Should DNB/hold time be periodically relieved?

SUGGESTED

I am curious whether it is beneficial to finalize internal bills for time that is DNB (or on hold). DNB/hold time is currently hanging out in WIP, some of it being years old. I feel this makes the system run more slowly. I want to be able to see the time/billable amounts for tracking purposes, and ideally would like to do this by relieving any non-billable time as billable (periodically, say quarterly, yearly, or at a matter's conclusion) and then write off the amount. This way I can easily go back and see how much time was spent/monetary amount credited. I would still be able to see the time by reprinting stored bills and can easily look under Transactions to determine the amount of the write-off/credit. Certain people in my office feel it is pointless to relieve any non-billable time, so internal bills are never done. I do not believe that hundreds (possibly thousands) of hours of time should be kept as WIP (some of it dating back to at least 2011).  I am currently using Timeslips 2009.  Does anyone have any thoughts on this subject? TIA

Top Replies

  • I don't know if there will ever be ONE answer to that question because it begs to know WHY the time was being put on DNB/Hold in the first place.  Different firms will have different reasons…

Parents
  • 0
    SUGGESTED

    I don't know if there will ever be ONE answer to that question because it begs to know WHY the time was being put on DNB/Hold in the first place.  Different firms will have different reasons for doing so.

    I personally agree with you that these types of slips should be kept to a minimum as they do sort of muddy up the WIP reports and can cause issues when trying to purge out older slips, or run accurate reports. There are of course valid reasons for keeping slips in WIP if the firm simply is not ready to attribute them to the matter quite yet.  (Contingency matters are notorious for this, but that is another discussion that I will not undertake at this time.)

    However, once the uncertainty resolves, I agree that you should approve off those slips as accurately as possible.  Again it depends why they were not billed out contemporaneously in the first place. So, how to resolve them will relate to that reasoning. I can't tell from your question whether changing them to billable, then writing them off is the best method for you.  I would use that method when the idea is that these slips would have been billable and should be attributed to the timekeepers as billable/income producing work, but the firm decided not to bill it out for some reason.  I.e., the firm is taking the responsibility for not billing it.  For example, to preserve a relationship with a client.  If instead it was truly never even possibly billable in the first place (such as Admin time) then leave them DNB and just approve them off.  No change to A/R, nothing to write off, slips continue to be accurately reported as non-billable time.

    Will it make your system run faster? Probably not.  Since the slips still exist in the database, the program still has to churn through them to run any sort of report. Pruning the database of older billed slips might speed you up, but really your firm needs to seriously think about possible upgrading to version 2020.  Here's why:

    -Your 2009 is now 11 years/versions old.  Congratulations, you've had a good run! It runs on a Paradox database. 

    -The v2020 will run on a Firebird SQL database that HAS proven to be faster for many firms. Especially with large datasets.

    -Your firm needs to make a conscious decision about 1) staying on v2009 (unsupported and older database engine), 2) upgrading to v2020 Perpetual (getting on the Firebird engine and buying in at the last perpetual licensing option), or 3) upgrading to Timeslips Premium (a subscription product).  Upgrade options will be a hot topic for the next year or so as Sage has announced a move to the Premium/Subscription ONLY method of using Sage Timeslips as of end of September 2020.  I wrote a blog post about it on my website here: http://www.duhon.biz/sage-timeslips-moving-to-subscription-only-pricing/ 

    The decision doesn't need to be made immediately, you have some time.  But you should at least know and understand the downsides to doing nothing and staying with v2009.

    If you would like to speak privately about your firm's options, just reach out to me via the contact information below.

    Nancy Duhon, Esq.
    Duhon Technology Solutions, LLC
    Master Certified Consultant for Sage Timeslips
    Providing individual Consultations and Third Party Remote Desktop Support - including older/unsupported versions.
    404-325-9779
    [email protected]

  • 0 in reply to Nancy Duhon

    Nancy, thank you very much for this information. 

    I am new(ish) to my current firm, and I agree that a serious software update is need, though due to financial reasons, this isn't as high on the priority list as it should be. I do intend to investigate various software alternatives in the semi-near future, and will probably take you up on your offer to discuss privately. I had read other forum posts from you concerning the premium/subscription or v2020 and noted that it may be better to upgrade sooner rather than later. 

    I apologize for this lengthy discussion. This is my first exposure to Timeslips (I used Omega Legal at my previous firm), so I am not knowledgeable on certain technical differentiations. I guess my first question needs to be what does "approving off" time actually mean? Is it still visible from the Billing Assistant/Go To Billing Details view?  What makes it different than finalizing time on a bill (what I refer to as "relieving") at a zero bill rate and noting it as internal?

