, wish all were this firm‐friendly easiest to use Easiest to use especially with non‐LEDES formatted bills easiest to use in my opinion Easiest to use, all needed information is easy to access, markdowns are readily accessible, can load an expense file at the same time as the LEDES file Easiest to use, submit and track status. Easiest to use. easy and prompt Easy bill submission process EASY BILLING ‐ UPLOADING INVOICES Easy login ‐ gives our clients more options to receive ebills ‐ easier to track vendor bills easy set‐up, easy to use and track submissions, reports easy easy site to use Easy to understand and work with . You are able to submit inv. with very little problem or errors, review status, etc. easy to use Easy to use and did not have any problems using it, it just seems to have too much information visual that I did not need to see. Easy to use and doesn't require a lot of time to maintain.Easy to use and see status Easy to use but the status reports requests are too often. Easy to use once the matters and timekeepers are set up. Can be a hassle setting up timekeepers Easy to use, good amount of information available about the status of the invoices, but need to input timekeepers Easy to use, takes multiple formats which is nice if you only have one matter and have the option of .pdf. It also lets you edit and move invoices if you've posted to the wrong file. A little top‐heavy on the set up, and it would be nice to be able to navigate away from a file set‐up and return to finish it. We have recommended this program to clients. Also ‐ no fees to us. Apparently no appeal mechanism Enforces LEDES standards, attorneys hate having to do budgets and updates before bills are processed Excellent Excellent ‐‐ easy to learn, easy to use, client pays fee
Fast processing, understandable error messages, and easy tracking. Emails for new matters as well as invoice reductions/rejections. As long as I don't have problems, it's fantastic. Good feedback, easy to use, intuitive Good, but reporting is time‐consuming. Good, but to flexible. Customer can use different setups and preferences. Drawback: customers can create user IDs for vendor companies. great system Great to use with no LEDES editing. The Delegation process is cumbersome and can slow down the bill process. Horrible administrative task requirements (Matter Profiles, Status Reports, etc.) that are assigned to attorneys only. Uploaded invoices are held until tasks are completed which can be a tremendous hassle. I like to be able to reprint the invoice as a PDF and upload it to Serengeti Law. It was an easy program to learn when I first started. It is the better of the two programs I work with It's free, allows you to submit in multiple formats, does require internal client number for LEDES files, allows you to check invoice status, no timekeeper listing to maintain & is very easy to use. This site still ranks low on in my book. All the features I just mentioned are dream features making my life a lot easier. BUT none of all that matters or is any good to me if I can't submit my invoices. When the matter profile. matter status reports & new matter information is due and you don't have access to update this information & can't get access or support through the system I don't care how awesome any system maybe it's no good to a law firm. As just mentioned the most painful process is updating matter information because the client only gives access to the responsible attorney here at the firm who in turn must give access to the rest of us. I completely understand it's a security issue as matter information is confidential but when system also prevents submission of our invoices or puts them on hold until the matter information is updated. That is no longer a security issue as legal work still continues by our attorneys for these matters yet we lose the ability to submit our invoices and get paid for it. We get penalized by the system but we aren't given the tools to do something about it. If the lead attorney is tied up in heavy litigation the last thing he or she is worried about is going into the web site & login in the system and enter the information it's hard enough just getting them to send me the information so I can enter it. They need to think of a way around this recurring problem. The more clients & matters you have on this system the worst it gets. I'm the firm administrator for this site & have a very hard time getting our attorneys to update their matter information. The system will not take any invoices until this information is updated so my bills start stacking up as I follow up and gather the needed information. My solution to this has been that the moment I'm notified of a new matter or client is in this site for our firm. I immediately contact the responsible attorney and request that they give me there access information or make me a delegate for them so I'm able to participate in all of their matters. From then on I monitor all activity and when the Status, budgets, profiles ,etc etc... become due. I personally ask the attorney to provide me with what I need and enter the information myself. If I had to wait on them my invoices would be 6 months late. If the attorney refuses to give me access or is not cooperating I go straight to head of our finance committee or office chair and inform him or her and trust me they take action. I've had to go to extreme measures with this system and more & more our attorneys are realizing that every time this happens the affects on our bottom dollar become more apparent. When asked about Serengeti I NEVER recommend. I use this one the most so I find it the easiest to work with.
