Clio and LawPay Are Breaking Up: What Law Firms Need to Do Before August 31
- TLTurner Group
- 11 minutes ago
- 9 min read
Executive Takeaway: On August 31, 2026, Clio will discontinue its native integration with LawPay. While both platforms will remain operational independently, the automated data bridge between them will stop. Waiting until the deadline leaves your firm at risk of manual data-entry backlogs, un-synced trust ledgers, and delayed collections.
The Decision Firm Owners Must Make Today
A payment workflow can appear to be working perfectly—right up until one connection changes.
Clients receive invoices. Payment links function. Card payments reach the bank. Your team knows where to find the transaction, apply it to a matter, and reconcile the deposit.
That familiarity can create a false sense of security.
On August 31, 2026, Clio will discontinue its longtime integration with 8am LawPay. After that date, Clio Manage users will no longer be able to process LawPay payments through the existing integration. The agreement supporting the connection is expiring and will not be renewed, according to LawNext.
This is not a reason to panic.
Law firms will still have options. Clio will continue offering Clio Payments within Clio Manage, and firms may continue using LawPay separately outside the Clio integration.
But firms that currently rely on both systems should not treat this as an ordinary software update.
The decision affects how money moves from the client to the firm—and how that payment reaches the correct invoice, matter, bank account, trust ledger, accounting system, and financial report.
That makes the Clio–LawPay transition an operational and financial workflow decision, not simply a technology decision.
The decision firm owners need to make
Before August 31, every affected firm should be able to answer one question:
What will happen when a client pays us on September 1?
Your leadership team should know:
Which platform the client will use
Whether existing payment links will still work
What will happen to stored payment methods
How current payment plans will continue
Where trust and operating payments will be deposited
How payments will be applied to invoices and matters
How transaction fees, refunds, and chargebacks will be recorded
Whether activity will synchronize with the accounting system
Who will reconcile the deposits
If the answers are unclear, the firm is not ready.
What is actually changing?
The current Clio–LawPay integration allows firms to process LawPay transactions from within Clio Manage.
For many firms, that connection supports more than the client-facing payment screen. It may also affect:
Online payment links
Recurring payment plans
Stored payment information
Invoice application
Trust and operating account routing
Deposit reporting
Client and matter records
Accounting-system synchronization
Reconciliation procedures
The Oklahoma Bar Association has advised firms using both products to review their workflows now, including whether payments are automatically recorded in Clio, QuickBooks, or another accounting platform and whether trust and operating deposits are being handled correctly.
Firms generally have three paths to evaluate:
Move payment processing to Clio Payments: Maintains native payment entry within Clio Manage.
Continue using LawPay separately from Clio: Preserves your processor but requires establishing new manual posting protocols.
Select another payment provider: Evaluate third-party tools that meet the firm’s operational and trust-accounting requirements.
There is no universal answer for every firm. The right choice depends on payment volume, transaction sizes, current payment plans, accounting processes, staff capacity, reporting requirements, and trust-account obligations.
The wrong approach is allowing the deadline to make the decision for you.
Three things that could go wrong
1. Clients encounter friction when they try to pay
The first risk is also the most visible.
A client receives an invoice after the transition and clicks an outdated payment link. A recurring payment does not process as expected. A saved payment method is no longer available. A staff member sends payment instructions that refer to the old process.
The client may fully intend to pay. But every additional step between the invoice and the completed transaction creates an opportunity for delay.
The disruption could affect:
Recurring payment arrangements
Automated payment plans
Retainer-replenishment requests
Outstanding invoice reminders
Links embedded in invoice templates
Website and client-portal links
Engagement-letter instructions
Saved email responses
Payments taken over the telephone
This matters because payment friction eventually becomes a cash-flow issue.
A delay in collections can affect the firm’s ability to fund payroll, taxes, vendors, owner compensation, hiring, and other operating commitments.
Operational direction
Map every place where a client can initiate or receive instructions for a payment.
Do not limit the review to Clio. Examine your website, client portal, invoice templates, intake documents, engagement letters, automated emails, QR codes, payment-plan documentation, and internal scripts.
Assign one person to own the update process and confirm that each payment route has been tested before launch.
The client should not have to understand your technology transition in order to pay your firm.
2. Money reaches the bank but not the books correctly
A successful transaction does not guarantee accurate accounting.
