H
HelloCounsel
HelloCounsel is an AI voice agent platform from HelloCounsel Inc. for plaintiff personal injury, workers' compensation and mass tort firms with roughly 10 to 200 staff. Its agents answer inbound calls and place outbound calls around the clock, handling new client intake and the calls that follow a signed case: client status updates, medical provider and records follow-up, insurance adjuster and claim calls, lien balance checks and appointment changes.
Routine requests are completed on the call and sensitive or complex calls are routed to staff with context; the agents give no legal opinions, settlement estimates or outcome predictions. After each call a transcript and structured summary are written into the firm's case management system through native integrations with Filevine, Litify, Clio, SmartAdvocate, MyCase, CasePeer and Neos, working alongside RingCentral. Per-task prices are listed on one page, with a two-week free pilot.
Capability grades
All 15 axes, graded from public sources on the date shown. Hover a grade to see what the letter means on that axis.
AI Centrality
How much of the product is actually AI. Whether the machine learning is the mechanism the buyer is paying for or a feature layered onto conventional software, and whether the vendor is specific about which is which.
The models are the product. HelloCounsel sells AI voice agents that answer and place calls, carry routine requests to completion and write the transcript and summary into the firm's case management system. Without the agents there is nothing left to sell. Verified 22 September 2026.
Citation Accuracy and Hallucination Disclosure
Whether the vendor publishes measured accuracy on citations and assertions, grounds output to primary sources, and says plainly what its system does when it does not know. Legal has a documented public record of fabricated citations reaching filed briefs, so an untested claim of accuracy is not evidence.
Outcome figures without an accuracy measure. The site reports 30,000 calls handled this year, 98% of calls completed according to the firm's procedures and under 1.1% escalated by the AI. No figure is published for the accuracy of transcripts, summaries or information captured on calls, and no test or method is described. The product does not cite legal authority. Verified 22 September 2026.
Autonomy and Oversight Model
What the system decides on its own, what a lawyer must approve, and whether the vendor documents where the review point sits. A tool that drafts under review and a tool that files without one are different products and different risks.
High autonomy with stated limits and an escalation route, short of defined thresholds. The agents resolve routine calls end to end without staff, following practice-area scripts; they are stated not to give legal opinions, settlement estimates or case outcome predictions; sensitive or complex calls are routed to staff with context; and every call's transcript and summary is written to the case file for review. What makes a call routine or sensitive is not defined. Verified 22 September 2026.
Operational and Outcome Evidence
Named, dated evidence that the product works in production at real firms or legal departments. Case studies with figures and identified customers count. Unattributed testimonials and launch announcements do not.
Unattributed platform figures. The site cites 30,000 calls handled this year, 98% completed to procedure and under 1.1% escalated, and its own analysis of personal injury call volumes. No named customer, case study or dated result was located. Verified 22 September 2026.
Privilege and Confidentiality Posture
How client confidences are handled: attorney client privilege and work product treatment, segregation of one client matter from another, whether client data trains any model, and what the vendor commits to in writing rather than in marketing.
Commitments on public pages, with the agreement silent. The FAQ says no client data is used to train the agents, call summaries and transcripts are stored in the firm's own case management system as the system of record, and the agents run inside the firm's system with IP staying with the firm. Protected health information is governed by a separate business associate agreement or master services agreement that is not published.
The published Terms of Service address none of this, and which AI providers process call audio and transcripts is not stated. Verified 22 September 2026.
UPL and Professional Responsibility Posture
Whether the vendor is clear that it supplies a tool rather than legal advice, who its audience is, and how it addresses unauthorized practice of law, competence and supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits. ABA Formal Opinion 512 is the reference point. Where the advice line is not the duty a product raises, the axis is read through the nearest professional duty it does raise: judicial conduct rules and the reviewing duty for products sold only to courts, and the duty to bill for time actually spent for products that draft time entries.
A plain advice line, short of caller disclosure. The site states that HelloCounsel is not a provider of legal advice and that its agents capture information and handle operational requests without legal opinions, case valuations or outcome predictions, and that call recording and consent are configured for each jurisdiction the firm operates in. The agents speak directly with prospective clients, and nothing located says callers are told they are speaking with AI. Verified 22 September 2026.
AI Governance and Bias Disclosure
Published governance over model behaviour: who owns it inside the vendor, what is tested before release, and what is disclosed about disparate output across matter types, parties, or populations.
Checked the home, product, FAQ, about and reference pages, the Terms of Service and the Privacy Policy on 22 September 2026. No AI governance position, accountable owner, testing before release, or finding on how the agents perform across callers, accents or languages was located. Verified 22 September 2026.
