Society contacts Cable over HSBC as Nationwide culls 'dormant' firms
The Law Society has today written an open letter to solicitors outlining its strategy and guidance for addressing HSBC’s highly controversial decision to introduce a conveyancing panel comprising just 43 firms. President John Wotton has already complained to business secretary Vince Cable, while talks took place on Wednesday this week between Chancery Lane and panel manager Countrywide.
In the letter, chief executive Desmond Hudson urges solicitors to contact their MP in protest and consider using any shareholding they may have in the bank to air their grievances. 'This decision by HSBC is damaging both to the consumer interest and to the profession and operates in our view to no one's interest other than the short term interests of Countrywide and HSBC,' said Hudson.
Read the letter in full.
In a separate development, Nationwide building society is undertaking another overhaul of its own conveyancing panel, removing firms that have not done work for its customers in the last 12 months. The Society criticised the use of dormancy as a 'blunt instrument' that could result in firms that have high standards in conveyancing being removed.
Nationwide, which has around 10% of the UK mortgage market, has sent letters to some affected firms and will be sending others out over the next few weeks. A spokeswoman for Nationwide said today the action is a 'business as usual’ review to ensure that its panel is kept up to date with firms that are still practising.
She was not able to give an indication of the number of firms who might be removed, but said Nationwide will retain its panel of several thousand firms.
Firms with the Law Society’s Conveyancing Quality Scheme accreditation or which can prove that they have been active in the past 12 months will be able to appeal for reinstatement.
Hudson said he appreciated Nationwide consulting the Society on the move, but added: 'Dormancy based on zero transactions for Nationwide in 12 months is a blunt instrument for panel reviews. There are more sophisticated and accurate ways of assessing dormancy.’
Hudson acknowledged the opportunity to appeal removal decisions. He said: 'While we welcome what is yet another show of confidence in CQS from the lenders, Nationwide should look again at their dormancy criteria. It makes little sense for them to remove a firm based on dormancy with Nationwide when that firm has had an active 12 months with other lenders.’
He said Chancery Lane is in regular 'dialogue' with Nationwide and will continue to discuss the issue with them.
Comments
CQS
The attempts to use these culling of panels as some sort of tribute to the effectiveness of CQS really are rather pathetic, Mr Hudson.
That is old news, Nationwide
That is old news, Nationwide did that some time ago, and you just reapply.
Personally I am about to move away from my own mortgage with them as not being competitive enough.
Erm
Hold on, the first three paragraphs of this article are new, but the remainder appeared earlier under a different title.
The letter from the Society is a very odd document. It is clear that the Society has elicited little or nor information from Countrywide or HSBC. Asking solicitors to write to their MPs about the matter is ridiculous: the Society's job (now that it now longer has a regulatory function) is to represent solicitors and protect their interests. If a trade union told its members to write to their MPs, the union would be laughed at; its members would stop paying their subscriptions and join a more effective trade association.
What on earth is the point of the Sociey "making a small purchase of HSBC shares so that it may use that avenue to press its concern further"? Who came up with that idea? Give HSBC some more money, so that the Society can turn up at shareholders' meetings, say its piece and be completely ignored? Is that really the best which the Society can come up with?
Surely no transactions is 12
Surely no transactions is 12 months is the definition of dormancy. I note Hudson doesn't say what the "more sophisticated and accurate ways of assessing dormancy" are.
Oops - or even "in" 12
Oops - or even "in" 12 months!!
Des Hudson comments on the
Des Hudson comments on the Nationwide cull and as a sideswipe writes off redundant or sick lawyers lawyers:
Quote" I don’t think I would want a medical expert, surveyor or an accountant acting for me on something that was high risk and easy to get wrong if they hadn’t been regularly conducting that activity in the last 12 months. "
Tough luck then, eh Des if you've been out of a job or ill for the last 12 months. On the scrap heap with you.
I hope you don't have any reason to be off work for too long, though some might see it as a relief!
Now BANKER business conveyancing panels
Surely at this stage in Britains economic recovery the gods should be looking to protect small to medium sized law practices from banks carving up the legal pie. More negative news for middleclass professionals will not help the high street which is already struggling.
In the gazette a while ago there was an article about Harry Hill (not the comedian with the same name) whom I understand has or may set up an ABS law firm to do conveyancing. It is the same Harry Hill who was or is a non-executive chairman of Countrywide? If so the proposed changes may benefit Harry Hill and top businessmen like him which may not necessarily be in the best interests of the consumer and is undoubtedly a threat to the independence of the legal profession which is of course a fundamental pillar of our democracy.
The same person was invited as a guest speaker at a 2008 Estate Agent Seminar and on the promotional literature it reads:-
"Harry joined the board of Countrywide 21 year ago and was managing director until the end of 2006. He was appointed as group chairman in January 2007. Qualified as a chartered surevyor in 1967 he was formerly managing director of Abbots (East Anglia). Harry is also a non-executive of the Jupiter Financial Income Trust."
I hope Desmond Hutton is aware that if the issue of consumer interests and the conveyancing panel "cull" is considered by the Legal Services Board then he obtains a copy of the current Register of Member Interests whose member s in 2009 included people who would need to declare an interest an abstain from voting on matters which involve BANKER interests.
On the copy of the Legal Services Register of interests 2009 I have seen the board includes
"A NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF NEW STAR PRIVATE EQUITY INVESTMENT TRUST PLC"
and a member, who appears to be a solicitor and NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HSBC Bank PLC
As Conservative I would urge the coalition government to pass legislation to prevent BANKS getting involved in the legal profession to the detriment of the real interests of consumers (CHOICE AND THEIR CHOICE AT THAT!). Leave the banking to them and legal services to lawyers.