Report comment

Frank,
But don't many lender solicitors presently insist on redeemkng the sellers mortgsge direct from the buyers advance anyway?

No undertaking is required at all. Of course, they then have to rely on the lenders redemption figure, and the lender removing the charge, which most certainly cannot be guaranteed!

In any event, the solicitors undertaking was always a service which carried risk, but not properly billed.

I would also challenge your assumption that small firms undertakings are the riskiest. Surely it is large firms which are proving to be most unstable, as the banks were, and indeed still are.

It is the large firms which will have most claims on the Compensation Fund.

The world has changed; seeking to have a commercial business "legal industry" but with professional responsibilities and liabilities " for the public good" is madness.

If we are to the liability, it must be properly charged for; but even better not accepted at all. If some wish to take them on, fine; but the client won't pay and they will die out, to be replaced by a cheaper service without the liabilities. Not what I wanted, but that is the reality....and it is happening now!