Zekarias Haile (zhaile@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 09:51:29

Good morning everyone I want to bring this into your attention that I'm showing 7 paraquat 12 signed e-sign re-triggered leads show up on page 0 dashboard. @James Turner please take a look at the screenshot below

image.png
Ryan (ryan@themedialab.agency)
2025-08-07 10:36:25

They would still be billable, and when they triggered, they would show up by design

Zekarias Haile (zhaile@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 10:49:03

*Thread Reply:* They are 2023's leads and re-triggered yesterday.. so I don't think they would be billable

✅ Ryan
Ryan (ryan@themedialab.agency)
2025-08-07 10:36:40

I wonder if we should just set the filter default to exclude them James?

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 10:39:20

Interesting- only way they should be showing up is if the earliest E-Sign date was in fact yesterday, or these leads never got signed in the activity log and got changed to a billable status. (We would then grab the date of the earliest billable status if it's deemed billable but has no E-signed date)

Dustin Surwill (dsurwill@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:19:43

*Thread Reply:* We might be able to use lead_contract (where serverstatus=Completed) as a backup if the activity log does not show an esign.

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:41:21

*Thread Reply:* Lets definitely poke more at this after we figure out this inital set of Re-Triggered leads

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 10:39:42

Thanks for bringing this to my attention Zek!

:yourewelcome: Zekarias Haile
James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 10:40:01

I'll dig a little deeper into the leads activity and see why they are on there.

Dustin Surwill (dsurwill@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:15:42

@Dustin Surwill has joined the conversation

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:23:06

Taking a look at these leads, they all appear to be copied / Imported from an old case so their history of original e-sign is not included. That is why their 'billable date' is considered yesterday when they hit a billable status for the first time.

What is odd is the 'Secondary' campaign (Paraquat - Dicello Filing Project) here is the campaign that actually came first, and includes the usual intake process. It seems like these are secondaries that aren't labeled as secondaries.

Pulling in Brittany and Dustin to see if they have a better idea of what kind of unusual process was done for these leads.

image.png
deleted-U04GZ79CPNG
2025-08-07 11:23:33

@deleted-U04GZ79CPNG has joined the conversation

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:31:30

@deleted-U04GZ79CPNG @Dustin Surwill Hey there~ We got a notification on the financial end of these leads (Example) hitting a billable status for the very first time yesterday (Retriggered) and upon inspection, found some lead history I'm not used to seeing. Findings: • It looks like these are being treated as an intake campaign, but are copies of an unverified lead. • These leads all have a secondary lead ID that came before this lead in the vitals. • The 'secondary' lead referenced in the vitals is in a secondary status, but contains the original e-sign and usual intake process. • The 'secondary' campaign it refers to is which I have not come across previously. @deleted-U04GZ79CPNG If you could tell us as much as possible about these leads, and their odd history, we would greatly appreciate. @Dustin Surwill If you could let us know why old leads that have never had a status indicating they have been sent to a firm, are being triggered now, so I can tweak the system as needed- it would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

Dustin Surwill (dsurwill@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:35:05

I was told by @deleted-U04GG7BCZ5M that Signed e-Sign QA & Signed e-Sign FINAL - SENT should be treated the same as FINAL, so I set them to re-triggered to do the DL backfill

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:42:18

Interesting- After a lead gets triggered to be sent via Integrations on that Re-Triggered status, does it ever return to it's previous status? Like is RE-TRIGGERED a 'temporary' status?

Dustin Surwill (dsurwill@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:43:13

*Thread Reply:* No, most of the time the previous status triggers an email to the firm therefore we can not put it back

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:49:52

*Thread Reply:* And do we normally send the Secondary AND the intake or just one?

Nicholas McFadden (nickmcfadden@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:50:56

*Thread Reply:* Usually just the intake

Nicholas McFadden (nickmcfadden@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:51:47

*Thread Reply:* but if secondary integration they are separate because we have to send when intake finalizes and the secondary hasn't been conducted yet

James Turner (jturner@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-07 11:52:29

*Thread Reply:* What's odd here is it looks like the secondary happened before the original by lead ID https://tortintakeprofessionals.lawruler.com/update-lead.aspx?lead=346128&Case=10

deleted-U04GZ79CPNG
2025-08-07 11:58:06

Hello! There are ~15 profiles from the paraquat 12 campaign that have this same situation: They were among the first few clients signed up and when the CSP agents got the list of clients to begin working on secondary interviews, they took the original intake file, turned it into a case (cannot be undone in LR), and changed the case type to the secondary interview case type. They then began completing the secondary interview in that profile. We need the intake and secondary files to be separate and it was less work for us to make duplicate intakes and input the responses than it would have been to revert back the secondary and redo the secondary interview. So, we made another profile, input all of the responses, and made them signed e-sign QA status.

This was before we knew about how to update LR with API and no one in my department could code. The import wizard at the time was only accepting CSVs of ~20 columns and it would take 3+ hours to map one import. We can swap them back now and make the one that was originally the intake the intake again and make the copy into the secondary interview to clean this up. I can grab a list of the affected profiles as well if you don't already have that