I heartily agree with Jonathan Goldsmith’s Euro blog ‘Notaries in revolt’ that much of what notaries do is ceremonial, unnecessary and ludicrously expensive.

As an English conveyancing solicitor I was appalled by the ridiculous pomposity of the whole property purchase system when buying properties in Spain some years ago. The costs were quoted to be 10-13% of the purchase price (vastly more than in England) with no firm advance figures because the notary apparently charges what he or she likes. The local land registry-equivalent fees are not predictable either.

Isn’t there a vulnerability to ‘backhanders’ here, with notaries setting their own fees and lawyers arranging for their favourite notary to oversee the completion? How can one be sure that a foreign solicitor will not take money from a particular notary to take out the appointment with that notary and not another?

Goldsmith’s description of a notary’s plush office is spot on, and the self-important notary’s job could have been done by anyone who could read and impress a seal. The designer-gear-clad lady from our solicitors’ office actually bowed to us after the ceremony was finished – I just wanted to be sick, it all seemed so unnecessary. The whole pantomime could be done away with completely and the cost of conveyancing greatly reduced if the Europeans would drag their conveyancing system into the 21st century – though I couldn’t say if European lawyers on the whole could be trusted not to abuse a system which, in England, relies on the trustworthiness of lawyers not just not to abscond with the money but to keep their promises backed up by a stiff disciplinary system.

I recall a meeting with a bank manager about one of our mortgages, at which he quoted huge figures for our case to be registered at the equivalent of the Land Registry, but of course he couldn’t say exactly how much. When questioned further, he said: ‘Surely in England documents have to be conveyed to the Land Registry and that costs money?’ I said yes, a pound or two for the price of postage. But it seems that documents are physically conveyed by someone to the land registry in Spain. Visions of a horse-drawn carriage guarded by uniformed pistol-toting officials came to me unbidden. I just about had to leave the room, I was so incensed.

The high cost of conveyancing in Europe must depress their property markets. It is no wonder that a far higher proportion of people in Europe live in rented flats. Even changing one’s mortgage conditions (say from repayment to interest only) apparently requires a notary appointment – quite unbelievable.

The British should be glad that they have so much more freedom of movement, in that they are able to move home relatively easily and cheaply, and they should stop griping about the delays and imagined high costs because it’s far easier and cheaper here than in Europe. Chains don’t happen in Europe – you have to sell and rent then buy, or bridge to buy before you sell.

I am not complaining about low conveyancing fees here, but rather about outlandishly archaic and expensive procedures in Europe, including those of the notaries. Notaries should get real and abandon their pre-Revolution posturings and practices and get into the 21st century.

With regard to our minimal rewards as conveyancing solicitors in England, Law Society chief executive Des Hudson is reported to have questioned ‘whether the market would continue to pay lawyers’ rates for work related to the transfer of title’. One option might, he suggested, be for solicitors to ‘take on more liability’.

There is a danger here that, if we continue to be squeezed and pressured to perform yet more feats for our minimal reward, only the large conveyancing ‘factories’ will survive, ultimately outsourcing telephone services to other countries and offering an even more appalling service than they do now – to the detriment of everyone.

Gill Mather, is a sole practitioner based in Colchester, Essex