Publishing conveyancing solicitors’ track record on performance will not necessarily improve the home buying and selling process, the Law Society has cautioned - telling the government that more detail on proposed reforms are needed to understand if they will work.
Announcing the ‘biggest shakeup to the homebuying system in this country’s history’ last year, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said it was exploring options for publishing information on conveyancers, such as the speed and quality of their service.
‘Not only would this support consumers to choose the appropriate services, it would also provide the opportunity to compare services through a trusted source and ensure consumers are paying a fair price. Existing support services of this sort have been shown to save consumers an average of £490 per transaction,’ the consultation.
However, the Society highlighted in its consultation response challenges in publishing fair and accurate information. For instance, conveyancers might be blamed for delays caused by matters outside of their power to change. Conveyancers might also insist on waiting for a particular piece of information as their client would be taking an unacceptably high risk without it or the lender will not be satisfied.
‘It is also unclear to us why the government should get involved in providing comparative data for consumers. Many firms already use Trustpilot and other market rating sites. Firms that are Conveyancing Quality Scheme accredited can use this standard to show their commitment to providing good conveyancing services,’ the Society added.
The Society backed government intervention to drive up standards among estate agents, who should be required to hold professional indemnity insurance.
In a separate consultation, the Society said it was neither realistic nor desirable to define material information as a single standardised set of items that must always appear at the marketing stage.
‘Expecting estate agents to supply the full breadth of the government’s proposed [material information] in this consultation at the listing stage is likely to lead to inaccuracies, duplication, inconsistency and risk. Solicitors will be required to verify this information, and premature disclosure of unverified or misunderstood material may mislead rather than inform,’ the Society said.
A stage-based model for material information would be better, the Society suggested, with a further targeted consultation on the stages and division of responsibilities.
7 Readers' comments