Conduct and serviceIncorrect accountingOne of the most frequent complaints in conveyancing matters is incorrect accounting.

Another is the solicitor's failure to ensure that all encumbrances are cleared.

A recent case combined both these factors and demonstrated the need for solicitors to have a reminder system to ensure that all possible angles are covered.The solicitors had been instructed jointly by Mr and Mrs N, who had divorced, in the sale of the former matrimonial home.

The sale was completed and the net proceeds accounted for.

Two months later, the solicitors wrote to both Mr and Mrs N, telling them a second charge to a bank, of 16,000, had not been repaid.Remarkably, three weeks before exchange of contracts, the solicitors had informed their clients they had become aware of the second charge, which would have to be repaid on completion, and asked for instructions.

Even more remarkable was that the solicitors acting for the purchasers omitted to ask for an undertaking on completion, so one was not given.

In effect, both solicitors involved overlooked the second charge on completion.It was, the purchasers' solicitors who raised the matter with the solicitors, finding themselves in the position of having to make the repayment to the bank, although they had a right of recourse from Mr and Mrs N.

The complaint was from Mr N.

He had disposed of his share of the proceeds by paying off private debts, buying a small car and giving money to his children.The solicitors conceded their own error, but argued that Mr N must have known that the second charge, which had been in existence for nine years, had not been repaid and that when he received the completion statement making no mention of it, he should have checked it and had he done so he must have realised the omission.

In the event, neither Mr or Mrs N raised the matter at all.The excuse that Mr N must have realised that there had been the omission was in effect an attempt to saddle him with the blame for the solicitors' own shortcomings.

He was entitled to assume that the solicitors had done their job, particularly as it must have been clear to Mr N that they knew of the second charge and had told him that it would have to be repaid on completion.The firm's costs were reduced by 100 and they were ordered to pay Mr N 350 compensation for the worry and distress he had been caused.

There was no appeal.l Every case before the compliance and supervision committee is decided on its individual facts.

These case studies are for illustration only and should not be treated as precedents.