Report comment

(Anonymous (9 April 2018 20:04 GMT) we all agree, well said! The estate agents who are guilty are such a shame for everyone else in the process. We are so impressed with estate agents we now actively promote the very best ones we work with on our website, and we keep adding to it. Still waiting for a high street chain to feature.)

Personally - as I actually care about the public receiving a decent legal service for their hard earned £s - to ensure home owners are sitting on fewer legal defects caused by conveyancers, faster deals and cheaper home moving:
1. There should be a complete ban on:
- conveyancers making any payment (apart from commission, though Marshall Hall makes a great point) whatsoever to estate agents - referral fees (and the usual ways to circumvent)
- conveyancers owned by / working in-house with estate agents

Smacks of a total conflict of interest otherwise. But it has to happen at once to all.

2. There needs to be an urgent ban - no exceptions this time - on certainly the same lawyer, and definitely the same law firm, acting for both seller and buyer - applying to solicitors, licensed conveyancers and legal executives - it has to stop by non-solicitors, and also solicitors, as shamefully, we see breaches by solicitor firms despite the stringent SRA rules of 'not 'wanting to see it happen as routine'. We imposed an instant ban within our firm when the new outcome focussed regulations by the SRA removed the old ‘established clients/separate offices’ exemption, as we too on board the SRA's concern - that the public come first, not profiteering from them. True, deals would fly if we were on both sides BUT that is because to the poor standard of conveyancers out there

3. Consequently THE BIGGEST ISSUE for the Government to actually tackle is the quality of the ACTUAL CONVEYANCER. But are they brave enough - as powerful vested interests to perpetuate the status quo will be acute.

Basic fact - tomorrow, we could badge our office cleaner as a conveyancer and let them loose. That is madness, but there is no regulation preventing it. And profiteering legal business knows it, hence why the standards out there are too often appalling. The irony is, the public never ask "please tell me about the person handling the legal conveyancing" when they seek a conveyancing quote, and so mediocre conveyancing gets worse and worse as legal outfits can charge the same or more than employing an expert qualified conveyancer. But how do they get work if they are mediocre? They throw huge sums at those estate agents, mortgage advisers, comparison websites, who care more about cash bungs than the quality of the conveyancer.

4. It makes me furious when I read - I won’t mention VEYO - suggestions that more IT is any kind of solution to making conveyancing quicker, more accurate, or in any way addressing my point 3 - it doesn’t. Talk of more IT this and that, electronic this and that, digital this and that, is a complete mask for not improving the poorly skilled conveyancers. Fix the person first, then give them more fancy IT if you have to.

5. BTW - Fix point 3 and there will be a dramatic decline in unnecessary legal indemnity insurance policies for issues that are not issues - cheaper home moving for the public too