Surrey Law Society adds weight to vote of no confidence

Surrey Law Society have thrown their weight behind calls for a vote of no confidence in The Law Society CEO Ian Jeffery, and President Nick Emmerson. As reported yesterday, the Property Lawyers Action Group (PLAG) have begun proceedings to initiate a Special General Meeting (SGM) in which it proposes to hold a vote of no confidence. 

It has been confirmed to Today’s Conveyancer that PLAG has now met the threshold of 100 signatures set out in Law Society Byelaws and has since sent on the formal Requisition today (6th June 2024)

PLAG describes itself as ‘a values-based organisation (which) came into existence last year because of the failure by the Society to defend the vital role of solicitors in conveyancing.’ Setting its stall out, PLAG say they are tackling concerns about the acceptance of material information and potential criminal liability for conveyancing firms.

In a post on the Surrey Law Society (SLS) President Dawn Lawson has updated members on concerns raised about the introduction of the updated TA6 form. In May Lawson wrote to The Law Society, expressing concern for SLS members who might face

• Increased Costs for Clients: The new TA6 form requires clients to engage solicitors before securing firm offers, potentially increasing their costs.
• Burden on Sellers: The form places undue responsibility on sellers to provide information that estate agents are required to gather, leading to duplication and potential confusion.
• Risk of Increased Insurance Premiums: Additional work from the new form could raise liability risks, resulting in higher insurance premiums and increased fees for clients.
• Impact on Smaller Firms: The complexity of the new form could push smaller firms out of the market, favouring larger firms that offer no sale, no fee arrangements.
• Strain on Conveyancers: The introduction of the new form adds to the already significant pressures on conveyancers, potentially driving more professionals out of the field.

as a result of the implementation of the fifth edition of the TA6. The latest post suggests there has been no response to those concerns, and is now pointing members at the PLAG website.

We regret to inform you that, to date, Dawn has not received a response from The Law Society regarding these concerns.

Additionally we wanted to advise that this morning, we were informed that the Property Lawyers Action Group (PLAG) has initiated a procedure for a vote of no confidence in The Law Society’s handling of this matter.

Surrey Law Society remains committed to representing the interests of its members. We urge you to share your experiences and concerns about the new TA6 form by contacting us… and to visit Property Lawyers Action Group (PLAG) for further information on how to add your signature to the vote of no confidence.

The Law Society have acknowledged it could have handled the implementation of the updated forms better in a recently published FAQs. PLAG have also challenged claims that practicing professionals were not consulted as part of the process of updating the forms. A freedom of information request asking ‘Please confirm the number of solicitors, who currently practice in residential conveyancing, who were involved in the creation of the 5th edition of Form TA6′ has confirmed

Four of the members practice currently, other members of the group actively advise practitioners day to day, operate as consultants within their firms and bring a wealth of experience of development of the forms over many years.

Pushed on the engagement of the Law Society in the production of National Trading Standard Estate and Letting Agents Team (NTSELAT) guidance for property professionals’ obligation under the CPRs, The Law Society responded

The Law Society was invited by National Trading Standards (NTS) to take part in a working group on the development of their guidance. Our representative was a Conveyancing and Land Law Committee member who currently practices residential conveyancing. We do not hold any information on the total number of solicitors currently practising in residential conveyancing who took part in the consultation with NTS as it was not our project. We would advise you to ask NTS for this information.

Commenting on Today’s Conveyancer Arthur Robinson of Emmersons Solicitors says

For me, the issue is the total lack of consultation and the lack of transparency. Who sits on the “working group”? Why aren’t they named? Who represented The Law Society and Conveyancers when the NTSLEAT created MI guidance?

Beyond that, The Law Society and the Conveyancing and Land Law Committee have been MIA and allowed the Conveyancing Association to fill the space. Conveyancers have been abandoned.

Another commentator, Andy, adds

The statements made by the Law Society on this matter have been very poor for a number of reasons

a) Lack of transparency in terms of who actually is making these decisions and amending these forms

b) The lack of thought due care and attention on their members who have to deal with the practical day to day realities

c) The seemingly forcing through of matters to benefit estate agents at the point of sale

d) The confusion and lack of understanding of what conveyancers are meant to do i.e. are we surveyors, are we valuers or should we only be dealing with the legal title

e) Despite the previous statement which I hold no confidence in the Law Society in, how are we protected against being sued for incorrect information and what negative impacts with this have on our indemnity insurance

f) How are clients and Conveyancers to be protected against the rising costs with the additional support that clients will need.