The “red tape ridden” system of buying a home is to blame for transaction delays more than individual conveyancers, agents or public bodies, a senior property professional has claimed.
Rob Hailstone of conveyancing network the Bold Legal Group said he is optimistic things will improve this year when further upfront material information is required on property listings.
It comes as the Land Registry earlier this week singled out conveyancers for making “basic errors” on property forms that it said caused delays in transactions.
But Hailstone has questioned if there is a better way to seek improvements than, albeit inadvertently, tarring a whole profession.
Writing exclusively for Estate Agent Today, he said: “There must be a number of conveyancing firms who are the biggest and repeat offenders. In which case tackle them direct, fine them maybe and name and shame them if all else fails.
“Most of us know that delays at the HM Land Registry (HMLR) are at an all-time high, up to two years in some cases, and I receive on an almost daily basis, numerous examples of poor service and ‘basic errors’ being made from and by HMLR, but I don’t want to set them out here because that just adds more fuel to the fire and continues the blame game.”
Hailstone said conveyancing is a very different occupation than it was 15 or 20 years ago and is “far more challenging.”
He added: “It isn’t conveyancers, agents, lenders, local authorities, or even HMLR who create the majority of delays, but the bureaucratic and red tape ridden system or process.”
Hailstone said matters are getting worse and suggested agents may soon get hit with issues around lender requirements on flat sales with cladding issues.
But he added: “I am optimistic that things will improve this year. Hopefully that will happen after phases B and C of the material information changes are introduced, when conveyancers will need more than ever, to be instructed at the point of marketing.”
Hailstone highlighted a quote to sum up what home moving looks like from the outside in.
He said: “A conveyancer asked her client what her home moving experience was like. She replied: ‘It felt like war between the conveyancer and the estate agent with us in the middle.’
“That perception has to change and blaming each other will not help do that.”
.jpg){kind=avatar}
/queen%20elizabeth%20ii_400x310.png)
%20-%20IMAGE%20Client%20Accounting%20%E2%80%93%20what%20are%20your%20options.jpg)
.png)
.png)
.png)
%20(002).png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Conveyancing seems to be the only area where absolutely everybody involved with home buying and selling has a story of gross incompetence about though.
With that story always being fairly recent.
Yesterday was just another day.......watching a lady crying her eyes out because despite having exchanged, yesterday on completion day she gets a call at 11am to say 'a charge has been missed on your property and your buyer won't complete until it is removed'
By 1pm she looked like she was about to have a stroke.
And this ross incompetence yet again wrecked a moving day experience.
She asked me if this sort of stress was common, I told her that where conveyancers are concerned, yes, it's perfectly normal now. Generally you can't trust the service levels.
It's weekly, that stories are generated. About conveyancers.
Conveyancing has very unfortunately become a laughing stock within house moving. And no amount of articles wil change that.
Performance has to change.
And until the grotesquely woeful service is acknowledged, it never will.
We get this a few times a year and despite what lawyers will argue, it because they don't bother reading the deeds / charges / claw-backs etc before sending the contract out, they just fire them off and let the buyer's raise it who equally doesn't bother until later in the day. It's usually lazy incompetence and could be prevented by the seller's solicitor know it will be asked 3 months from then.
That doesn't sound great Matt, but of course we don't have the full facts (and as a lawyer I feel that the full facts should be obtained before any blame is apportioned, in any situation), and presumably you have heard the story from the seller and not the conveyancer/s. I'm not saying the conveyancer wasn't to blame either partly or entirely, but it looks like the charge was registered against the seller's property, and therefore, she should have also been aware of its existence. Maybe the instructions she gave to her conveyancer were lacking a little. It is even possible that the charge was registered after exchange took place. My point is, there will be more than one reason why the unfortunate situation arose, and possibly more than one person to share the shoulder of blame.
Charge went back to 2007.
Client didn't even know it was still there - why would they?
Exactly how would the poor lady have any blame to take?
Nope, again it's gross incompetence. Either from her or her buyers lawyers. And, given that her buyers lawyers have repeatedly left customers homeless or with collapsed sales due to their incompetence it's no surprise. They're renowned for it.
Where is Australia's famous Opera House?
And the first part of the name related to the most well known crystal skull?
These stories are common. And, while qpeople think I delight in 'bashing conveyancers' I don't. I along with the poor clients have to suffer the disruption and misery caused by it.
It shouldn't be this way.
Like I said, until one delves into the detail, no one really knows where any blame should be placed. But you are jury, judge, and hangman, as usual😊
Do you know what a charge usually is Matt? Of course you do. Normally, a loan, secured against a property. A loan (more often than not a hefty one) taken out by the owner of a property. I bet you would know what charges you have on your property (if any), and you would know that they need to be paid off/removed before selling.
Ok, I give up, please explain (anyone):
Where is Australia's famous Opera House?
And the first part of the name related to the most well-known crystal skull?
Love the attempt at patronising me.
The charge was left on when it should have been removed. That's the fault of Lloyds. Fifteen odd years ago.
That you honestly believe the client should potentially share some blame for this is demonstrative of the problem and attitude purveyant through your sector.
That you ignore both buyers and her solicitor should not have even exchanged without this having been dealt with is also telling.
Don't patronise me Rob, you've done it for years. Not unless you want me to post up your company accounts versus mine. Of course I know what charges are, or used to anyway....back when I needed to borrow money.... Some sectors in the housing market are successful because customers value them.
Because they're competent, provide good service and don't seek to shirk blane when they're wrong nor needlessly blame clients for things out of their control.
Where is Australia's famous Opera House?
Sydney
And the first part of the name related to the most well-known crystal skull?
