In one sentence
All active members of a firm now share a single monthly AI allowance instead of each having one of their own — and a paid individual plan is no longer devalued when someone joins a firm on the free plan.
Two errors that pointed in opposite directions
The old calculation was dishonest in two places, and to the detriment of both sides.
First, a firm subscription silently multiplied the monthly allowance per head. A plan, bought and paid for, had five times the effect where there were five members. That was never intended and never stated — it simply did not stand out as long as hardly any firm had more than one active member.
Second, a firm’s free standard plan could override a paid individual subscription. Anyone who had started alone, booked a plan and later joined a firm still on the free plan effectively lost what they had paid for. That is the more unpleasant of the two errors, because it concerns real money.
One pot, across all active members
The interface carries the sentence that describes the new rule: All firm members share the monthly AI allowance of the firm plan — a shared pool, not a separate allowance per head.
In practice that means consumption is added up across all active members. Someone who writes a great deal in one month draws on the same pot as the colleague who needs little in the same period. That matches the way a firm actually uses a tool — the load is distributed unevenly and shifts with the case files.
Purchased packages lie in the same pot
Additionally purchased token packages likewise belong in the shared stock. If one member buys a package, it covers the extra demand of the whole firm — it does not stay in the account of the person who happened to click the buy button. Otherwise the pool would have been introduced on one side and cancelled again on the other.
The higher-ranking plan prevails
For the question of which plan applies, the higher one decides: that of the lawyer or that of the firm. Where they are equal, the firm plan applies, which corresponds to the previous behaviour. The sole practitioner with a paid plan therefore keeps it when joining a firm on the free plan.
Why there is an additional lock at firm level
A shared pot brings with it a problem a per-head allowance does not have: if two members book at the same moment, both can proceed from the same remaining amount and the total drifts apart. Booking is therefore additionally locked at firm level, and the locks are taken in a fixed order. That is invisible when it works — and the reason the figure displayed holds.
What is expressly not in the pot
Two things deliberately remain per lawyer, and that belongs said, because “shared pool” would otherwise promise more than is delivered:
- The allowance for agent runs remains personal. It limits how many background runs a single person can trigger, and is thus also a cost brake against mistakes — shared, it would be weaker.
- The fair-use limit of the Fable add-on model likewise remains per lawyer.
What of this pays off for your firm depends on size and utilisation; the plans and the method of calculation are set out openly on the pricing page for firms. If a figure there does not match what you see in your account, that is an error and not room for negotiation — please report it to us.
→ Pricing for firms · Why Smart Legal Pro · Agents · For lawyers
