The Treasury is consulting on whether the Financial Services Authority (FSA) should regulate advice on and the marketing of mortgages.

Conveyancing solicitors are in a unique position to help the Treasury.

They see nearly every mortgage transaction, although relatively few of them give advice to clients on which mortgage is suitable.

Clients have usually arranged a mortgage before they see a solicitor and so a conveyancing lawyer's involvement is limited to advising the buyer on the legal implications of the mortgage deed and ensuring that the mortgage is registered to protect the lender.Sometimes solicitors become concerned because a client appears to have arranged an unsuitable mortgage.

But by the time this can be pointed ou t, there is a danger that any delay caused by finding a new mortgage may lose the client the opportunity to purchase another property.

Too often a client sticks with a bad buy made in haste or under pressure.The question is, will the regulation of mortgages by the FSA help clients? Such regulation may well be helpful.

But the fear is that regulation could add to the costs for all involved, stifle innovation in the mortgage market and add to the timescale at a point when solicitors are working with the government to speed up the house-buying process.Problems in the present market should be accurately identified and then an assessment can be made as to whether targeted regulation -- going no wider than necessary -- can solve them.

It must be remembered that where a mortgage is linked to an investment product, then that investment element is already subject to regulation by the FSA.

The sale or 'churning' of endowment policies is still of concern, but the regulation of those policies is not directly an issue for this consultation.

It should also be noted that there is regulation in this area through the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1994, and the ombudsman schemes.

More recently, the voluntary mortgage code has sought to improve standards and one issue for the Treasury is whether the code has resulted in any improvements.The Treasury needs evidence to show whether lenders treat borrowers unfairly or unreasonably.

What is the experience of solicitors? Is marketing information sometimes misleading? Is it a fact that lenders tie in apparently attractive mortgage offers with the sale of other products such as buildings and contents insurance? Do clients come to solicitors unaware of lock-in periods and penalties? Are there different problems for clients who have arranged mortgages through brokers or estate agents to those who have dealt directly with a lender? Are there still complaints that particular mortgages are, by implication at least, tied in to the successful purchase of a particular property? Do clients appreciate the distinction between an independent intermediary who will consider a range of options and pick a suitable one for the client, and agents which sell only one product? Given the huge range of options, do clients understand the differences between the options?It would also be useful for the Law Society to hear the views of the profession on what the right regulatory solution might be.

Is it a question of improving the standards of qualification and training of those dealing with customers? Will the giving of prescribed information help?For those solicitors who would like to find out more about the Treasury consultation, it is available on http://www.hm.treasury.gov.uk/docs/1999/mortgage.html.

The Law Society can respond on behalf of the profession and so it would be grateful for input.

Real life examples will be particularly helpful.Finally, it must also be remembered that if mortgage advice is regulated, this will impact on those solicitors who choose to give mortgage advice as they may then need to be authorised by the FSA.

The Society thinks it is right to respond on the profession's own behalf, but primarily to respond in the interests of the profession's many conveyancing clients.