Report comment

Some silly comments as usual, but also level headed ones by:
Stephen Desmond, James Godden, Andrew Finkel, David Cairns, Marshall Hall, Robert Hailstone.

Clearly all conveyancers know of the issues, and will be taking steps to make sure current practice accommodates the issues, whether they are legally correct or not.

However, it IS the grubby side of the profession, as quite frankly, each case should be considered on its own merits. Both asking where did a conveyance fail to advise where a prudent one would, and what is the actual loss suffered. I agree, that with the spotlight on leaseholds, landlords should be all too accommodating to amend leases to bring them the right side of controversy. I know one landlord sending letters out offering variations for free.

Purchaser's lawyers immediately have the protection of what the reasonable and prudent conveyancer would have done at the time.

And also, the absence of any warnings in the numerous changes to the CML handbooks over the years too. I have yet to check the various editions of the Law Society Conveyancing Handbook, but I suspect there is little in there too.

One element - the £250/£1000 threshold for an AS - is surely the result of 'CPD course hysteria' but I have to ask, which court in the land would apply that to a long lease, and cause national panic?
Even Lenders are only slowly adding to their CML Part 2, and many just require the 'starting rent' to have been those amounts. I have seen one lender say 'of course we have no issue'.

However, expect big improvements to the whole area if the Government is serious about tackling leaseholds - managing agent fees will surely be targeted, solicitors acting for landlord too, as will ground rent amounts. Not a good time to be a landlord or solicitor/managing agent associated with a landlord.