Indiana Jones, Stephen Spielberg
'For the Love of God' by artist Damien Hirst
Its a bit too cryptic for me..!!
Mitchell-Hedges
In an average transaction their can be up to 19 parties required to provide information or have an interest in the transaction, with so many moving parts things will always go wrong.
But how broken is the industry? we still mange to complete on over 1.1 transactions every year, so it cant be completely broken, it's just not broken enough.
With so many agents using 'the big boys' due to their excessive referral fee's who's service levels are poor and level of staffing inadequate then it's fundamentally down to those at the start of the process to instigate change, but with that comes a cost.
I have a case which has been going on for 6 months. 95% of this delay has been caused by a conveyancing firm that takes volume business from the banks and cant cope with it. Despite this they still take on more business. I am led to believe they get around £35 a case. How is this sustainable ?
The answer is when you pay cheap you get a cheap service. I will always use a cash back service and pick a solicitor for my clients where possible. The production line conveyancers give the industry a bad name. You cant speak to anybody actioning the case just a call handling service. The case handlers never update their portals despite the portal sending out update notifications.
High Street solicitors as a whole do not give shabby service. The production line conveyancers simply don't care about the people involved in the process.
As Princess Dianna once famously said "there are three of us in this marriage". Home moving is essentially the same; the client, the agent and the conveyancer. For this marriage to succeed there are three essential requirements - communication, communication and communication. The clients agent and conveyancer have to work together to achieve a successful outcome for the client. Communication has never been easier, telephone, email, digital portals, text messaging and of course the good old solicitors letter. There will always be the odd egregious mistake like the one highlighted by Matt, however, the biggest issue for most clients is the failure of estate agent and conveyancer to communicate each with the other but also for the conveyancer to effectively communicate with the client.
Agents are by their very nature communicators and are always the first port of call by an anxious client usually because their offices are in the same location as the home they are selling. When I was a conveyancer in the 70's and early 80's I never saw anyone without an appointment and was always able to hind behind my receptionist or secretary. When I moved into estate agency I realised there was no place to hide - I was in the bloody front window! There is no doubt that the major communication failure lies with the conveyancer and in this modern digital age I am afraid there is absolutely no excuse for this. Conveyancers need to get into the 21st century and adopt all of the means of pro active communication available to them many of which can be automated by linking with their case management systems.
Communication.
This morning in my office we've had a customer go ballistic at us. They're in storage. Despite conveyancer having gone AWOL for the last two weeks, yesterday (!) they were told 'we're exchanging and completing tomorrow'. We've told them we cannot manage anything before Tuesday, and that's at a push. Apparently their conveyancer thinks it's unfair, and we should have availability. Absolute joke. In what world is it fine to not talk to your client for 2 weeks, then give them 6 working hours notice they're moving in......and then think it's unreasonable the mover isn't immediately available?
Movers all around the UK all experience this rubbish weekly.
Although I'm sure Hailstone will suggest this couple in their eighties are being useless tools themselves and should have been primed and ready. After all, the conveynacer has done their job......
Perspective.
Conveyancing is what you get when an industry is essentially regulated by it's own members. Zero service, poor / wrong advice and plenty of arrogance. Over the years I taught some more about property law than their university must have done for sure.
“Don't patronise me Rob, you've done it for years. Not unless you want me to post up your company accounts versus mine.”
I have never patronised you Matt, you always read into everything what you want to read. However, have you completely lost the plot? Why are you banging on about company accounts? Is this now **** swinging thing with you. I really don’t care what you earn, or what you are worth.
You are also stooping a bit low now:
“Although I'm sure Hailstone will suggest this couple in their eighties are being useless tools themselves and should have been primed and ready.”
I have acted for thousands of clients and have always gone the extra mile for them, and would never categorise any of them, or indeed anyone, as “useless tools”. What an unpleasant phrase.
I thought my comment earlier was entirely fair and was not apportioning (or ruling out) any blame, because I don’t know the full story.
“I'm not saying the conveyancer wasn't to blame either partly or entirely, but it looks like the charge was registered against the seller's property, and therefore, she should have also been aware of its existence.”
Conveyancing now is far more challenging than it was 15 or 20 years ago, and it becomes more challenging by the day. Feel free to register for our online forum and see the number of highly complicated questions that are posted most days.
Don’t you ever have any good conveyancer stories to tell because LinkedIn etc is full of them and flowers, thank you cards, chocolates and wine are in abundance. And if you don’t have any positive stories one has to ask why?
I’m going to take a breather now, as I see round two coming on next week, if the editor of EAT decides to publish some more of my thoughts. I don’t want a round two, I would much prefer a sensible discussion. I live in hope.
Propert Estate Agent, our industry/profession is not regulated by its own members. what an odd comment to make.
I'm quite sure there are plenty of lovely stories. Of course there are.
Mutual backslapping for a job well done is great. Too much of it leads to living in a bubble, and only by addressing the failures does overall service improve - in any company, sector or industry.
That public forums like this are awash with negative conveyancing comments for years now tells us something is wrong.
The truth is that there's so, so many stories that it shouldn't be ignored.
Moreover, with many if these events & stories the worrying thing is that it can happen in the first place. Even more worrying is that often there's absolutely no proper or adequate even redress for the affected parties.
That's the gross part.
I was stood next to the lady yesterday when she asked 'who exactly is at fault for this?' The individual was asked the same question a further three times before giving up and saying to me 'they just won't tell me, they just keep saying - sorry this has happened' . A toe-curlingly cringey sentence designed to appease but not take responsibility.
Something we've seen a lot.
Conveyancing is inadequately regulated. As a result there's too little protection for the public.
Please login to comment