The contaminated land regime contained in part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 came into force on 1 April 2000.

It provided for a 15-month strategic planning period for local authorities to formulate policies for dealing with this complex issue.That period expires at the end of June 2001, so it will soon be open season for the service of notices requiring the remediation of seriously contaminated sites.It has long been a concern of practitioners acting for purchasers of land - and indeed, those acting for sellers - that costly liabilities may be inherited by buyers even in routine domestic transactions.

And it is against this background that the Law Society has this week issued a warning card by way of guidance to the profession as to how to deal with this matter in every land transaction.Risks and liabilitiesWhile the warning card understandably focuses on the contaminated land regime, it points out, rightly, that this is by no means the only risk faced in conveyancing transactions.

The new regime concentrates on sites that are significantly contaminated in the sense that they will give rise to significant harm to people or property and while this may be true in some cases, most sites will not be so seriously polluted as to fall within this definition.

Those that do will attract considerable remediation costs, so its importance must not be underestimated -- like an earthquake, the new regime will not strike often, but will cause considerable disruption if it does.Equally, if not more, important is the risk that some issue of lesser severity may have an impact on the land, or the occupiers of it.Such risks include:-- Other legal liabilities for example, for water pollution or civil nuisance;-- Structural instability of the site;-- Health effects;-- Delay while removing a source of concern;-- Cost;-- Perceived blight;-- Devaluation of the asset on the open market.Steps to takeThe warning card provides that practitioners must 'in every transaction, consider whether contamination is an issue'.The implications of this form of words are significant.

Every transaction, however routine or mundane it may seem, carries a risk of some sort of 'environmental' problem related in some way to contamination or other land-use issues.

That risk may be so minimal as to be discountable in the majority of cases, but one cannot know this without some examination of the risk in the first place.Ignoring the issue is no longer an option.

Steps must be taken to consider 'whether contamination is an issue'.

This implies that solicitors must do more than merely mention the topic in passing in a letter or initial meeting with a client.

Merely saying 'have you thought about the issue of land contamination (to which the response will typically be 'no - it never crossed my mind') will not be enough.

The guidance suggests that some active consideration of whether, in fact, there is or may be a problem is required.Practitioners may be concerned that this requires a degree of expertise which they do not possess.

While this is a concern up to a point, the rudiments are not difficult to grasp, and the Society's Environmental Law Handbook is written precisely to be of assistance to the non-specialist.

The warning card also points out that it will be necessary, in cases of doubt, to engage others with specialist expertise to investigate further and interpret any informatio n which may be forthcoming from routine investigations.The card suggests several steps which should be routinely considered:-- Discussing issues with a client.

This would require some meaningful discussion of the possible risks and further steps which could be taken to identify and evaluate them, rather than merely mentioning contamination in passing and 'ticking that item off the checklist';-- Making preliminary enquiries of the seller.

Several precedents are available and can be tailored to the specific circumstances of the transaction.

A practice of always raising the same comprehensive set of questions regardless of the circumstances will merely serve to annoy and will not elicit any meaningful responses, so practitioners must exercise discretion;-- Undertaking searches of the regulatory bodies.

This should become as routine as coal mining searches have in certain areas, although some bodies are more able to respond quickly than others;-- Obtaining a commercial search.

This is the really new step in the process, and would add a degree of cost to the transaction, which clients may not wish to bear.

However, commercial searches offer a wealth of accessible information (including information held by the regulatory bodies) at a cost of £20-40.

Sold sensibly to a client, this is a cost of minimal size by comparison to, say, stamp duty, and may enable a client to guard against huge liabilities later.

Most commercial search providers have products already geared to the residential and commercial markets, and practitioners should take steps to decide which product is most appropriate for their needs in this area.

The products will indicate the matters of concern which can then be investigated further, or discounted, as the client, with advice, sees fit;-- Undertaking site investigations.

This is unlikely to be necessary in residential cases, but could be considered in commercial transactions or cases of extreme concern, as the only way to determine the exact extent of a risk is to make intrusive investigations on the site itself, although this is costly;-- Contractual protections.

Not really appropriate in residential cases, this may nevertheless be relevant in commercial transactions as a way of determining responsibility for a liability;-- Obtaining insurance.

Environmental insurance is increasingly available to deal with some of the perceived risks associated with contaminated land, and again, the premiums are now at reasonably affordable levels, approximately £20 to £40 to buy ten years' post-purchase cover.

However, practitioners should note that most commercially available insurance policies which purport to cover such risks are restricted in their wording and cover.

Different insurance products offer widely differing levels of protection, often for similar premiums.

Insurance cover is generally limited to the costs and expenses incurred in meeting a legal liability for contaminated land - only one of several possible problems faced by a purchaser.

Not many sites are, for example, likely to be formally designated as 'contaminated' within the meaning of part IIA (so there is little risk to cover), insurance may cover the cost, but not the inconvenience, dislocation, disruption and psychological upset of a clean-up operation, which could take several weeks, months or even years to complete.

Practitioners should be wary of pursuing insurance as the only route to dealing with the professional matters referred to in the warning card.Environmental risks are increasingly important in land transactions.

Clients are awar e of this, and have a legitimate right to expect advice in appropriate cases.

They would expect their solicitor to be the party to give that advice.

It may be negligent to fail to do so.

An approach which looks upon the matters raised by the warning card as mere window dressing may miss some potentially costly liability which would have repercussions for the solicitor and the profession.

Steps can be taken at moderate cost which would head off such a risk.

Practitioners need to embrace this new area of expertise - it may even provide marketing opportunities for those courageous enough to tackle it sensibly.