Invoice Submission is great (Speed Post) Allows for different invoice formats, and requirements. Client contact information is available. Budget submission for attorneys is challenging. Unbilled accurals: I'd be curious as to the benefit, and how the due date requirements effect law firms. It is free to the person submitting the invoice, but is not so user friendly. It is very simply system for submitting invoices. I had only one deducted invoice so I haven't experienced any difficulty so far. It was the easiest to upload the bills, and didn't run into avoidable issues Just starting using it and it seems to have alot of information for attorney that is not needed for billing purposes. Lack of automatic code enforcement is good, but structure that forces attorneys to log in wastes tremendous time internally. Least amount of administrative overhead required from the law firm. Very clean look. Has additional features such as Accruals and Budgeting, if desired. least issues. Less errors rec'd. like the ease of use, doc management, no ledes req., no task based billing req. Love standard ledes file
Mainly because we don't have to use the UTBMS codes Most user friendly and least amount of delays. I can submit my invoice and not have to check back to make sure it wasn't rejected. My most preferred system. Good reporting methods and easy user friendly system. If ask, I recommend this e‐billing vendor over all the others. Nice system! no charges, good invoice status info, pain with notion that lawyers are going to spend time on this, they won't, some require budgets and matter profiles, have to make myself a delegate to update this info. No cost to us and has the ability to check the status of the invoices No fees charged. Some clients require budgets and additional information to be submitted before invoices are approved, so that is sometimes a drawback. No personal experience with ebilling platforms other than Serengeti. I am not wowed by it. No problems at all No task codes required! not easy to use or follow. Not just a billing system ‐ "case/matter management" not thrilled One of the Best systems to use by all users Only use LEDES billing through Serengeti Overall very user friendly and ease of use. pros: streamline user‐interface and vivid access into available matters, also no UTBMS coding required, cons: none I can think of Provides good training and direct connection to both client contact and vendor support Quick and easy. Ranked first bc you can submit LEDES or .pdf Reasonably easy to use, however slightly more difficult than mailing. Relatively easy to submit because they don't require task codes. relatively easy to submit statements, cumbersome to determine nature of problem/reject Relatively easy to use and to track invoices and payments afterwards. The User Interface could be improved, but overall it's better than the others that we've sued so far. Says it supports LEDES, doesn't really. Cannot handle alternative billing arrangements. Serengeti employs automatic notification of errors. The errors are easily defined and easily corrected. There is little delay in processing a flawed invoice. Clients are automatically added. Easy maneuverability on website. Serengeti is by far my favorite system to use. I know instantly if there are any issues with our invoices whether the issues come up during submission or review. It is easy to find information regarding our pending or approved invoices. I find that when charges are rejected in this system there is generally a valid reason for the adjustment. Finally, they do not charge us to use the system Serengeti is by far the superior product. It is geared with both law firms and the client in mind. It allows a very dynamic environment that gives both the law firm and the client the benefit of an appropriate level of transparency. It allows client level and matter level access to be managed quite well. From a collections POV, the reporting is dynamic and wonderful. It allows us to find not just invoice status, but invoice history, matter contact, and other information. The vetting and confirmation and notice of errors is online and nearly instantaneous. Their site is well‐ written. Reports are exportable to excel. The speed of the site is excellent. There is no fee to the firm. The Serengeti staff actively solicit both client and law firm feedback and take their suggestions and thoughts into consideration with improvements. Serengeti is much more user friendly but expects too much from the timekeepers and they don't like it Serengeti is user friendly and has streamlined the firm's billing process. Serengeti is very user friendly. We don't need to enter tkpr rates (Requiring every tkpr (including clerks, students, etc..) entered with a client approved rate prior to submission is time consuming as it delays invoice submission waiting for approvals) and we can submit multiple invoice formats (pdfs, ledes). Simple and user friendly. Simple line item entry for invoice Somewhat user friendly, not as quick, more work involved in getting matters set up for invoicing Staff has always been helpful‐don't use the system too much and can be difficult remembering how to use it! Still user friendly, but not as much as others submit the bill ‐ minimal law firm set up required, fairly easy to use, no rates Super easy to use. Love it! Take PDF files or word files, extremely easy. Terrible.
