I was recently represented by the WOMACK LAW FIRM, of Houston, Texas

From Walter, in Houston, Texas I was recently represented by the WOMACK LAW FIRM, of Houston, Texas, in two cases filed with the US DOL, and EEOC, against a big corporation I was refered to their firm by a couple of lawyer referal agencies, and I am VERY Happy that I was. I am not an attorney, and I don't know all of their jargon but with Mr Womack handleing my cases, I didn't need to, as I put all of my faith in him, especially as he researched and presented the Agencies with what procedures Their Own Charters instructed them with. Fighting a big corporation with a Government Organization, as I found out, is not easy, but I am Well Satisfied at the representation I received By their Law Firm. Lord Willing, I will never need a Lawyer, but I know a Good one, in Mr Womack, If I do.
View full review
ID
#1476870 Review #1476870 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Round Top, Texas
Service
The Womack Law Firm Legal Service
Reason of review
Fast order processing
New Reviewer

I am writing an UPDATE TO Mark Womack Lawfirm

I originally had experienced what I felt was less than great service and wrote about it. However, after Mr. Womack was given an opportunity to resolve this - I wished I could in fact remove my entire negative review about him. I want to write this to state that he has handled my situation and went above and beyond to rectify everything. I am writing here and plan to send the required "certified and notarized" letter to Pissed Off Customer in order to get this entire review removed. I completely wish they would allow me to just remove my entire negative review. I apologize to the Mark Womack firm that Pissed off Customer is not allowing me to do just that. I would recommend Mr. Womack to my friends and family.
View full review
ID
#1185930 Review #1185930 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Houston, Texas
Service
The Womack Law Firm Legal Service
Pros
  • Followed up on his word
  • Professionalism and adherence to professional standards
Reason of review
Reliable warranty
New Reviewer

Mark Womack is on the *** of harassment with calls and emails

Update by user Jan 02, 2018

Here is all the jargon he's written since we've asked specifically to stop payment on check ($25), recut us a check for the amount that he owes to me, provide a tracking of any check he's claiming he sent (he does not have tracking) and stop contacting us. Here's his reply to that: Dear Mr.

Losoya: When we spoke on the telephone a few moments ago, you confirmed that you have not reported to the Unites States Postal Service ("USPS") that the envelope that was sent to you by our firm on December 18, 2017 (which mailing was confirmed by USPS by email to you on December 20, 2017), is missing, although you and your wife have maintained in your correspondence to, and conversations with, the undersigned today, repeatedly that, in the opinion of you and your wife, such envelope is in fact "missing" because it has not yet been delivered to you by USPS. In our conversation you also confirmed that you do not intend to report to USPS that this firm's December 18, 2017, envelope (containing the check you have requested) is "missing," although USPS's December 20, 2017, email to you clearly states that you may make such a report of "missing" mail to USPS in order to possibly retrieve mail identified in the December 20, 2017, email message but which has not been delivered. Neither the undersigned nor you have received any notification from USPS that it will not deliver this firm's December 18, 2017, mailed envelope to you, which contains the check you have requested. In fact, USPS's December 20, 2017, email message to you (which your wife forwarded to the undersigned this afternoon) states that the envelope (containing the check you have requested) mailed by this firm to you on December 18, 2017 will be delivered to you at the address shown on the envelope sometime after December 20, 2017.

In our telephone conversation completed moments ago, you stated once again that, despite the fact that there is no indication that the envelope (containing the check you have requested) mailed to you by this firm on December 18, 2017 will not be delivered to you by USPS, you wish that (1) this firm stop payment of the check payable to you that is contained in the December 18, 2017, mailed envelope to you from this firm; and (2) issue a new check payable to you for an amount less than the aforementioned check mailed December 18 (such new check to be in a lesser amount because the fee charged to this firm for stopping payment on the first check will be deducted from the amount payable to you in the new check) and have such new check available to be picked up by you at our office on January 3, 2018. This email message shall confirm that the undersigned once again advised you -- this time, in our telephone conversation completed moments ago -- that, in his opinion, the aforementioned requested stop-payment of the check mailed to you on December 18, 2017 makes little sense, because (a) you will likely receive by mail the check mailed December 18, 2017 from USPS, there being no indication that USPS does not intend to deliver such check to you, and, also, there being no indication that such check is missing or has been lost by USPS; and (b) stopping payment of such check before you receive it in the mail, and accepting a check for a lesser amount in its place (based on the unwarranted assumption that the check mailed December 18 will not be delivered to you), as you have requested, needlessly deprives you of the sum of money (currently included in the amount of the check mailed on December 18, 2017) equal to the difference in the amounts of the two checks. Please therefore confirm in writing that you wish for this firm to stop payment of the check mailed to you on December 18, 2017, and issue you a new check in a lesser amount as set forth above to be picked up by you no sooner than the afternoon of January 3, 2017 at our office in Houston, Texas. I look forward to receiving your written instructions in this regard at your earliest convenience.