An integrated process may automatically connect a payment to the appropriate client, matter, invoice, and account. If a firm continues using LawPay outside Clio—or introduces another process—some of those steps may become manual.
Integrated Sync (Automated):
Client Payment ➔ Processor ➔ Auto-Posted to Clio Matter ➔ Auto-Synced to Accounting
Standalone Process (Manual):
Client Payment ➔ Processor ➔ 🛑 Manual Entry Required ➔ Manual Reconciliation
Clio’s current guidance explains that firms may continue processing existing LawPay payment plans through LawPay, but those payments may not synchronize with Clio Manage and may need to be recorded manually. Firms should review the current Clio Payments setup and migration guidance before making a transition decision.
That creates several potential breakdowns:
A client pays, but the invoice remains open
A deposit cannot be matched to the correct matter
Accounts receivable is overstated
A retainer is recorded as revenue instead of a trust liability
Processor fees are omitted or duplicated
A deposit contains several client payments without a clear allocation
Clio, the bank, and QuickBooks report different balances
Month-end close requires additional cleanup
These may begin as small posting differences. Over time, they can undermine the reliability of financial reports and make cash-flow decisions more difficult.
For firms holding client funds, they may also complicate three-way trust reconciliation. The trust bank balance, accounting-system trust liability, and total individual client ledger balances should agree.
For additional guidance, review TLTurner Group’s law firm trust accounting resources.
Operational direction
Document the current payment workflow from beginning to end:
Client payment → processor → trust or operating bank account → Clio matter or invoice → accounting system → reconciliation
Then document the proposed future workflow.
At every stage, identify:
What happens automatically
What must be entered manually
Who owns the task
Which report verifies completion
How exceptions will be identified
How often reconciliation will occur
Who reviews the final result
If the future process adds manual activity, assess whether your team has the time, training, and accounting knowledge to perform it consistently.
A familiar or lower-cost processor is not automatically the better option if it creates unreliable financial records.
3. Trust payments, fees, refunds, or chargebacks are mishandled
Payment processing is more complex for law firms because not every dollar received belongs to the firm.
An earned fee may be deposited into the operating account. An advance fee or retainer may need to remain in trust until it is earned.
The payment process must distinguish between the two and route the money appropriately.
Firm owners should understand:
Which payments enter trust
Which payments enter operating
Whether trust deposits arrive in full
Which account absorbs transaction fees
Where chargebacks are withdrawn
How refunds are processed
How client ledgers are updated
How fees appear in the general ledger
Clio’s payment fee documentation explains how payment fees are handled, including the treatment of trust and operating transactions.
Clio also provides separate guidance on payment disputes and chargebacks, including how disputed transactions affect invoices and bank activity.
Those platform features are important, but firms must still confirm their own configuration and understand how each processor under consideration handles client funds.
Selecting a trust account from a setup menu does not replace an end-to-end review.
Scenario | Operating Account Impact | Trust Account Impact |
Earned Fee Collection | Direct deposit | No impact |
Retainer / Advance Fee | Processing fee deducted here | Gross funds deposited in full |
Disputed Chargeback | Disputed amount & fee debited here | Protected from debit |
Operational direction
Test the workflow using the types of payments your firm actually receives:
Earned legal fee
Advance fee or retainer
Retainer replenishment
Partial invoice payment
Payment covering multiple invoices
Recurring payment
Electronic bank payment
Refund
Return of client funds
Failed transaction
Chargeback or dispute
For each scenario, confirm:
Where the money is deposited
What the client sees
What appears in Clio
What reaches the accounting system
How the fee is recorded
What the billing team must do
How the transaction will be reconciled
The first time your team identifies a configuration problem should not be during a live client transaction.
Do not compare payment providers on rates alone
Processing fees deserve review, particularly for firms that collect large retainers or process significant monthly volume.
But the lowest transaction rate may not produce the lowest total cost.
The evaluation should also include:
Staff time required to post transactions
Time spent identifying and matching deposits
Payment-plan functionality
Stored payment-method migration
Trust-account protections
Deposit timing
Refund and chargeback procedures
Transaction and deposit reporting
Accounting-system synchronization
Client convenience
Support responsiveness
Reconciliation complexity
The cost of delayed collections
Clio’s setup and migration guidance confirms that firms moving from LawPay may need to make specific decisions about transferring stored payment methods and payment plans.
That is why this decision should not be delegated to one department without financial and operational input.
The better question is not:
Which provider charges less?