The best ‐ very simple and easy to use The program is very useful, however, it does not have the ability to explain any "red flag" entries, however, we have not had to appeal any fee reduction decisions. There is no one to contact regarding technical support issues. These people are far superior to any other billing system They don't charge us anything. This is a great system. We are allowed to upload budgets, post status reports and also important documents. This is actually the only one I've used, but it is very user‐friendly and efficient. This is also a great program. This is my all time favorite e‐billing site! It's perfect in every way! This is the standard other electronic billing systems should be modeled after. This system is easy to use and navigate This system only requests a number of case and an invoice in PDF format which makes Serengeti be a fast and easy system. This vendor is the best of all e‐billing vendors, in my opinion. Their website is very easy to use, and it sends out reminder e‐mails when activities are due, and you know immediately if there is an issue with an invoice. Great service too! time consuming to get clients set up Two problems or annoyances, if the client has a set price for duplicating, for example, the system does not alert the user of a discrepancy. 2. Do not have the capability to turn off the e‐mail alerts to attorneys for new matters and rejections. Otherwise, very easy to use and the reporting features are great. Used Serengeti once ‐ did not like it. used these guys for one client, don't remember to many problems. User friendly User friendly User‐friendly, but their need to have attorneys involved (including setting them up as the primary contact) is problematic ‐‐ the Billing Department should always be the primary contact and have all‐access to all matters. Very basic but includes case related info for attorneys Very easy system to navigate Very easy to submit, very few problems, easy to do searches very easy to use very easy to use and find all of the information you need regarding payment Very easy to use and navigate. Reports reasonably easy to obtain Very easy to use, great site, scaleable, Very easy to use. Reflects what the deductions are. Very poor for small bills. Very simple and easy to use ‐ no need for ledes unless client wants it Very user friendly Very user Friendly Very user friendly! Very user friendly, doesn't require task/activity codes, provides clear notification of errors Very user friendly, reports good, history available way too many requirements\reports We do not like using this package although we have noticed more clients migrating to it. Not very user‐friendly or intuitive. Help is virtually non‐existent. We do not pay Serengeti, it provides considerable useful information to the firm, and its interface is easy to use. We have limited experience with Serengeti, but it has been very user friendly We love Serengeti, the site is easy to navigate through, it is very self‐explanatory. We aren't fond of the budgets and status reports that are due but not all cases require this. Well‐organized, easy to use interface, easy to obtain information on invoice status, who to contact for different issues, etc. What I saw I did not like. When a vendor blanketly requires budgets for each ongoing matter, the process becomes troublesome. Wish the system would require alternate browsers. Currently will only run on Internet Explorer.
TyMetrix
2nd most difficult site to work with (1st most difficult being Bottomline Technologies) A bit too complex, but very thorough. Accepts backup documentation easily. Not happy about the 2% of fees cost that is involved. all negative points are for this e‐billing system. Caused much added work for me to submit. I would never recommend this system to anyone. Also quite simple and easy to navigate charges a fee. Charges an excessive fee for what is essentially an automated system Client charges a fee but payments are processed more quickly than before. This software is very slow. Completely dislike this system. While there are some good features. The actual process time is horrid. Repeated submissions of bills rejected because vendor has not updated their system with the correct info. Confusing interface, difficult to do bulk loads CONFUSING TO USE Constant coding issues, time consuming. Decent system ‐ easy invoice submission Drawback ‐ they charge fees that are taken out of our payment. The fees incurred should be shoulders by the business requesting that the service be used instead of by the law firm. We have to jump through a lot more hoops to utilize this system than just printing a bill and sending it to the client. Drawback no Invoice recap‐must search for any reductions easiest submission and notification of errors that need correcting Easy submission process but misplaced pipe symbols will cause bills to be rejected. Emails telling of rejection or acceptance aren't always clear. Easy to set up, errors are not always clear Easy to use ‐ sometimes do not receive feedback on invoices with adjustments. Slow to pay Easy to use and see status Easy to use, put invoice in LEDES format and then submit