Compare what arrives and what remains
The right buying model depends on the work your firm wants to retain and the work it wants included before handoff. Start by asking every supplier to explain the delivery stage using the same hypothetical matter. Then compare documentation, staffing requirements, and commercial terms.
Use the table as an evaluation framework. Specific suppliers may include more or less work at each stage, so confirm the proposed scope rather than treating these categories as fixed packages.
| Model | Handoff to confirm | Work to plan for at the firm | Billing question |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contact lead | Contact information, inquiry source, screening answers, and delivery time | Contact attempts, intake, review, signing when appropriate, and onboarding | What makes an inquiry billable, and how are duplicates handled? |
| Live transfer | Caller identity, screening record, connection requirements, and transfer window | Available call handling, remaining intake, review, signing when appropriate, and onboarding | What counts as a billable connection, including interrupted or missed calls? |
| Signed case | Agreement identity and version, signature status, case profile, and agreed packet | Acceptance review, unresolved fact checks, conflict review, and onboarding | Does billing follow delivery, signature, firm acceptance, or another agreed event? |
Contact leads: plan for the follow-up work
A contact-lead arrangement gives your firm information about an inquiry and an opportunity to respond. Screening, exclusivity, and geographic targeting may be part of the offer; they are not limited to later-stage products. Request a field list and distinguish the person’s reported answers from reviewed evidence.
This model may fit a team with a dependable contact process and capacity to complete intake. Evaluate what happens after delivery: who receives the inquiry, how attempts are recorded, when unresolved contact attempts are reviewed, and how the firm closes the loop.
The price per lead is only an input. Inquiries that remain uncontacted or pending still belong in the delivery cohort. Removing them from reporting makes comparisons look better without explaining what happened.
Live transfers: match delivery to staffed availability
A live transfer moves the handoff onto a call. The firm needs a person or approved workflow ready to receive it during the agreed hours. Confirm whether screening occurs before connection, what information arrives with the call, and how your team can recover the record afterward.
Ask how the proposal treats a dropped call, a missed transfer, an unanswered connection, or a caller who cannot continue. Define any connection threshold and exceptions in the agreement. A connected call may be billable without becoming a completed intake or signed matter.
Live transfers can reduce the need to initiate the first contact, but the amount of remaining work depends on the screening and handoff scope. Test that scope against your actual intake staffing.
Signed cases: inspect the agreement and review process
A signed-case arrangement moves the stated handoff to a signed representation agreement. Confirm whose agreement is used, how versions are controlled, what signature evidence is available, and what information accompanies delivery. The label alone does not establish the scope of screening or supporting documents.
Your firm still needs a designated acceptance reviewer and a route for unresolved questions. Keep the signing event separate from that review decision. A signature does not, by itself, establish that the firm has completed its acceptance process or that a future case outcome will occur.
This model may suit a firm seeking more intake and signing work before handoff, provided the agreement describes that work and the firm can complete the responsibilities left with it.
Use one buying specification across proposals
Write a short specification before collecting quotes. Include the firm-approved case profile, geography, required fields, acceptable unknowns, delivery method, and reporting expectations. Ask suppliers to mark which requirements are included, optional, or unavailable.
Request an illustrative or appropriately redacted handoff example. Walk through it with the intake reviewer who will use it. A proposal can describe a complete process while leaving the actual field names or exception workflow unclear.
- Identify the delivery event and the evidence that confirms it.
- Assign responsibility for contact, screening, signing, review, and onboarding.
- Define required information and the evidence status for each material answer.
- Record how missing information, duplicates, and disputed deliveries are handled.
Treat exclusivity as a term, not a delivery stage
Contact leads, transfers, and signed cases may each be offered under different distribution arrangements. Ask what exclusivity covers: a person, an inquiry, a particular matter, or a defined delivery. Specify the recipient, duration, and exceptions.
Also ask how prior inquiries and duplicates are identified. An exclusivity term does not automatically establish that a prospective client has never contacted another firm. Keep supplier distribution promises distinct from facts about the person’s broader activity.
Compare bills and accepted matters separately
Price per delivered unit helps explain the invoice. Cost per accepted case helps explain the acquisition cohort. Both can be useful, but they answer different questions. Define the billable event and the firm’s acceptance event before comparing figures.
Use charges less confirmed applicable credits from a single delivery cohort, divided by the number accepted from that cohort as of the report date. Keep pending reviews visible. Add attributable intake labor in a separately labeled measure when models leave different workloads with the firm.
Do not mix this month’s invoices with every matter accepted this month if those acceptances came from several delivery periods. The cost guide provides a reproducible example and explains how to handle zero acceptances.
Run an evaluation your team can interpret
Agree the scope, reporting fields, review ownership, and commercial terms before an evaluation begins. State when the cohort will be reviewed and what information the decision makers need. Keep open reviews and credit requests visible at the checkpoint.
An evaluation should show whether the handoff is usable, the criteria are being applied consistently, and the firm can reconcile deliveries with its review decisions. A small or immature cohort may not resolve every question about future performance.
CaseLead Agency offers signed personal injury and MVA cases to law firms. Use this comparison to define the responsibilities your firm wants included, then discuss the proposed engagement against that specification.
Questions law firms ask
Which model is best for a law firm?
There is no universal winner. Match the delivery stage to your intake capacity, review process, and commercial requirements, then compare consistent cohorts through acceptance.
Are live transfers or signed cases automatically exclusive?
No. Exclusivity is an agreed distribution term. Confirm what it covers, the recipient, duration, and exceptions for any delivery model.
Can a signed case still be pending review?
Yes. Signature status and firm review status describe different events. Record each separately so a signed agreement does not automatically increase the accepted count.
Should we choose the lowest price per lead?
Unit price does not show how many matters your firm accepts or how much intake work remains. Compare the scope, cohort cost per accepted case, and attributable internal work.
Choose the handoff your firm needs
Bring your intake workflow and buying criteria to a conversation about the proposed signed-case scope.
Discuss your delivery requirements