As a law firm owner with an unshakeable belief that technology is the only way to support and protect the practice of conveyancing safely and effectively, I find the drip-drip of negativity on social media against this approach rather wearing. That said, I am with Evelyn Hall when she quoted Voltaire as roughly saying “I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it”.
Given that technology has transformed most of our lives for the better, it’s curious why such scepticism exists with lawyers. Over the last 20 years, nearly all types of business such as supply chains, financial management and sales functions have experienced significant improvements in productivity and efficiency by its use.
However, an experience last week may go some way to explaining why there are such challenges introducing new technology into the legal world, so I thought I’d share my experience.
Just do a bit of research and then listen
In a recent podcast, I explained that if software providers wanted to be more successful selling to lawyers, they should spend more time learning about the issues we actually face, not what they think we face. A few hours later, I was watching a technology demonstration over Zoom, and whilst not a direct criticism of the individual involved, it was a fairly typical experience and offers a partial explanation as to why lawyers are hesitant to adopt new technology.
Things didn’t get off to a good start. The person demonstrating the product admitted he’d only been at the company for a few months, having come from estate agency, so this legal stuff was new to him. Given that many lawyers are wary of agents, this definitely put him on the backfoot in building confidence and trust.
He asked us what we were looking for and our expectations; we explained we had a genuine interest in technology that would improve the updating process between us and the agent. He nodded and then spent 30 minutes showing us something that had nothing to do with this. The primary focus of his speech was the ease of use of the product and how much better it was than the competition. He even went so far to say that this meant because his product was better, he didn’t actually have competitors. Which we did find a little curious.
When he stopped to draw breath and asked us what we thought, we had to break it to him that, as we had told him, we were looking for another aspect of his platform. Which was obviously tricky, because he then explained that they had focussed on building what he had shown us, because “many other law firms have this issue”. Only, like every other one of those law firms, we have own special and issues and need technology to help solve those – not what he was showing us.
Then things got worse
It was when I pointed out that the solution he had presented was just one of many available, that things started to go downhill. Clearly frustrated that we weren’t blown away by the brilliance of what they had built, the sales person took the ill-advised step down the well-trodden path of arguing with us. Which, when you’re trying to build trust and confidence is not a good look. Unfortunately, this was not the first time we’ve seen this and it adds further credence to those who complain that people selling technology do not understand our issues. When people don’t listen or pick arguments with lawyers, it’s rarely ends in a sale. We have turned away some really promising products that could genuinely reduce our risks and improve our productivity, due to a salesperson being argumentative or just plain dismissive.
The sad reality
Unlike other sectors, our specific part of the legal industry has been chronically starved of investment in new technology due to a lack of demand and margins to afford the spend on this. This has resulted in more established firms struggling to invest in new products due to the overheads involved in managing the existing client base who have not been able to move to their latest versions.
The vacuum left creates opportunity for startups to develop solutions who proceed to do their best to gain adoption and traction whilst building a brand new product. Owners of these firms are often self-funded and offer stock rather than salary and predictable commission, which can make attracting seasoned salespeople a challenge.
If lawyers are going to adopt technology, vendors need to be more effective at understanding the problems they face, build solutions to solve them and hire people to communicate this. For this they will need funding and training, which needs to be spent on development and experienced sales people – unfortunately, it’s usually marketing where this money ends up.
Which does mean that sadly, we should all expect to see the technology adoption drought continue, to the detriment of us all.
Peter Ambrose is the owner of The Partnership and Legalito – specialising in the delivery of transparent and ultra-efficient conveyancing services and software.
Peter Ambrose: pambrose@thepartnershiplimited.com, 01483 579978
Press enquiries: Tracy Holland, tholland@thepartnershiplimited.com 01483 579978
7 responses
Could any lawtech advocates please explain why despite utilising more tech than ever before, conveyancing currently takes longer than ever before?
Conveyancing in 2024 takes longer than it did in the 80’s or 90’s, when the system was almost entirely paper based.
Lack of technology is not the issue.
Can we please have a proper, genuine debate about why conveyancing takes so long?
Simple. Increase in scope, reduction in (actual) conveyancers. Add to that failure of the profession to manage fee eradication, and failure to manage expectations of an Amazon-style delivery of the property.
Always happy to explain where the problems lie, and I can 100% confirm from direct experience that there is a HUGE lack of technology used in conveyancing.
The inefficiencies due to a lack of efficient technology are massive. Look at how pre-contract enquiries are handled along with requisitions.
That is nonsense.
Those firms who take the longest are those firms who over rely on technology at the expense of employing qualified and experienced conveyancers.
All law firms utilise technology. The fact is that those firms which value legal thinking are more efficient.
When it comes to Enquiries many of the issues arise from technology generated enquiries rather than a qualified or experienced conveyancer sitting down and thinking what needs to be asked or what replies are required. Our experience of portal generated Enquiries was that they were standard in nature and prolonged the process which would have been shortened of legal thinking had been applied.
The real issue is a lack of qualified conveyancers.
I second Julie West’s comments and would add the drip drip of the efficacy of digitisation and more technology is now beyond boring and evidence light.
Peter Ambrose really should take a good long look in the mirror…..
I’m unsure what this article is trying to say? It’s either:
1) Peter Ambrose would turn up to the opening of an envelope and therefore of course he’s likely to come across some products that don’t meet his needs.
2) It’s the fault of poor sales people that legal technology isn’t accelerating in his mind.
Todays Conveyancer…give me a break, this man has run out of anything creditable to say and he’s now just spouting complete waffle!
Technology.
Did anyone else get this call from a lender yesterday? Due to an unexplained tech issue with Lender Exchange please re-submit your certificate of title and funds request for completion on Thursday.
Funds release on short notice had already been confirmed via the platform on Tuesday; all chilled.
Then 4 panic calls from lender on Weds, requiring repeat entering of COT, priority search expiry date etc: lender unable to access COT data on the platform, only the completion date 🤯
To add to the drama the heavily accented caller was almost unintelligible. Had to ask him to slow right down, and repeat everything.
I said at the recent Law Society Special General Meeting convened, among other things, to challenge the headlong rush towards digitalisation of conveyancing, that tech slows us down all the time. This is a perfect example. Me and my team tied up for an hour taking calls, making file notes, transferring calls, stress levels sky high, repeating tasks, so tech can do its job.
Conversely a septic tank survey commissioned by email, carried out promptly, report with colour photos, diagrams and calculations has been shared quickly and easily, with all parties, within days 👍
Technology involved? Yes. Simply email and scanning. All law firms have invested in this tech, because it works!
Peter Ambrose: “our specific part of the legal industry has been chronically starved of investment in new technology due to a lack of demand and margins to afford the spend on this”
This oft repeated assertion misrepresents the position. We do invest in tech that works, and we are receptive to increasing use of tech.
But we are rightly wary of tech we don’t control, because we know from experience it sucks up our time and resources.
Land Registry, HMRC, Probate Registry, OPG, the courts, lenders and panel managers all use tech to achieve efficiencies for themselves, but at a cost: ever multiplying inefficiencies for users – conveyancers.
Is it any wonder conveyancers across the country are resisting the creeping takeover of prop tech and digitalisation?!
Information overload is at least part of the problem. And what is it that makes all that information available?