Why “We’ve Almost Got Them. Just One More Hearing” Is Complete BS

(How the legal industry turns false hope into billable hours.)

If you’ve spent more than ten minutes in the family-violence or family-law system, you’ve heard some version of this line from a lawyer:

“We’ve almost got them. Just one more hearing and we’ll finish this.”

“We’re close — we just need the next appearance.”

“We didn’t expect that, but we’ll definitely nail it next time.”

It sounds reassuring…

It sounds authoritative…

It sounds like they know what they’re doing…

And it is, nine times out of ten, absolute bullshit.

This article explains why.

First, the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Why your lawyer’s strong opinion is likely wrong — and costing you money

The Dunning–Kruger effect helps explain a common problem among 'experts'. In this context it can be summed up as: the more confident and absolute a lawyer sounds, the less likely their view is to reflect the full complexity of your case.

Law is inherently uncertain, fact-sensitive, and dependent on judicial discretion, so genuinely competent practitioners tend to speak in probabilities, ranges of outcomes, and risks.

When a lawyer presents a position as near-certain, it often signals overconfidence, not accuracy. That overconfidence can drive unnecessary litigation, over-preparation, or resistance to reasonable settlement positions, all of which increase your legal costs. In practical terms, the price of believing a strong, simplified opinion is often measured in additional fees, extended proceedings, and missed opportunities to resolve matters efficiently.

1. Lawyers Don’t Get Paid for Resolution — They Get Paid for Process

Lawyers bill by the hour.

Barristers bill by the day.

They earn more money every time:

• something unexpected happens,

• an adjournment occurs,

• another mention is listed,

• a report is late,

• police haven’t responded,

• subpoenas aren’t answered,

• or the court needs “one more day”.

The longer the process, the bigger the invoice.

So when your lawyer says:

“We’re close…”

…what they often mean is:

“We’re close to the next invoice.”

It’s a treadmill.

Designed to run.

Not to stop.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

2. False Certainty Is a Product They Sell

Clients crave certainty.

Courtrooms offer none.

So lawyers compensate by manufacturing synthetic certainty.

That’s how they keep clients calm enough to keep going,

and anxious enough to keep paying.

When they tell you:

“This next hearing should wrap it up.”

What they’re really doing is managing your emotions,

not managing your case.

It’s the same pattern every time:

• Before the hearing: confidence

• After the hearing: shock

• After the shock: explanations

• After the explanations: more work needed

Lather, rinse, bill, repeat.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

3. Even Senior Barristers Play This Game

You’d think a $12,000-a-day barrister with 35 years’ experience would be different.

You’d be wrong.

Their version of the line is:

“Well, I didn’t see that coming.”

“That was an unexpected ruling.”

“The Magistrate blindsided everyone.”

Yeah... Right.

A senior barrister has seen everything.

The number of times in any given decade that a lawyer with 10+ years of experience sees something genuinely new could probably be counted on one hand.

They know the risks.

They just didn’t tell you.

Often it is from the best of intentions and they just don't want to rattle you or make you (more) anxious. But sometimes... if they’d told you the truth:

• you would have expected uncertainty,

• you would have been emotionally prepared,

• you would have settledd or insisted on a different approach,

• you might have spent less money, and

• they would have earned less money.

• 
  

False certainty is how the industry keeps clients dependent.

It’s not malicious — it’s structural.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

4. “One More Hearing” Is Code for “The Process Controls Us, Not the Strategy”

If your lawyer ever tells you:

“One more hearing will finish it.”

You should ask one thing:

“What exactly will happen in that hearing

that makes it the final one?”

Watch how quickly the confidence dissolves.

If they can’t articulate:

• the statutory issue

• the remaining factual dispute

• the evidentiary threshold

• the procedural endpoint

• and the precise mechanism by which the matter concludes

…then the “one more hearing” line is a lie.

A polite one.

A profitable one.