It is:
Which workflow allows our firm to collect money reliably, protect client funds, maintain accurate records, and reconcile transactions without creating unnecessary administrative work?
A four-stage plan for firm owners
┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐
│ STAGE 1 │ │ STAGE 2 │ │ STAGE 3 │ │ STAGE 4 │
│ Map Current │ ──►│ Select Future │ ──►│ Configure & │ ──►│ Launch, Audit & │
│ Workflow │ │ Operating Model │ │ Test Pipeline │ │ Monitor │
└─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘
Stage 1: Understand the current workflow
Before selecting a future platform, document how the firm operates today.
Confirm:
Whether LawPay is currently being used inside Clio Manage
Which payment links are active
Which bank accounts receive payouts
How trust and operating transactions are separated
Where payment methods are stored
Which clients have active payment plans
How payments are applied to invoices
Whether transactions synchronize with QuickBooks or another accounting system
Who completes the reconciliation
Do not make a future-state decision based on an incomplete understanding of the current state.
Stage 2: Select the future workflow
Evaluate Clio Payments, LawPay outside Clio, and any other viable option using the firm’s actual operational requirements.
The decision should include the firm owner or managing partner, administrator, billing team, bookkeeping or accounting team, and anyone responsible for trust reconciliation.
Document the final decision, including:
Selected processor
Bank-account configuration
Payment-plan approach
Stored payment-method approach
Expected automation
Required manual steps
Reporting process
Process owners
Launch date
Stage 3: Configure and test
Do not assume setup is complete because the account has been approved.
For Clio Payments, setup involves an application process followed by connecting payout accounts. Firms moving from LawPay must also select which information they want to transfer. Review the full Clio Payments setup instructions before launch.
Before launch:
Connect every required trust and operating account
Confirm account mapping
Test existing and new payment links
Review active payment plans
Test stored payment methods where applicable
Process test trust and operating transactions
Review settlement timing
Confirm fee treatment
Test refunds and disputes
Verify synchronization
Complete a sample reconciliation
Stage 4: Communicate, launch, and monitor
Update all client-facing materials before the transition.
This may include:
Engagement letters
Invoice templates
Payment reminders
Retainer requests
Website pages
Client-portal instructions
Automated emails
Saved staff responses
Internal billing procedures
Notify clients whose payment plans or stored payment methods may be affected.
Train the intake, billing, administrative, and accounting teams. Each person should understand what is changing, what is not changing, and when to escalate an issue.
During the first weeks after launch, monitor:
Failed payments
Unapplied transactions
Duplicate entries
Unidentified deposits
Trust and operating routing
Processor fees
Payment-plan activity
Client questions
Accounting-system synchronization
Complete an additional reconciliation shortly after launch rather than waiting until the regular month-end close.
The Clio–LawPay preparation checklist
Before August 31, confirm that your firm has:
Identified whether it processes LawPay transactions through Clio
Documented the current payment workflow
Listed all active payment links and instructions
Identified active payment plans
Identified stored payment methods
Selected its future processor and workflow
Compared total operational cost—not only transaction rates
Confirmed trust and operating bank-account mapping
Determined what will and will not synchronize automatically
Assigned responsibility for manual posting
Tested trust and operating transactions
Tested refunds, recurring payments, and failed transactions
Confirmed fee and chargeback treatment
Verified accounting-system entries
Completed a sample reconciliation
Updated client-facing payment instructions
Trained the team
Assigned a transition owner
Established a post-launch monitoring process
Do not wait for the payment process to fail
Payment workflows receive little attention when they are working correctly.
That is what makes this transition easy to underestimate.
The end of the Clio–LawPay integration does not need to become a crisis. It may give firms an opportunity to simplify their systems, improve reconciliation, and establish clearer responsibility for billing and collections.
But that outcome requires action before August 31.
Map how money enters the firm today. Select the future process deliberately. Test the full workflow. Communicate the change. Confirm that the accounting still works.
A payment system should do more than process a card.
It should help your firm collect revenue efficiently, protect client funds, maintain reliable financial records, and understand its cash position.
Is your payment workflow ready for August 31?
TLTurner Group helps law firms evaluate how payments move through their billing, trust-accounting, bookkeeping, and reporting systems.
If your firm is unsure what will happen after the Clio–LawPay integration ends, schedule a conversation with TLTurner Group to review the workflow and identify gaps before the transition.
Comments