via e‐mail Easy to use. Easy to use. The only thing I did not like about it is the fact you do not get an immediate approval of format. Easy to work with but resent having to pay a fee everyone left these guys Excellent Good dashboards, can follow invoices throughout status and process Good feedback, easy to use, intuitive Good information regarding tracking and acceptance. good status info, but now charges and forces rate approval with from through dates Good system, but require password changes too often. Has all the information you need, if the client handles their side correctly. Had to use this vendor appox 2 years ago/Not impressed Has too many bells and whistles and makes it difficult to navigate and maintain. Have most access to status of invoices once they've been submitted high maintenance, especially TyMetrix 360. Horrible to work with I only used few times but login gets locked too often and the navigation is not too friendly. immediate feedback on invoice acceptance, easy to research It is slow to logon and is not always easy to navigate Lets me know immediately when its rejected and I can usually fix the problem myself without having to contact the client to get something set up. Many different versions available. In its simplest form, it gets the job done which is to facilitate invoice transmissions. matters are not always loaded prior to first billing, immediate notification by email of any file problems many rejections and resubmissions Most user friendly, quick status turn around, best system out there. Next easiest in terms of visibility. Like the ability to add timekeepers and rates as needed.Nice layout, though have issues with communication and resolution. No clear rejection reasons are given. Unless you keep bugging them the support line is not very helpful. No experience with this program. No fee to use system, good email alerts about invoice approval, reductions or other issues, easy to navigate system Not hard to use, just dislike the fee. Not TyMetrix360 but the original TyMetrix get's this ranking. T360 was good but now is only second last behind only Serengeti. To many fancy feature make it to slow now & plus the ever changing requirements for law firms that are becoming mandatory on the T360 system. I think this system is over kill of what was intended or needed. Not very intuitive Not very user friendly Not very user friendly and a little confusing to navigate between clients and timekeeper set‐up. once rate and timekeepers are established ‐ easy to use One of the easiest systems to navigate. Only If this is the same as CTTyMetrix360 only one we use at the moment Our billing contact at our client knows his stuff, which makes navigating the eBilling system easier, if not easy. PAIN TO SUBMIT Poor ‐‐ difficult and time‐consuming to learn, demanding precision, firm charged % fee Poor set up Pretty easy to use. They email right away with which invoices were accepted and which weren't which is a significant help so you can fix any errors and get them submitted. Provides a lot of information, but difficult to navigate. Too expensive. Quick and easy. After submitting an invoice and receiving an email regarding status is extremely helpful. I wish all vendors did that. Quick feedback re: status of submission. Rather arbitrary auditing though & don't like the fee. Quick turn around of approval Re T360, complexity and variation getting timekeepers in from client to client. Rules and requirements are too extensive second easiest to use Slow navigation, cumbersome setting up timekeepers/rates and matters Some clients charge us a 2% fee on each invoice submitted to pay for the use of the vendor Specific client requirements have delayed or slowed down processing, not vendor issues. Started using it again ‐ no comments yet System is hard to naviagate, Directions for setting up are far to hidden, and most I wasn't able to access T‐360 A bit cumbersome to navigate, and apparently no mechanism to appeal invoices. Good status notification system, and at least with the big client we have, you can see what invoices are being paid by batch. This thing is huge and powerful T360 is a pretty nice system so long as the client puts our agreed‐to rates into the system. The older version of TyMetrix is pretty easy to use, and has the advantage of allowing the firm to email invoices as attachments. T360 specifically Technical Support for TyMetrix is inconsistent. Sometimes the support is quick and helpful and other times it's not. terrible is all I can say The problems with the timekeeper module (including supposedly impossible multiple‐entries for some timekeepers) outweighs most of the positives of this system. Quick to process, easy to search for matters and invoices are big pluses, just not big enough. The vendor doesn't seem to understand how much time we spend on timekeeper issues. The cost doesn't help, either. They charge a fee. The fee may ultimately be worth it given the quick turnaround on payment, but I haven't been able to assess that yet. This is a great program. This is the only system I'm familiar with. Our current billing system is not compatable. This system has m