The reported “Conveyancing Standards Bill,” a Private Member’s proposal brought before Parliament by MP for Dudley North, Marco Longhi, has prompted a lively response from Bold Legal Group Members.
The proposed Bill, which according to Mr Longhi would aim to:
“Protect people who wish to buy a house, sometimes their first home, from being exposed to risks which are currently not sufficiently visible or understood when at the point of purchase.”
In response Bold Legal Group members have shared their frustrations with the current system, which, according to one member highlighted the massive expectations placed on solicitor’s and conveyancer’s role in the transaction.
“We will be required to go out and do soil samples shortly!!!! Again – lay the blame and responsibility at the door of the Solicitor.”
While another responded:
“Again, it seems that the profession is becoming a scapegoat for the inadequacies of the system!”
For some the issues raised by the examples used highlight a lack of understanding of the wider involvement of other authorities within the process.
“Interesting approach… the examples highlight problems with planning permissions and the way local authorities deal with developments. The solution blames the solicitors dealing with the conveyancing. In reality in 99.9% of cases where you highlight legal issues clients carry on anyway, because who are we to prevent them from moving into their dream house? It is only when a problem occurs and with the benefit of hindsight clients look for somebody else to blame for a problem which may or may not have been foreseeable.
“If there is a problem with the planning system then fix the problem. Do not look to apportion blame elsewhere! Another example of a politician not having a clue about conveyancing!”
While others acknowledged that these issues are raised with home buyers who pay little attention to the legalities until it’s too late.
“Most of us point these matters out to a buyer and a few take heed and withdraw. Most are so besotted with the prospect if buying this house, they “take a view” which they only regret later.”
The recent news that the SRA are back on the case with price transparency makes for interesting reading, especially for those who have commented about the need for conveyancers to charge more to ensure the quality of the work.
“We need to increase legal fees. Whilst we do the work for the current low return, we do you are always going to find that robust practices are not always followed by all.”
“Interesting he talks about an increasingly cut throat business. I have said for years that price cutting leads to lower standards. That if the public want a good service, they have to be willing to pay for it. That we should sell in quality not price. But even now the SRA is pressing for more “price transparency” which just puts the emphasis on price once again. It’s the old cliche. You have three elements to conveyancing. Price, Speed and Quality. You can let the client control any two of those but not all three.”
This publication and Rob Hailstone, CEO of Bold Legal Group, have written to the MP requesting an advance copy of the proposed Bill.
One Response
“lay the blame and responsibility at the door of the Solicitor.”
Solicitors have had the benefit of trade restraint legislation since 1804 without using their influence to co-ordinate the home moving process sufficiently for the benefit of the consumer
Change long overdue