Risk management

Dud documentsIt is crucial that any final document prepared by a solicitor reflects the client's wishes and instructions.

It sounds simple, but all too often it doesn't happen.

And we find this problem in all areas of law.Jack owned a large property in a rural location.

The garden area was very large, and was proving too much for him to look after.

So it was at just the right time that an approach came from a developer who wanted to buy part of the garden.

Jack asked his solicitor if it was possible to have a clause in the transfer of part preventing the builder from erecting more than one property.

He explained that he could live with one other property in his immediate vicinity, but certainly no more.

No problem, said the solicitor.

But the final document did not include the covenant.

The developer obtained planning permission for three smaller houses.Jane instructed Miriam, her solicitor, to draft her will.

She wanted to leave a substantial legacy to her life long friend, Alice, with the remainder to be divided equally between her two nephews.

As it was so straightforward, Miriam produced an engrossment without bothering with a draft.

Jane went to sign the will at Miriam's office, where she was asked to sign in the reception area.

She felt under pressure, and was a little embarrassed, as there were other clients in the area.

She signed without reading the will.

There was no legacy in favour of Alice, and the problem only came to light when Jane died.Nick was buying a business that was in trouble.

He saw that it had good potential, and that the problem was with the existing management.

The company had very large debts.

In the course of negotiations it was agreed that Nick would assume responsibility for one small debt; the other debts were to be discharged by the vendors.

The final document resulted in Nick assuming responsibility for the main debts, with the vendors being responsible for the one small debt.ABC Ltd had surplus office space.

The company agreed, with its landlords' consent, to grant a three-year sublease to another company.

After completion, a copy of the lease was sent to the landlords as they had requested.

They noticed that the term was in fact for six years and not three.

This was unacceptable to them, but perfectly acceptable to the subtenant.

The landlord threatened forfeiture proceedings.

In order to agree rectification, the subtenants demanded 'compensation'.l Always get detailed instructions from the client at the start of the retainer;l Confirm the instructions in writing;l Confirm in writing any amendments to the instructions which may arise in the course of the retainer;l Go through the draft and or engrossed document with the client before execution;l Check your original instructions, and any amendments, against the draft/engrossed document to ensure that they have all been incorporated;l Do not over rely on word processors, all engrossments must be proof-read.l This column was prepared by the St.

Paul risk management team.