Yours truly, Mark T. Womack On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 6:42 PM, mark womack wrote: (last email sent prematurely, accidentally. The email continues below) . .

. in pertinent part, “You have mail and packages arriving soon . . .

COMING TO YOUR MAILBOX SOON . . . You have mail arriving soon .

. ." After these (repetitive) statements are made by USPS in its December 20, 2017, email message to Mr. Losoya, the email then shows, among other images, an image of the envelope that was sent from our office, containing the check, to Mr. Losoya.

In your most recent email Ms. Losoya, you say that the December 20, 2017, email from USPS indicates that our firm's envelope was "scanned" the same day (i.e., December 20, 2017) and, therefore, "the envelope [from our firm] should have been delivered on 12/20." How do you conclude this? The December 20, 2017, email from USPS does not say that any of the pieces shown in the email, including our firm's envelope, will be delivered on December 20, 2017. Instead, at the bottom of the December 20, 2017, USPS email, it is clearly stated that "Mailpieces may arrive several days after you receive the notification." Isn't it reasonable to conclude, therefore, that our firm's envelope containing the check will arrive, by delivery from USPS, some number of days after December 20, 2017?

Also, the December 20, 2017, email from USPS states at the bottom of the message that you may report missing mail (which notice presumably refers, at a minimum, to the mail which is imaged in the email message, including our firm's envelope addressed to Mr. Losoya). The email even has a link that may be employed to report missing mail, including our firm's envelope addressed to Mr. Losoya (assuming such envelope is, in fact, missing).

Have you reported our firm's envelope, which is clearly imaged in the USPS email, as missing? I look forward to receiving your responses. Yours truly, Mark T. Womack Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone Begin forwarded message: On Tuesday, January 2, 2018, 6:17 PM, mark womack wrote: Dear Ms.

Losoya: The check will be available for pick up at our receptionist’s desk in our office tomorrow (January 3rd) afternoon. This is how Mr. Losoya wished to take delivery of the new check, according to his statement in our phone conversation today. Ms.

Losoya, you apparently have some expertise in matters regarding the USPS. The email from USPS that is attached to your email to me from earlier today, states, in pertinent part, “ Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Tuesday, January 2, 2018, 5:27 PM, Kristine Losoya wrote: Mr. Womack, If you have subscribed to the USPS service, you would know that the date of the email is the day that the scans are delivered. The envelope containing the check should have been delivered on 12/20.

It is out of both of our hands once USPS receives the envelope without any tracking information, which is what I suggest how your firm sends any future reimbursements if you want to argue with a client about requesting their funds back. In my professional accounting experience, we never sent checks without tracking. Please stop payment and resend the check as I originally requested verbally in our conversation and again in my original email. My request has NOT changed.

I expect a short email letting me know the new check is ready to be picked up less the stop payment fee. Blessings, Krissi On Jan 2, 2018, at 5:15 PM, mark womack wrote: Dear Ms. Losoya: The email from USPS, attached to your email, states that our firm’s envelope (containing the check for the reimbursement to your husband of the balance of the retainer which he previously paid to our law firm) will be delivered to your husband at the address on the envelope. I have seen nothing to indicate that the envelope will not be delivered to your husband by USPS at such address.

When we spoke by telephone this afternoon, you did not indicate that USPS has ever indicated to you that the envelope (a) has been lost or (b) will not be delivered to your husband at the address on the envelope. As we discussed, it is the undersigned’s opinion that, given these facts, the envelope (the delivery of which, in the undersigned’s opinion, has likely been delayed because of the recent end-of-the-year holidays) will be delivered by USPS to your husband at the address on the envelope. It is only a matter of time before such event occurs. Therefore, stopping payment on the check (as you and your husband have requested) so that a new check (for an amount that is equal to the amount of the original check less the fee charged by this law firm’s bank to stop payment on the original check) may be issued and picked up by your husband at our office, does not, with respect, appear to make much sense to the undersigned.

