The Land Registry announced last week that the first stage of the process that will see all conveyancing transactions carried out electronically by 2010 - the chain matrix system - will be prototyped from autumn this year.

Under the new system, solicitors will no longer have to send paper documents to each other, but will be able to transfer them instantly electronically.


The matrix will signal readiness for exchange and completion and will have notepad and messaging facilities. By logging on to the system, solicitors will be able to communicate with other parties in the chain, access up-to-date information on what stage other parties are at and identify any hold-ups.


The system will be trialled by 80 law firms in Fareham, Portsmouth and Bristol for a six-month period, with the second phase of the programme being rolled out in July 2007, when parties will be able to exchange contracts electronically.


The Registry said the purpose of the prototype was to test the usability of the service, ensure it contains no bugs and assess the impact of e-conveyancing on the wider conveyancing community.


It is currently working with IBM to develop the hardware and infrastructure needed to run the system and anticipated that the chain matrix will undergo 'considerable transformation' as a result of the trial.


A spokeswoman for the Registry said: 'It is predicted that this new system will reduce delay in the whole property-buying process and lessen the anxiety that clients feel when they do not know what is happening in other parts of the chain.'


Paul Marsh, chairman of the Law Society's conveyancing and land law committee, said the matrix was good in principle as it would bring greater transparency to the process, but questioned whether it would have the predicted impact in practice.


'A good number of the profession is already very IT literate and geared up for this, but the solicitor is still reliant on the client and other parties to provide them with the information to put into the matrix,' he suggested.


He also questioned whether greater transparency was in everyone's interest.


'A buyer or seller may want to keep the situation a bit cloudy. Once you get all this transparency, a lot of the options will be removed from the parties. I am not sure that members of the public actually want this.'