x

Isobel Brookfield

1568 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Isobel's Recent Activity

The “support” provided will be directly proportional to the value of the additional services purchased. Who would waste their time supporting the customer who listed free and chose not to purchase any additionals?

From: Isobel Brookfield 12 December 2023 12:26 PM

The “support” provided will be directly proportional to the value of the additional services purchased. Who would waste their time supporting the customer who listed free and chose not to purchase any additionals?

From: Isobel Brookfield 12 December 2023 09:05 AM

Sorry but the comment about referral fees and turnaround times in the context of cyberattack (you say "it is the problem") is a complete non-sequitur. Whilst all reasonable precautions must be taken by law firms to protect client data and withstand an attack, in the end there must be a really good disaster recovery plan in place that is tried out and proved before you need to rely on it, if firms are to survive an attack and protect their reputations. I have seen such plans that are shockingly complacent and would not result in the firm being able to conduct its business to any satisfactory extent if a cyber attack were to occur. Unfortunately it requires imagination and a strong constitution to really address what might happen if a firm is cut off from its files, ledgers, banking and communications and it is useless to employ half measures in planning for a disaster. By the way, I was practising law when referral fees first came in and had nothing good to say about them. I realised later that they had had a positive effect on service standards because those who sullied the reputation of the industry by delivering sub-standard service were kicked off the panels. Unfortunately what panel managers do not measure is the quality of the legal advice provided. A firm can return calls all day long and get 5 stars for service but if they have failed to deliver technical legal excellence it may not emerge for years. If only there was a way to ensure both...good communicators using AI perhaps?

From: Isobel Brookfield 02 December 2023 15:18 PM

ID for onboarding never holds up a transaction. Source of funds/wealth is a highly individual and subjective process and lawyers are not able to delegate the responsibility because they still retain 100% liability for it. It’s almost always the enquiry process that causes delay and frustration sometimes but not always due to inexperience and lack of technical knowledge on the part of those handling it. Properly collated documents up front would help slightly but to be honest not significantly. Knowledge, experience and common sense would go a long way.

From: Isobel Brookfield 02 November 2023 08:33 AM

It will only be worth doing if conveyances are indemnified for using it. What is more likely is that as usual they will be left in a position of being free to use it but if it transpires that someone has fooled the system they will still be liable for the representation made that they are acting for the Registered Proprietor” with all the liability to buyers, the LR and lenders that this entails.

From: Isobel Brookfield 22 February 2023 08:31 AM

I don't at all mind hearing from those who have been through an oppressive and poorly-understood experience in the workplace with a view to improving things for the future for others, and I congratulate these and others who have worked for better inclusion. It is a thoughtful and though-provoking item. I do hope however that soon we can just call each other people and give up the labels - surely that was what was wrong in the first place. I hope most of us do not care if someone is LGBTQ+ or not as long as they are good colleagues and good humans. I make a distinction between this kind of constructive article and the appalling item midweek concerning the activities of a rugby player in an alley behind Greggs. If there is any more of that kind of thing I will definitely be switching Property Industry Eye off for good.

From: Isobel Brookfield 18 February 2023 14:11 PM

Transaction delays can’t be caused by errors in registration applications - the registration application isn’t made until after completion. The number of times the LR process interferes with the pace of a live matter is negligible. This whole conversation is irrelevant.

From: Isobel Brookfield 13 February 2023 13:25 PM

Transaction delays can’t be caused by errors in registration applications - the registration application isn’t made until after completion. The number of times the LR process interferes with the pace of a live matter is negligible. This whole conversation is irrelevant.

From: Isobel Brookfield 13 February 2023 08:07 AM

Absolutely excellent article, thank you.

From: Isobel Brookfield 26 January 2023 08:50 AM

Will anybody notice if the Land Registry goes on strike? Their pace of work is almost imperceptible currently as it is.

From: Isobel Brookfield 15 November 2022 22:10 PM

Simples - give private tenants the right to require their landlord to sell them the property they are renting at a discount. Great way to redistribute wealth without encouraging enterprise.

From: Isobel Brookfield 27 September 2022 16:18 PM

Does this mean we can look forward to an end to “comprises of” in sale details as literacy improves?

From: Isobel Brookfield 25 February 2022 08:25 AM

I believe it would be HMRC themselves Simon

From: Isobel Brookfield 18 February 2022 09:00 AM

Reading the details, linked above, the family’s lawyers say “we always advise our clients to take independent advice” -bizarre: if they are THEIR clients presumably THEY are supposed to be advising them! Ten months and no exchange is more than a “slight delay” to the contracted 4 months so no surprise this couple lost their non-refundable deposit. The advice was needed BEFORE they signed it and if that was made a legal requirement it would ensure the fatally stupid only had themselves to blame and couldn’t whinge afterwards. With suitable advice and perhaps an upper limit in terms of % of price the arrangement seems rational and justified between informed adults.

From: Isobel Brookfield 03 February 2022 08:06 AM

Wow. Well done indeed.

From: Isobel Brookfield 01 February 2022 08:25 AM

If I discovered that my buyer was proposing to apply to turn my house into a lorry park after completion I’d definitely pull out out of concern for my neighbours. Nobody would be surprised and it wouldn’t give rise to endless column inches. Disgusting as I find the homophobic views of these people, I don’t think the agents have the right to select which views they accept and which they don’t. I might well refuse to sell to people who express the views of this couple, I’d certainly be tempted to. If that isn’t acceptable neither is it acceptable the other way round (sadly).

From: Isobel Brookfield 28 January 2022 08:54 AM

This is not wholly wrong, as much of the control of process is in the hands of conveyancers. However, with estate agents taking the lion's share of the legal fee in most cases, leaving the conveyancing companies a pittance on which to recruit the lowest possible level of competence to get them through, what we end up with is a lot of people who are not competent to make decisions about key elements of the process having to wait for the small handful of competent people who have far too much to do, to get round to troubleshooting the technical or risk issues that arise on any transaction. There are far more of these today than there were even 5 years ago - compared with 10 or 20 years ago the job has morphed out of all recognition. Risk has increased substantially, but returns have reduced as estate agents and panel managers have become greedier and greedier, whilst simultaneously wanting better service. These things are not reconcilable unfortunately, and fees in the hands of those taking the risk will need to rise if firms are to employ better qualified, better trained and - just better - staff, to handle cases day to day.

From: Isobel Brookfield 03 March 2021 09:06 AM

It is also time for the government to look at the way property searches bundles are marked up sometimes by 100% in order to provide a further kick-back to the estate agent introducer - they seem to want to draw a veil over that at the moment but it is should be subject to exactly the same scrutiny if transparency is genuinely the object of the game here!

From: Isobel Brookfield 18 January 2019 09:44 AM

Breaking News