When I attend a conveyancing lecture, the firm offering it often poses a question: ‘What further topics do you think should be covered in our lectures?’ My reply is always – I would like a lecture on the utility of the insurance policies that purchasers’ solicitors demand we provide on about 60% of our conveyancing transactions. I am convinced that these policies are provided for no better reason than to enable the purchasers’ solicitors to complete a tick-box.

Many of the documents we provide in this matter appear to be absolutely useless and the only entity that benefits is the insurance company.

Indeed, many of the questions raised by conveyancers appear to be meaningless. We are asked to provide copies of planning and building regulation consents, but unless the complete planning and building regulation package is handed over to the buyer’s surveyor, what assurance in the absence of a completion certificate do we have that the property has actually been built in accordance with the consents, unless the whole package is referred back to the buyer’s surveyor for him to make a detailed inspection?

Solicitors are not qualified to say whether works have been performed in accordance with the terms of the documentation – and if this is the case, what is the point of asking for them? It is noteworthy that most of the policies provide protection from the cost of prosecution for breach, not for the consequences of a breach.

Other examples are policies for breach of covenant. If the breach occurred 30 years ago and the freeholder suddenly claims, surely the defence to this is laches?

When I was in a position to ask an insurance company two or three years ago whether they have ever had a claim under one of these particularly useless policies, I received the not unexpected answer ‘no’.

R.M. Napier, Albinson Napier & Co, Warrington

Topics