Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

When I was in practice (but mercifully not now) there were occasions when I would make a point of obtaining copy documents from the Land Registry in order to check signatures on registered documents. Just in case. Obviously this was not fool-proof but it seemed a good idea at the time.

On occasions I also asked to see signed papers before exchange or completion. It caused offense but that’s life.

It would be helpful if the duty of care could be extended to banks that allow crooks to use their facilities without liability.

If X & Co wish to transfer A’s Money to B, and Y Bank & Co, provide a façade for Z the crook to masquerade as B, why should X & Co be liable when Y Bank & Co is not?

When X & Co implements the transfer they give no authority to anyone to transfer the money to Z.

It seems daft to single out solicitors who authorise money transfers and not those who supply the means for the receipt (an onward transfer) of that money by a crook.

I dare say the idea would not be well regarded in some quarters.

Your details

Cancel