AI Safety and Data Stewardship
Retention, deletion, access control, and what happens to prompts and documents after they are processed. Whether the vendor states its subprocessors and its incident practice, or leaves the buyer to assume.
A privacy policy and compliance claims, short of committed practice. The Privacy Policy, effective 31 January 2026, says service providers are bound by data processing agreements, voice biometric data is collected only with consent and kept under a retention schedule, and protected health information is handled under a business associate agreement; the site says HelloCounsel is HIPAA compliant. No retention period for call recordings or transcripts, subprocessor list or incident notification commitment was located. Verified 22 September 2026.
AI Liability and Recourse
What the vendor stands behind contractually when its output is wrong. Indemnities, caps, carve outs, insurance, and whether any of it is published or only reachable through a negotiated agreement.
Addressed only through a standard limitation clause. The Terms of Service, a website and services agreement under Delaware law, disclaim warranties that information or services are accurate or error-free and limit HelloCounsel's entire liability to the amount paid for services in the preceding twelve months. Nothing addresses a call handled wrongly by an agent. Verified 22 September 2026.
Practice Systems Integration Depth
How deeply the product reaches into the systems legal work already lives in: document management such as iManage and NetDocuments, Word and Outlook, contract lifecycle management, matter management, e-billing, and court filing systems.
Integrations are described with the depth an implementer needs. Transcripts, structured summaries and notes are written through native APIs, not relay tools, into Filevine, Litify, Clio, SmartAdvocate, MyCase, CasePeer and Neos, attached to the correct matter; the firm creates a user for the agent in its case management system and assigns it tasks there, so access is governed by that account; and the agents work alongside the firm's existing phone system, with RingCentral documented. Verified 22 September 2026.
Deployment Model and Data Residency
Where the software runs and where the data sits. Multi tenant cloud, single tenant, private deployment, on premises, and whether region of residence is a published option or an enterprise conversation.
Where call records end up is stated; where processing happens is not. Summaries and transcripts are stored in the firm's own case management system, and the agents operate through a user account in that system. Where call audio is processed and stored, and in which region or on what infrastructure, is not stated. Verified 22 September 2026.
Security Certifications and Trust Center
Independent attestation a buyer can pull without a sales call: SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration test summaries, a trust center with current reports and named scope rather than a badge image.
Claims without an attestation in hand. The site says HelloCounsel is HIPAA compliant, which names no audit, and that SOC 2 is "in observation", an attestation still in progress. No trust centre, report or audit date is published. Verified 22 September 2026.
Model Supply Chain Disclosure
Which models sit underneath, whose they are, where they run, and whether the vendor commits to telling customers when that changes. A legal buyer inherits every dependency it cannot see.
Checked the home, product, FAQ and reference pages, the Terms of Service and the Privacy Policy on 22 September 2026. No speech, language or voice model, model provider, inference location or change notification is named. Verified 22 September 2026.
Commercial Transparency
Whether a buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, what sits behind an enterprise tier, and what implementation adds.
Unit prices are published on one page and contradicted on another. A comparison page lists $10 per medical record, $6 per insurance claim opened, $3 per crash report and $1 per call, with no setup fee and go-live in one to two weeks; the FAQ says pricing is per call or per open request with no setup or integration fee. The company's reference page says pricing is custom by call and case volume with no published rate card. Every engagement starts with a two-week free pilot. Verified 22 September 2026.
Firm and Practice Coverage
Who the product is actually built for. AmLaw, midlaw, small firm and solo, in house departments, government and courts, and which practice areas are supported rather than merely claimed.
Coverage and limits are both stated. HelloCounsel is for plaintiff personal injury, workers' compensation and mass tort firms of roughly 10 to 200 staff with case managers and a production case management system. The company says it is not for solo practitioners without case management staff or general practice firms, not for family, criminal, immigration or corporate work, and does not do legal research, drafting, medical records review or advice. Verified 22 September 2026.
3 public documents
The public pages on file for HelloCounsel, with the recorded signals each one supports and the date it was last read. Open any of them and check the reading against the record.
-
hellocounsel.ai4 signals
Client Data in Training, Prompt and Output Retention, Refusal and Uncertainty Behaviour and 1 more
Read Sep 22, 2026
-
Fabricated Citation Record
Read Sep 22, 2026
-
hellocounsel.ai/privacy-policy1 signal
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
Read Sep 22, 2026
$1 per call (per-task pricing)USD, as published, never converted
- HelloCounsel prices by task: $1 per call, $3 per crash report, $6 per insurance claim opened and $10 per medical record.
- There is no setup or integration fee.
- Every firm starts with a two-week free pilot.
- The company's own reference page says pricing is custom, so confirm the rates before relying on them.