    As a brief overview, I have a ton of old slips in matters that fall under multiple categories.

    Some time is admin, usually set up with a zero bill rate, not necessarily DNB time. Some matters have slips dating back to 2011 (and possibly earlier).

    I also have time in general matters which act as catch-alls for work related to a particular client but not necessarily a particular matter, and it is used for attorney productivity/tracking purposes. Like you mentioned, this time is something for which the firm is responsible/client-relationship related - freebies which I want to be able to evaluate periodically in order to determine how much non-billable time is actually being spent on a particular client outside of a billable matter - which data I can use to evaluate a client's future rate increases (or to see if a client is taking advantage of an attorney relationship). Sometimes a  timekeeper may enter slips after a final bill is rendered or there is some post-closing follow-up needed for which we are unable to bill, and that time is also put into some kind of general matter.

    We also have clients who get billed flat fees to cover a policy year's worth of claims, so we open individual matters for tracking purposes and if one develops into something more complex, we then bill that matter separately. People have been DNBing time in these matters while they are still active which I don't like because it prevents me from knowing when a matter becomes complex enough to get separated out (when viewing an unbilled report) as the DNB'd time is zero. In my mind it makes sense to keep this time as billable and finalize an invoice the conclusion of the matter along with a simultaneous write-off. This way I can look back at all the matters which were covered by a flat fee over a certain period (like a policy year), add them up, and evaluate the reasonableness of the flat fee for the following year's renewal. There are also several closed matters from previous years that have what I refer to as slips in "limbo" which is what prompted me to ask the question as I would like to clear out this old time. 

    Lastly, there are DNBs done to slips in regular billing matters which were not necessarily "value added" entries to our clients (such as an attorney conferring with a coworker or an attorney billing time which appears secretarial). I consider these slips to also be in limbo.

    Thanks for your help with this craziness!

Reply
  • 0 in reply to Nancy Duhon

    Nancy, thank you very much for this information. 

    I am new(ish) to my current firm, and I agree that a serious software update is need, though due to financial reasons, this isn't as high on the priority list as it should be. I do intend to investigate various software alternatives in the semi-near future, and will probably take you up on your offer to discuss privately. I had read other forum posts from you concerning the premium/subscription or v2020 and noted that it may be better to upgrade sooner rather than later. 

    I apologize for this lengthy discussion. This is my first exposure to Timeslips (I used Omega Legal at my previous firm), so I am not knowledgeable on certain technical differentiations. I guess my first question needs to be what does "approving off" time actually mean? Is it still visible from the Billing Assistant/Go To Billing Details view?  What makes it different than finalizing time on a bill (what I refer to as "relieving") at a zero bill rate and noting it as internal?

    As a brief overview, I have a ton of old slips in matters that fall under multiple categories.

    Some time is admin, usually set up with a zero bill rate, not necessarily DNB time. Some matters have slips dating back to 2011 (and possibly earlier).

    I also have time in general matters which act as catch-alls for work related to a particular client but not necessarily a particular matter, and it is used for attorney productivity/tracking purposes. Like you mentioned, this time is something for which the firm is responsible/client-relationship related - freebies which I want to be able to evaluate periodically in order to determine how much non-billable time is actually being spent on a particular client outside of a billable matter - which data I can use to evaluate a client's future rate increases (or to see if a client is taking advantage of an attorney relationship). Sometimes a  timekeeper may enter slips after a final bill is rendered or there is some post-closing follow-up needed for which we are unable to bill, and that time is also put into some kind of general matter.

    We also have clients who get billed flat fees to cover a policy year's worth of claims, so we open individual matters for tracking purposes and if one develops into something more complex, we then bill that matter separately. People have been DNBing time in these matters while they are still active which I don't like because it prevents me from knowing when a matter becomes complex enough to get separated out (when viewing an unbilled report) as the DNB'd time is zero. In my mind it makes sense to keep this time as billable and finalize an invoice the conclusion of the matter along with a simultaneous write-off. This way I can look back at all the matters which were covered by a flat fee over a certain period (like a policy year), add them up, and evaluate the reasonableness of the flat fee for the following year's renewal. There are also several closed matters from previous years that have what I refer to as slips in "limbo" which is what prompted me to ask the question as I would like to clear out this old time. 

    Lastly, there are DNBs done to slips in regular billing matters which were not necessarily "value added" entries to our clients (such as an attorney conferring with a coworker or an attorney billing time which appears secretarial). I consider these slips to also be in limbo.

    Thanks for your help with this craziness!

Children
No Data