I disagree with James Brenan (see [2003] Gazette, 30 October, 16) and Simon Harris (see [2003] Gazette, 13 November, 16) about there being risks involved in answering part II of the seller's property information form.

There are just three questions to answer:

- Is the information provided by the seller in this form consistent with the information in your possession ?

- Do you have any information in your possession to supplement the information provided by the seller?

- Is there an indemnity policy ?

It is surely necessary to have answers to these questions from the seller's solicitors because in few cases will the seller have had access to the deeds when answering part 1.

That is evidenced by the large number of cases in which a seller is unaware that his property is affected by restrictive covenants.

Is it not a natural part of the seller's solicitor's function to check the deeds (and, more importantly the documents accompanying the deeds) to see whether there is anything there that contradicts the information given by the seller.

In appropriate cases, there is no difficulty in answering questions A and B with: 'All information in our possession has been provided with the draft contract.' How can a seller's solicitor answering part I be liable for any error in the information given by the seller in part II that is not apparent from information actually in the possession of the seller's solicitor?

Andrew Melling, Lionel J Lewis & Co, London