Like most things today, the trend for an intolerance of differing opinions marches onwards. Whether it’s politics, sport or heaven forbid, conveyancing, it seems that for a tiny but very vocal minority, if they are right then everyone else is wrong. Maybe this is the reason for the significant reduction in the number of comments and interaction we see after articles in trade publications – clearly, the bone-aching weariness of skip reading the bile produced by anonymous keyboard warriors is taking its toll.
When it comes to conveyancing, one of the most popular subjects right now is the Canute-like debate about the role of technology in the process. Given that since setting up my law firm many years ago, I have always believed in the importance of accurate data capture, I’m surprised these discussions are even taking place. That said, opinions are split into those who are actually doing the work today and have the experience to know that conveyancing is messy, unstructured and every case is different, and those who believe that if we’ve capture the data properly, technology will find a way to deal with it.
That’s why, if you have attended any conveyancing event or listened to any roundtable discussion in the last few years, you’ll have endured the usual circular arguments where the ‘experienced lawyers’ claim the ‘data first’ people don’t understand the nuances and the need for human input, and the ‘data first’ people believe the system is inefficient because it’s too reliant on individuals.
And the reality?
Despite the best efforts of those that walk amongst us to divide and harass, the reality is there are fundamental flaws with both views. Rather than trying to rally the locals, Shrek-like, to grab their pitchforks and attack the technology interloper, it’s important that as lawyers, we address the most pressing and imminent threat to our well-being – the relentless increase in client use of ChatGPT accompanied by their rush to produce AI generated letters to the ombudsman and our regulators.
Taking care to avoid the glibly-simplistic and patronising opinions that “technology will not replace lawyers, they will be replaced by lawyers using technology”, the reality is that as lawyers we have little choice but to change our approach to how we practice law. This is because the very thing that makes lawyers such a critical part of the conveyancing process, is our biggest weakness. When it comes to helping highly stressed and upset clients, dealing with unpredictable events and changes of circumstances, it is clear, that humans have the monopoly on that skill. Those that are suggesting that clients will be happy to rely on self-service without the need for empathetic and experienced people to calm their fears, need to listen in to the types of telephone calls and read the emails that lawyers are receiving.
The problem is that because we rely on humans to deliver these types of skills, this means we have to accept the rest of the baggage that goes along with being human as well. Humans, by their very definition are not machines, so they WILL make mistakes, forget things and become upset when faced with high pressure situations. Which is completely understandable, justifiable and indeed reasonable and as a law firm owner, it’s my responsibility to ensure that when such events occur, we support our colleagues, address the problem, and most importantly, move on.
But the reality of current life means …
Unfortunately, when a lawyer has made a mistake or forgotten to do something, we try to justify this with the sagely saying, “we are only human” which is where the polarisation between the ‘experienced lawyer’ and the ‘data first’ people is highlighted. In my experience, most of the mistakes we see in conveyancing are due to lawyers either not double checking their work themselves or with a colleague or rushing to get something to a client who has been pressurising them.
It’s obviously never advisable to use the “only human” excuse with a client when an issue occurs, because at that moment, all the human benefits of empathy, understanding and kindness are completely irrelevant. Clients want the output of the human to be flawless, immediate and without ambiguity – exactly what technology delivers.
Which means when it comes to the future of technology and conveyancing, we must take into account the role and expectations of our clients, as this requires an understanding of this nuanced complex relationship, which warrants more than the simplistic accusations that technology cannot replace humans.
About the author
Peter Ambrose is the owner of The Partnership and Legalito – specialising in the delivery of transparent and ultra-efficient conveyancing services and software.
The views expressed in this feature are those of the author and not those of Today’s Conveyancer.
