How JT Singh's firm is rebuilding fee structures around outcomes, not minutes
The billable hour was invented in the 1950s as a management tool, not as a fairness device. It was a way for law firm partners to measure associate output. Over the next seventy years, it became the dominant way clients pay for legal work. It has also become one of the most criticized billing structures in any professional service.
Singh Law Firm P.A. is one of a small group of firms actively rebuilding around something else. JT Singh has been direct that the hourly model misaligns the incentives between client and firm. The slower the lawyer works, the more the lawyer earns. The more efficient the firm gets, the less the firm makes per matter. This is not a structure that rewards quality.
Singh Law Firm’s billing approach varies by matter type, and the variation is the point. Routine business matters are quoted as flat fees with clear scope. Ongoing corporate counsel relationships move to monthly retainers that cover defined work bands. Litigation matters mix flat fees on key milestones with hourly billing on unpredictable phases. Bankruptcy matters often run on engagement-letter caps with clear phase pricing.
The goal across all of these is to give clients certainty where certainty is possible, and to align the firm’s economics with the client’s outcomes rather than with the lawyer’s calendar. A flat-fee bankruptcy filing means the firm is paid the same whether the work takes 12 hours or 30. The incentive shifts. The firm wants to be efficient. The lawyer wants to use time well.
The model requires the firm to understand its own work better than most peers do. A firm that quotes flat fees has to know, with reasonable accuracy, how long each kind of matter actually takes. Singh Law Firm has invested in building that internal data over years of practice. New matter types start with conservative pricing while the firm gathers enough cases to refine the estimate.
The approach is not all flat fees. Some matters resist scoping. A complex commercial dispute can swing in cost depending on what the other side does. A complex immigration matter can be reopened by a Request for Evidence the client did not anticipate. For those matters, Singh Law Firm uses hybrid structures: a base fee that covers a defined scope, plus hourly billing for clearly identified extension scenarios.
Clients have responded. Mid-market clients who are used to surprise legal bills have been some of the firm’s strongest advocates for the structure. The predictability matters more than the absolute price. A client who knows what the matter will cost can plan, budget, and decide. A client who is staring at a $50,000 bill that was supposed to be $25,000 cannot.
The model has limits. Some matters cannot be fixed-fee priced honestly. Some clients prefer hourly billing because they want to control scope at a granular level. Singh Law Firm does not push every client into the same structure. The firm offers options, and lets clients choose.
For the legal industry as a whole, the shift is overdue. The billable hour will not vanish, but its dominance is eroding. Firms that have started to build serious alternatives are positioning themselves for a market that is asking, with increasing volume, for a better way. Singh Law Firm P.A. has been building those alternatives for years.