Per-task pricing on the comparison page: **$1 per call**, **$3 per crash report**, **$6 per insurance claim opened**, **$10 per medical record**; no setup fee; one-hour setup call, live within one to two weeks. The FAQ says pricing is per call or per open request with no setup or integration fee and no per-minute billing. The reference page (ai-instructions, August 2026) says pricing is custom by call and case volume with no published rate card, positioned about 50% below legacy answering services. Two-week free pilot for every engagement.
Implementation: None: the site says there is no setup or integration fee, with a one-hour configuration call and go-live in one to two weeks.
Confidentiality and data terms: Protected health information is processed under a business associate agreement or master services agreement with the covered entity, per the Privacy Policy; the FAQ says RingCentral, the documented phone integration, supports HIPAA-aligned handling under a BAA. The agreement itself is not published.
Note: The published figures conflict: a comparison page and the FAQ give per-task prices, while the company's reference page says pricing is custom by call and case volume with no published rate card. Every engagement begins with a two-week free pilot and a custom return-on-investment estimate. Contract length, minimums and cancellation terms are not published.
Legal Signals
What each signal meansA signal records what public sources say on the date shown. It is not a grade and it is not a recommendation. Where a signal reads Not addressed, it means the index did not locate the material in public sources on that date, which is a statement about disclosure rather than about the product.
Client Data in Training
Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?
A public policy or trust page states no training on customer content, with no matching term located in the published agreement.
The site's FAQ says HelloCounsel is HIPAA compliant and that no client data is used to train its agents, and a comparison page repeats it. The published Terms of Service do not address training, and the separate customer agreements for protected health information are not published.
Prompt and Output Retention
How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?
Retention is acknowledged in public materials with no stated period.
Call summaries and transcripts are written into the firm's own case management system, which the site calls the system of record. The Privacy Policy refers to a retention schedule, including for voice biometric data, without stating periods, and nothing says how long HelloCounsel itself keeps call audio or transcripts.
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?
No located public material addresses walls or matter level segregation.
Checked the FAQ, product and reference pages on 22 September 2026. The agent works through a user account the firm creates in its case management system, so its access follows that account; nothing addresses walls between matters or teams within the firm.
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?
Terms commit to notice where lawfully permitted. No transparency report located.
The Privacy Policy says HelloCounsel may disclose information in response to a court order, subpoena or government request and that, where permitted by law, it will endeavour to notify the person before disclosing. The commitment sits in the Privacy Policy, not in a published customer agreement. No transparency report was located.
Primary Law Corpus Provenance
Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?
No located public material identifies the corpus behind the product’s answers.
Checked the product, FAQ and reference pages on 22 September 2026. The agents follow firm-configured scripts and case data and do not answer from a body of law, so no legal corpus is identified.
Good Law Verification
Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?
No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.
Checked the product, FAQ and reference pages on 22 September 2026. The product does not cite legal authority, and nothing addresses checking authority for later treatment.
Refusal and Uncertainty Behaviour
What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?
The vendor describes refusal or abstention behaviour in public materials.
The site says sensitive or complex calls are routed to human staff with the relevant context already loaded, that intake follows practice-area scripts, and that the agents do not give legal opinions, settlement estimates or outcome predictions; it reports under 1.1% of calls escalated by the AI. No published evaluation shows how reliably calls are routed.
Fabricated Citation Record
Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?
No court order, opinion or disciplinary record addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations produced by this product has been located as of the date shown. This is a statement about the public record on that one subject, not a finding about the product, and this signal is not a litigation history.
Searched the AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin on 22 September 2026 for HelloCounsel, and no recorded case was returned. No court order, opinion or disciplinary record naming the product was located. This is a statement about the public record rather than a finding about the product.
Bar Guidance Alignment
Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?
No located public material engages with bar or ethics guidance.
Checked the product, FAQ, about and reference pages, the Terms of Service and the Privacy Policy on 22 September 2026. No material engages with lawyers' professional or ethical obligations for AI answering client calls or names any ethics opinion.
Billing and Fee Posture
Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?
Public materials claim time savings without addressing billing or disclosure, and the product sits inside a fee relationship between a lawyer and a client where those savings would change the bill.
The site positions its pricing at about half the cost of legacy answering services and describes case manager hours saved. Nothing addresses how the service's cost is reflected in what clients are charged.
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?
No located public material supports a client side disclosure obligation.
Checked the FAQ, reference page and Privacy Policy on 22 September 2026. No subprocessor or model provider list and no client-facing disclosure material was located; firms with security-review requirements are told to confirm details during the demo.
Court Disclosure Support
If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?
No located public material addresses court disclosure or verification certification.
Checked the product, FAQ and reference pages on 22 September 2026. Every call's transcript and summary is kept in the case file, but the product does not produce court filings, and nothing addresses disclosing AI use.