Given what we know, it seems to be reasonably certain that the envelope, which is on its way to your husband at the address on the envelope, will be delivered. Again, there is nothing to indicate that such delivery will not occur. With respect, therefore, may I suggest that this situation only requires a bit of patience on the part of you and your husband, and not a rush, on an emergency basis, to the cessation of payment of the original check, and the issuance of a new check (for a lesser amount). The envelope containing the check, a copy of which is in the email you received from USPS (which states that such envelope is in the mail, for delivery to your husband) very likely will be delivered to your husband.

Therefore, it seems irresponsible to the undersigned to conclude, based on what is known at this time, that the envelope will not be delivered to your husband at the address shown in the envelope. When we spoke, in response to my question, you said that you and your husband are desperate to receive the check, which is in the envelope currently on its way from USPS to your husband. With respect, if this is the case, how could you and your husband have paid this law firm $4,500.00 in September 2017, knowing that all of this sum would likely be spent on attorney’s fees to this firm, and you would never see this sum of money again? In other words, how could it not have been a “desperate” situation for you and your husband to spend $4,500 in September (with no expectation of ever receiving back any of this money), but it is a “desperate” situation now, in January, when a check for less than half this sum, as a refund, is on its way to your husband, but the envelope containing such check simpl has not yet showed up in your mailbox?

As you can tell from the above, it is the undersigned’s view that it makes no sense for Mr. Losoya in these curcumstances to “desperately” seek to obtain a check from this firm, on an emergency basis, for an amount that is less than the amount of the check that is on its way to him. When we spoke, you said you were “certain” that the envelope with the check would not be delivered in the mail to your husband. What evidence is there to support this “certain” conclusion?

As set forth above, as far as the undersigned can tell, from the available proof there is no reason to conclude that the envelope containing the check will not be delivered. In other words, just because the envelope with the check has not arrived, does not mean that it “certainly” will not arrive. Please therefore let me know if you still want to go ahead with your proposal (1) to have payment on the first check stopped, and (2) for the issuance of a new check to your husband for a lesser amount. Yours truly, Mark T.

Womack Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Tuesday, January 2, 2018, 4:20 PM, Kristine Losoya wrote: Mr. Womack, Please see below the information from the USPS. This is the delivery for 12/20/17. The reason the USPS now does this is so you do not lose mail and are aware of anything that comes up missing, which is exactly what has happened.

There is no need to wait the 45 days when you receive these emails. I recommend this service to everyone since it is free.

Please arrange to have the check recut as discussed. Blessings, Krissi Begin forwarded message: From: USPS Date: December 20, 2017 at 9:46:39 AM CST To: kristinelosoya@***.com Subject: Informed Delivery Daily Digest

Update by user Jan 02, 2018

Mr. Womack has since emailed my wife harassing letters and called me and even after telling him in writing that we demand our money immediately he still wrote once again to explain how it's our responsibility to call the US postal service for his lost check.

This is borderline harassment from Mr. Womack. He has already attacked my personal Wartime disability in his demeaning phone calls.

This guy is a real character. All we want is our money back in FULL, that he owes to us.

Original review posted by user Jan 02, 2018
Mr. Womack attorney at Law in Houston Texas claims he mailed us the check for which he owes me and my wife nearly $2,000 on December 18, 2017. I wrote him a few times after a week went by because we had not received the check. I've been patient enough to wait 3 weeks and phoned him today to let him know we still have not received his check. He has since questioned "are you so desperate that you need the money back?" He's written 2 attacking letters to my wife. And he just now called me to ask me if I've reported his check stolen or lost to the USPS telling me that it's my property to go look for. This guy is a joke. He wasted the $2500 of the $5000 total and I was glad to just walk away with the $2,000 owes me. He's now turned this in to a serious nightmare of the phone calls and emails instead of simply doing the professional thing and stopping payment on his check and reissuing us the money he owes us. What arrogant *** asks a lady as he asked my wife today, "what are you guys that desperate for the money back?"
View full review
ID
#1160843 Review #1160843 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Houston, Texas
Service
The Womack Law Firm Legal Service
Cons
  • Mark womack and his harassing phone calls and emails
Reason of review
Return, Exchange or Cancellation Policy
Loss
$2000
Preferred solution
Full refund
New Reviewer

Please remove the false review of my business

A review titled "Paid but nothing was done" was submitted to Pissed Consumer about my law practice, the Law Office of Mark T. Womack, on June 8, 2013. I sent a request to Pissed Consumer on January 18, 2017, showing that the June 8, 2013, review was false. I asked that the review be taken down. As of February 18, 2017, the false review is still posted on Pissed Consumer. I ask, therefore, again, that the false review be removed. By making the false allegations against me and my firm, the person who posted the June 8, 2013, review has violated Pissed Consumer's Terms of Service, which prohibit, among other things, the posting of defamatory and abusive material. I therefore ask again that the posted review be removed.
View full review
ID
#1010307 Review #1010307 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Houston, Texas
Pros
  • Professionalism and adherence to professional standards
Reason of review
Pissed Consumer has posted a false review in violation of its Terms of Service, which prohibit the posting of defamatory and abusive material
Preferred solution
I would like Pissed Consumer to remove the false review about my business submitted on June 8, 2013.
New Reviewer

A false and malicious review of my business was submitted.

