1. Home
  2. San Diego, CA
  3. Personal Injury
  4. RTM Law, APC

RTM Law, APC

LFL Verified 2026Personal InjurySan Diego, CA● Accepting new clients
★★★★★ 5.0 · 204 Google reviews4 offices5 attorneysEnglish · Spanish
ContingencyFee model
FreeInitial consultation
24/7intake line
6Practice areas

About RTM Law, APC

RTM Law, APC works from four offices across California, among them San Diego, Santa Ana and Torrance, and names six attorneys.

204 reviews at 4.99 across four listings. Contingency fees, a free consultation, a 24 hour line and pages in Spanish, published.

What this firm has earned Every one from a measured value, with the evidence behind it

LFL Verified 2026

Every eligibility gate this firm's state allows us to check has been checked and held: licensure, discipline, entity, website and footprint. Certification additionally requires a score of 70.

No public discipline

No named attorney carries a disbarment, a suspension or a disciplinary resignation on the State Bar of California's record, across the 3 we identified. Administrative suspensions, which the State Bar states are non-disciplinary, are not counted here

4.99 average over 204 reviews

A high rating is easy at low volume and hard to hold at this one. Pillar C scores it against the market rather than against five stars.

Service in Spanish

Published by the firm on its own pages, which is how this was measured rather than assumed from a name.

LFL Certification Score Scored under Methodology v2.0 · rows tagged Registry, Observed or Ahrefs are measured; rows tagged Illustrative are sample values pending full verification

48out of 100
LFL Certification Score · Methodology v2.0Scored across 87 of the 87 points this firm's state lets anyone measure, out of 100 in the methodology: 13 of them need a register that California does not publish for us to read. Anything unscored counts neither for nor against the firm.

Verified

4 of 5 eligibility gates passed. 1 could not be answered from the available records (G3) and does not count against the firm. Strongest pillar: C; most headroom in pillar B (0/15).

LFL Verified 2026
17 points to Certified
65 needed · A+B+C floor not yet met (47% of the A, B and C points assessed)
Most headroom: A6 Roster verifiability: +6 available · B1 Results published: +6 available · A2 Experience: +5 available
G1 Licensure3 of 6 named attorneys hold an active California licence and none carries an adverse status. 3 name(s) could not be told apart from namesakes and are counted neither way
G2 DisciplineNo named attorney carries a disbarment, a suspension or a disciplinary resignation on the State Bar of California's record, across the 3 we identified. Administrative suspensions, which the State Bar states are non-disciplinary, are not counted here
G3 Entity & officeNot published by CA4 physical locations verified on Google Business Profile. California publishes no business register we are able to query, so the registration itself is not verified here. The state's own business search is the place to check it.
G5 WebsiteSite has served over HTTPS, a working phone number published, 5 named attorneys published, and 1 more person in roles the firm states are not a lawyer's.
G6 Footprint204 public client reviews across 4 Google listings, above the 10 minimum, and the firm's domain has been registered since 2020-02-13, so it has been operating for more than a year
Professional Standing
8/25
A2 ExperienceRegistryMean 5.3 years since admission across 3 of 4 named attorneys (longest 12, shortest 1) · NYS Attorney Registration database5 / 10
A6 Roster verifiabilityRegistry3 of 4 named attorneys matched to the California register; no bar number published on any bio3 / 9
A5 AccountabilityObservedno bar or trial lawyers' association named on the pages we read · no professional liability cover disclosed, which is not scored here: plaintiff firms in this market do not publish it, and an absence shared by every firm separates none of them0 / 3
BPublished Outcomes
0/15
B1 Results publishedFirm-submittedThe firm publishes no case results we could read0 / 6
B2 SpecificityFirm-submitted0 case types named; no court or county named, so no result can be looked up0 / 5
B3 Results disclosureFirm-submittedNo prior-results disclaimer on the results page. A past result is not a prediction of another one, and the disclaimer is the sentence that says so0 / 4
CClient Experience
19/20
C1 Authentic volumeObserved204 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 4 listings, counts summed and rating weighted by count4 / 5
C2 Rating qualityObservedGoogle rating 4.99 over 204 reviews → Bayesian 4.94 (prior 4.83 weighted as 100 reviews, from 1410 scored firms) · single platform, Google only6 / 6
C3 Review recencyGoogle17 of 20 sampled reviews are from the last 12 months (newest 2026-08-27) · a sample of five per business listing, not every review5 / 5
C5 Complaint shareGoogle0 of 20 sampled reviews rate 1 or 2 stars · a sample, so this is the shape of the complaints rather than a count of them4 / 4
DDigital Presence & Authority
8/25
D1 Website trust & experienceObservedCWV fail · no fee statement · privacy policy · no disclaimer · fresh content · scored out of 5 of the 7: nothing has measured accessibility or bar numbers on bios here yet, so it is not counted against this firm1.5 / 5
D2 Search authorityAhrefs · 2026-09-30DR 32 → 81th pct of 109-firm cohort (median 14) 2/3 · 936 referring domains, 44th pct 1/2 · 47 organic keywords / 151 visits·mo, 46th pct 1/2 · brand demand 0/1 (pending)4 / 8
D3 Local presenceGoogle4 operational Google Business Profile listings · 10 or more photos, which is where the API stops counting · 5 categories, hours published, which almost every listing here has and so separates nobody · the services list, Q&A and recent posts are owner-side fields the Places API does not expose, and NAP consistency across citations and local-pack rank have no source here, so the rest of this sub-factor leaves the scale rather than being scored as unearned1 / 1
D4 Content, E-E-A-T & schemaAhrefs · 2026-09-30JSON-LD detected 1/1 · not assessed on any firm yet, so content depth and earned media and AI citations leave the scale (4 pts)1 / 1
EAccess & Responsiveness
7/15
E1 Free consult & fee transparencyObservedFree consultation · Contingency · the fee percentage itself is not published3 / 6
E3 Languages & accessibilityObservedEnglish, Spanish1.5 / 4
E4 AvailabilityObserved24/7 intake line2.5 / 5
Next automated re-check: Nov 1, 2026 · Cohort: San Diego Personal Injury (113 firms measured)How the score works →

