Mortgage funding change
Mortgage funds must be transferred directly from the lender’s to the seller’s solicitor where conveyancers act only for the lender under new instructions published by the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML).
The rules, which amend part 3 of the CML Handbook, apply when a conveyancer is acting only for a lender rather than for both lender and borrower in homebuying transactions. They come into force on 2 July. The rules were drafted to cope with the increase in the number of cases where a seller’s chosen conveyancer is not on a lender’s panel, as lenders move to manage their panels more actively and cut the number of member firms.
CML director general Paul Smee said: ‘In most cases, the same conveyancer acts for both lender and borrower. However, where this is not the case it is important that both conveyancers know exactly what is expected of them so that any confusion is eliminated and resulting problems minimised.’
Jonathan Smithers, chair of the Law Society’s conveyancing and land law committee, said that while he hoped joint representation would continue to be the norm: ‘We recognise that a variety of factors may mean an increase in the number of cases where separate representation is used and we hope that the new instructions will provide some consistency in those cases.’
He added: ‘We are working with lenders to help ensure that our Conveyancing Quality Scheme supports lender confidence in operating broad panels.’ The new instructions, together with a set of voluntary example letters designed to help ensure complete clarity between conveyancers acting in transactions where the lender and borrower are separately represented, are on the CML website.
Comments
A lack of control or no more piggy in the middle?
A lack of control or no more piggy in the middle?
We are in the middle of a sale where the buyer's lender is being separately represented, and everything has taken so much longer because of it. The buyer's solicitor is getting frustrated at repeating everything twice (three times if the agent wants updating!) I'm sure one less thing to duplicate would be a good idea.
However, in the spirit of having all your ducks in a row, you would still be wholly reliant on the lender's solicitor paying over in good time to not delay your sale.
Seems like a move toward separate representation for lenders.
Maintaining joint representation as the norm
While this is a useful instruction from the CML, to try and minimise confusion and unnecessary complications, I think it's great that the Law Society are working with lenders to try and maintain a norm of joint representation.
CQS is so successful in helping lenders and consumers ensure they are working with a trusted conveyancing firm. The more firms they can encourage to get involved, the better!
"CQS is so successful in
"CQS is so successful in helping lenders and consumers ensure they are working with a trusted conveyancing firm. The more firms they can encourage to get involved, the better!"
Hmmm. You could pay the Law Society (on top of the Practising Certificate fees which already outclass by a significant margin those paid by other lawyers to their regulators) an "Application Fee", and a "Membership Fee" and an "Annual Accreditation Fee", and compulsory "Course Fees", to become CQS members, and have lots of extra fancy little office protocols, office manuals and office procedures in lever arches on the bookshelf, and give ridiculous acronym job titles (on top of the COLP and COFA that have already been foisted upon us) to members of staff such as SRO.
OR you could become a licensed conveyancer, pay half the practising certificate fees, a fraction of the indemnity insurance fees and no need to leech money to the Law Society, as apparently licensed conveyancers don't need any of this crap for some reason?
Why is it great that the Law Society are working with lenders to try and maintain a norm of joint representation?
victim
conveyance Solicitors have all the help they can get to fraudulently appropriate the mortgage funds together with the property and the Law Courts help them with judgements to swindle both the buyers & the Venders.
Majority of the property in London have been caught up in situation like this ,I wonder if the Government is at all aware of the situation. The Law Makers.