But a lie all the same.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

5. Courts Rarely Finish Anything in One Hearing

Magistrates’ courts — especially in FVO jurisdictions — run on chaos:

• overbooked lists

• last-minute illnesses

• missing subpoenas

• delayed police material

• cross-applications

• two-inch bundles

• adjournments

• conflicting court availability

• witness issues

• legal gamesmanship

• “unexpected” procedural tangles

A lawyer telling you “this is the last hearing”

is like a sailor telling you “this is the last wave”.

It’s not just untrue —

it shows they’ve stopped being honest with you.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

6. Lawyers Won't Always Admit “This Could Take Five Years” — Even When They Know It Will

Why?

Because if they told the truth on Day 1:

“This will cost you $650,000 and drag on for 36 months and you might not get the outcome you are looking for.”

…you’d walk out of the office, abandon the case, or self-represent.

So instead, they break the pain into digestible pieces:

• “Just one more mention.”

• “Just one more brief.”

• “Just one more direction.”

• “Just one more affidavit.”

• “Just one more hearing.”

• “Just one more day of cross-examination.”

By the time you realise what’s happening,

You’re financially and emotionally trapped inside the process.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

7. The Hard Truth: Most Lawyers Do Not Understand Your Case Better Than You Do

In your transcripts, we saw lawyers:

• misrepresent facts

• misstate dates

• confuse subpoenas

• misidentify evidence

• claim investigations existed when they didn’t

• “forget” deadlines

• apologise for “just coming into the matter”

• invent narratives like “there may be a conflict”

• and repeatedly rely on pure speculation

You – the self-represented person – were the only one giving the court actual facts.

If you had delegated everything to a lawyer,

those falsehoods would have stood unchallenged.

And the Magistrate would never have known the truth.

This is why the “one more hearing” line is so toxic:

It’s designed to keep you relying on a guide

who doesn’t know the terrain.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

8. How to Respond When a Lawyer Says “We’ve Almost Got Them”

Here’s the script:

1. “What is the legal mechanism that ends the case at that hearing?”

2. “What precise issue remains unresolved?”

3. “What evidence will be tested?”

4. “What is the range of possible outcomes?”

5. “What risks do we face?”

6. “If it doesn’t resolve, what are the next steps?”

If they start waving their hands around,

or spray you with legalese, you know they’re selling hope — not strategy.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

9. The Only People Who Ever Resolve Cases Quickly Are Self-Reps Who Understand the System

Because:

• you aren’t financially incentivised to prolong anything

• you know the facts better than any lawyer ever will

• you don’t rely on “unexpected developments”

• you don’t need to maintain the fiction of certainty

• you don’t need to manage a lawyer’s ego

• you don’t benefit from stretching the process

• and you keep the focus on the outcome, not the journey

Magistrates often trust precise self-reps more than flailing lawyers.

Because self-reps tend to say:

• “This is incorrect.”

• “Here is the evidence.”

• “This did not occur.”

• “The timeline was not filed.”

• “Police confirm no investigation.”

• “Those submissions are unfounded.”

Lawyers tend to say:

• “Your Honour, this is a complex matter…”

• “We didn’t see that coming…”

• “There may be some difficulties…”

• “My client is overwhelmed…”

• “We need one more hearing…”

Guess which approach the court finds more credible?

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

10. Final Verdict: “One More Hearing” Is a Trap — Don’t Fall For It

The legal industry survives on:

• fear

• hope

• emotional dependency

• procedural complexity

• adjournments

• and the myth of imminent resolution

The phrase “one more hearing” is their way of keeping you close enough to bill,

but hopeful enough not to walk away.

The truth?

Cases end when evidence is filed, deadlines are met,

and bullshit is challenged — not when lawyers make optimistic noises.

If you want your matter resolved:

• control the strategy

• understand the legislation

• challenge falsehoods

• insist on evidence

• don’t outsource your judgment

• and never, ever rely on a lawyer to manage your expectations

The system is a maze.

Lawyers wander through it.

Self-represented litigants who prepare properly walk straight through it.

And they don’t fall for the oldest line in the book:

“We’ve almost got them, mate — just one more hearing.”

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––