Digital presence snapshot

Pillar D signals, re-measured monthly. Paid advertising is not scored.

Domain authority
32· 79th percentile
936 ref. domains · cohort median 16 · Ahrefs rank 3.2M
Observed · Ahrefs, 2026-09-30
Trust pages
3 / 3
blog · attorney bios · privacy policy
Observed
Core Web Vitals
Failmobile
Performance 92
Observed · PSI, 2026-09-30

Attorneys 3 attorneys · every licence checked against the California attorney register · 1 more person is named by the firm without a role, so we do not call them attorneys · 1 person is named in a role that is not a lawyer’s

RM
Ramin T. MontakabPrincipal Attorney
SB
Sarah BeydounAssociate Attorney
JH
Jackson HoganAssociate Attorney

Also named by the firm

The firm lists this person among its team and prints no role beside the name, so we do not describe them as attorneys.

Also named by the firm, in a role that is not a lawyer’s

The firm names this person among its team and prints the role below beside the name. They are not counted as attorneys.

Client reviews

5.0
★★★★★
Based on 204 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 4 listings, counts summed and rating weighted by count · Quotes below are testimonials published by the firm

Offices 4 locations · main office: San Diego

San Diego591 Camino De La Reina #1020, San Diego, CA 92108, USA
Santa Ana1327 N Broadway, Santa Ana, CA 92706, USA
Torrance2916 W 16th St, Torrance, CA 90504, USA
Victorville16888 Nisqualli Rd #200, Victorville, CA 92395, USA

Frequently asked questions

How much does RTM Law, APC charge?
RTM Law, APC publishes a contingency fee, which means the fee is a share of what the case recovers and there is nothing to pay if it recovers nothing. The rate itself is not published, so ask for it in writing, along with how case expenses are handled and whether they come out of the recovery before or after the fee. The first consultation is free, which is the place to ask.
Does RTM Law, APC offer a free consultation?
Yes. RTM Law, APC publishes a free initial consultation. The intake line is published as open around the clock and it publishes material in Spanish.
Where does RTM Law, APC have offices?
RTM Law, APC publishes four offices, in San Diego, Santa Ana, Torrance and Victorville. Addresses and the Google listing behind each one are on this profile under Offices.
Who are the attorneys at RTM Law, APC?
RTM Law, APC names six attorneys on its own site, and each is listed on this profile with the page we read them from. They have not been checked against a state register: California does not publish an attorney register we can query, so licensure is not verified here. The state's own attorney search is the place to check it.
What has Law Firm Listings verified about RTM Law, APC?
RTM Law, APC scores 48 and sits at Verified. Passed: website and footprint. Could not be answered from any public source and therefore counts neither for nor against the firm: licensure, discipline and entity registration. Every row of the scorecard above names where the value came from and when it was read. Nothing on this profile was supplied by the firm for payment, and no placement here can be bought.