Abbey strikes thousands from conveyancing panel

Hundreds of solicitors across England and Wales reacted with shock and dismay last week after mortgage provider Abbey halved the size of its panel for residential conveyancing.

Some 6,050 law firm offices have been removed from the 12,000-strong panel as part of a rationalisation by Santander, Abbey’s Spanish owner.

Abbey’s head of customer services, Keith Bowran, wrote to the firms affected on 16 March, stating that their panel membership had been revoked because of ‘the low volume of transactions dealt with by your firm’ over the past year.

By Monday this week Abbey had already received 542 letters of appeal from solicitors’ offices, 319 of which have transactions in the pipeline.

The Law Society called for an urgent meeting on the issue, which concluded as the Gazette went to press. Chancery Lane secured concessions which saw 244 of the 319 offices reinstated to the panel, with the remaining 75 expected to follow.

Chief Executive Des Hudson said Chancery Lane and Abbey were preparing an update to the profession explaining the practical implications of the decision.

Hudson said: ‘At the moment, if you are buying your house with an Abbey mortgage and your solicitor is not on the panel, Abbey had been saying you can’t use them. We are inviting them to reconsider.’

The Society plans to meet Abbey again next week. It will argue that Abbey should not dictate who their customers instruct, as this adds to the complexity of transactions and inconveniences customers.

The development comes at a time when conveyancers are struggling to survive a protracted housing market slump. Barclays has also given warning of plans to revise its panel arrangements and ‘update its policy with regard to instructions’.

Mike McNeill, private client associate at 27-partner Westminster firm Winckworth Sherwood, said he was surprised and disappointed to receive Abbey’s letter. ‘The consumer is also the loser,’ he said. ‘The right to choose your own firm of solicitors is enshrined in the Code of Conduct.’