Building a case to pay

A recent article refers to the report by Zurich that 32% of professional indemnity claims relate to conveyancing (see [2002] Gazette, 23 May, 1).

So, what has happened to conveyancing? One only needs to attend one of the 'Conveyancing update' courses to realise that the majority of the 200 or 300 delegates present are well-seasoned troopers.

Indeed, it is difficult to see a young solicitor among them.

Clearly domestic conveyancing holds little attraction for the newly qualified solicitor.

Ask any conveyancing solicitor about the level of work and almost invariably you will be told that he is under considerably more pressure than at any time in the past.

This pressure, fuelled by the client's wish for matters to be dealt with ever more speedily, must surely add to the risk of errors occurring.

Another contributory factor could be the rise of the paralegal.

Such staff, who have often been promoted from being secretaries, need to be carefully supervised so as to ensure that they work within their level of competence.

It is a fact that solicitors' charges for conveyancing have not risen in line with other costs associated with moving house.

For consumers, this has been beneficial.

However, it could be argued that the time has come for the cost of indemnity insurance to be treated as a disbursement in the same way as search fees and Land Registry fees.

Perhaps the best people to organise this would be the insurers themselves.

In this way, the cost of the issue of a conveyancing insurance certificate could be treated as a disbursement in the true sense of the word.

There could perhaps be a flat rate charge of, say, 60 for the issue of such a certificate for either a sale or purchase, with the same fee applying on a nationwide or regional basis.

For those firms with a good claims record a credit or discount could be given on the insurance cost for the firm, while those whose claims record was not so good might be subject to a surcharge.

Dealing with indemnity insurance as a disbursement would not affect the competition that exists between firms within a given locality as conveyancing fees would continue to be set in the same way as they are at present.

Provided that the insurance companies did not increase the overall cost of insurance per firm, then for each 500 transactions completed at the rate of 60 per transaction there would be a saving in the insurance overhead of 30,000.

This sum could be used towards the cost of implementing risk assessment procedures and for staff training that can only lead to improving the service.

The public accepts charges for warranties in respect of other domestic products that they purchase, so why not for the domestic conveyancing product?

JLB Thorpe, Hillman Smart & Spicer, Eastbourne