A review titled "Paid but nothing was done" was submitted to Pissed Consumer about my law practice, the Law Office of Mark T. Womack, on June 8, 2013. The review is false and harmful to my business in several regards: (a) the client agreed before the meeting that there was a charge for the initial investigation, and there would be no refund, even if it was determined that he or she had no case; (b) the client agreed to these terms before any work was done; and (c) in this case, without knowing the person's name (because he or she has not identified herself), I can only conclude that, after my investigation was performed at and after the time we first met, I determined that the client had no legal recourse for his or her situation, because his or her former employer had not violated the law. According to the agreement made before we met, there would be a charge of $350 for the investigation, and that there was no guarantee of any finding that he or she would have a case after the completion of the investigation. In this instance, it is beyond doubt that the investigation revealed that the client did not have a legal case, and I informed him, or her, of this fact. But, as was agreed in the first instance, the work I performed in determining whether he or she had a case was not free. He or she agreed to these terms and paid my firm for the investigation upon our first meeting. We met during the lunch hour, I can only assume, because that was the only time both of us were free to meet on that day. He or she has wrongfully distorted what we agreed to, and what happened, by falsely claiming that instead of telling him or her that the investigation of the facts of his or her situation revealed that he or she did not have a legal case, I "insulted" him or her. I never insulted the client. After the investigation was performed after we met (such an investigation did occur because, as the complaint notes, we discussed the results of the investigation after our initial meeting at my office), but merely informed him or her that, as sometimes is the case, even though he or she had lost his or her job, nothing illegal had occurred. The client does not explain these important facts at all, and instead, in an apparent attempt to vent his or her frustration at not having any legal recourse for what happened with his or her former employer, accuses me, falsely, of taking money and doing nothing, and then "insulting" him or her. None of these things I am accused of, happened. I performed the work we agreed I would perform, and the client paid me for that work, which was also agreed. However, the client has accused me of doing something that did not happen. The accuser has wrongfully been able to post this false report on your site, damaging my business and reputation, even though he or she received what she had paid for: i.e., an investigation of the facts of his or her situation to determine whether any legal action could be taken against the former employer. My duty was to determine objectively if any such action could be taken, which I did. The client's frustration, apparently, with not getting the advice he or she hoped to get should not allow him or her to wrongfully malign my legal practice and my character, which is what has occurred. By making these false allegations against me and my firm, the person who posted this complaint has violated Pissed Consumer's Terms of Service, which prohibit, among other things, the posting of defamatory and abusive material. I therefore ask that the posted complaint be removed. You may contact me at marktwomack@***.net or at 832-439-**** if you would like to discuss this matter further. Thank you, Mark Womack
View full review
ID
#993543 Review #993543 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Houston, Texas
Reason of review
A customer of my legal practice has filed a review containing defamatory and abusive material, violating Pissed Consumer's Terms of Service
Preferred solution
Please remove the defamatory and abusive review filed on June 8, 2013 against Law Office of Mark T Womack
New Reviewer

Paid but nothing was done

I was jobless, my employer had not allowed me to return to work it had been over seven months, and I was disparate to find someone who could see what could be done. I contacted Mark T. Womack employment attorney at 713 238-****. He said he had worked with similar situations faced by individuals in my profession and could help me. He agreed to meet with me provided I paid in cash or with a check made out to him. He met me outside his office in a waiting room so I never filled out any paperwork in his office at: 1600 Ten Allen Center 1200 Smith Street, Houston Texas 77002. He said he knew where we could go. He was meeting me on his LUNCH BREAK. I paid him $350.00, something I could hardly afford, but I needed his help. He took my check, cashed it, and told me when I called to find out what he had done, he said insulting things to me and hung up! When I asked for my money back, because he had done nothing, he insulted me again, and told me he would not give me the money back.
View full review
ID
#415986 Review #415986 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Ashburn, Virginia
Loss
$350

Why Trust Reviews on PissedConsumer?

  • Professional auto and live moderation
  • 100% user-generated content
  • Equal opportunity and protection
  • Zero tolerance for fake reviews
  • Verified content

For more information read Blog article