LENDER POINTS I read James Jacoby's letter and similarly despair at the lenders' determination to achieve a paperless process (see [2001] Gazette, 1 February, 19).

I recently received instructions from a building society informing me that it would only require copies of the register entries and no other documentation, not even in a leasehold transaction.

I enquired as to the position should it need to sell as mortgagees in possession and not be able to produce any ancillary documentation to an intending purchaser.

Its response was that 'the benefits to be gained from aLetters continued on page 17Continued from page 16 paperless process outweigh the risks involved in not having immediate access to the relevant papers if we have to repossess and sell a property'.

I wonder at the position of a solicitor acting for a purchaser and simultaneous mortgage of a repossessed property.

The solicitor's responsibility to the new lender will include investing title and obtaining all the usual NHBC, planning and building regulations, agreements, bonds etcetera - documentation which may not be forthcoming from the mortgagee in possession.

Who will bear the cost of gathering such information and imagine how much time this could take?Is there an indemnity policy for this scenario? If there is, I agree with Mr Jacoby, and question why the lenders need a solicitor at all.

Why, at such an expense to the profession, should we continue to act on their behalf?Vivienne Ives, Ives & Co, Nottingham