"Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition"
It appears that solicitors who are members of the Law Society's new Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) needn't worry about a Pythonesque "fear and surprise" reprisal if they break the guidance rules.
The Law Society introduced the CQS to help traditional high street law firms differentiate themselves from ordinary legal providers. Although it is designed to show that member firms are always courteous and offer excellent service, our recent experience with some CQS firms indicates that this may not always be the case.
Following some recent exchanges of the nature that we thought solicitors only reserved for estate agents, we checked with the Law Society what sanctions were available where firms breach their rules. The answer was that there are none. The words teapot and chocolate spring to mind, although not necessarily in that order.
Chancel repair liabilities - the clock is ticking
Over recent years, it has become a standard requirement for buyers (particularly when getting a mortgage) to check whether there is any liability for homeowners to pay for the upkeep of the local church, through a rather arcane law enacted centuries ago. Although there have not been many cases, this right expires next year, so there is a possibility that some churches may look to make the most of this opportunity.
The potential liability is real and we will be introducing a low-cost service next year for homewners to check whether they have this liability and take the necessary steps to protect themselves.
SDLT Changes
The government and Revenue & Customs have warned they will close the loopholes that people are exploiting to avoid Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT). Indeed, last month, they announced they would remove one method, whereby buyers used companies to buy properties, by increasing the rate to 5%. Discussions with agents has shown a marked decrease in the numbers of clients trying to avoid SDLT, and we have witnessed numbers falling.
Whilst currently, mitigating SDLT can be done legally, some are speculating that in the future, it may be considered to be a criminal offence.
Finally, the government appears committed to its decision to scrap the SDLT exemption for first time buyers spending less than £250K after 24th March 2012.
New website and online case tracking
We will be launching our new-look website in January, with the focus very much on social media and information delivery. We will also be extending our Partnership League system so agents will be able to track the progress of their client's cases online. This will enhance our current offering of our fast-response email and 7 days-erp-week telephone access.
... and finally ... we don't DO end of year reviews, so it just remains for us to wish a merry Christmas and a happy new year to our readers!
Wednesday 21 December 2011
Tuesday 13 December 2011
Solar panels - its deja vu all over again
We should have known.
In our last blog, we found it within our hearts to compliment the government on actually doing what they said they would do when it came to eradicating tax avoidance with Stamp Duty Land Tax.
We believed that we were witnessing a new political dawn.
However, as Nick Clegg will testify, a week is a long time in politics. Therefore, we're not surprised to see, that, unfortunately, Westminster is back to its old ways when it comes to shifting policy goal posts overnight.
This time it's the solar panel industry.
Recent years have seen massive growth in the sale of solar panels - the promise of free electricity and money from the government paying home owners to produce it, was simply too strong for many. Indeed, this business opportunity, with its green overtones, seemed ideal for domestic energy assessors, (DEAs) many of whom had lost significant income from the overnight scrapping of HIPs, where they made their money.
The key to the business was the "feed-in tariff" - money from the government paying consumers to generate their own electricity. Without it, the cost of buying (or leasing in many cases) these solar panels simply didn't make financial sense. This fee was guaranteed. (Or so the franchise salespeople told their franchisees).
The amount paid was up for review in April 2012, and a consultation period was underway. However, in a HIP-like move, the government has overnight reduced this tariff by 50%, making the proposition for many, unviable.
Observers estimate this will cost 20,000 jobs. Add that to the estimate of 10,000 jobs lost when HIPs were abandoned, and suddenly, Cameron's new caring Conservatism doesn't appear to be quite so friendly after all.
In our last blog, we found it within our hearts to compliment the government on actually doing what they said they would do when it came to eradicating tax avoidance with Stamp Duty Land Tax.
We believed that we were witnessing a new political dawn.
However, as Nick Clegg will testify, a week is a long time in politics. Therefore, we're not surprised to see, that, unfortunately, Westminster is back to its old ways when it comes to shifting policy goal posts overnight.
This time it's the solar panel industry.
Recent years have seen massive growth in the sale of solar panels - the promise of free electricity and money from the government paying home owners to produce it, was simply too strong for many. Indeed, this business opportunity, with its green overtones, seemed ideal for domestic energy assessors, (DEAs) many of whom had lost significant income from the overnight scrapping of HIPs, where they made their money.
The key to the business was the "feed-in tariff" - money from the government paying consumers to generate their own electricity. Without it, the cost of buying (or leasing in many cases) these solar panels simply didn't make financial sense. This fee was guaranteed. (Or so the franchise salespeople told their franchisees).
The amount paid was up for review in April 2012, and a consultation period was underway. However, in a HIP-like move, the government has overnight reduced this tariff by 50%, making the proposition for many, unviable.
Observers estimate this will cost 20,000 jobs. Add that to the estimate of 10,000 jobs lost when HIPs were abandoned, and suddenly, Cameron's new caring Conservatism doesn't appear to be quite so friendly after all.
Wednesday 7 December 2011
Good to see the government grasping the mettle
To be completely frank, when we saw a Conservative prime minister appear at the doors of number 10 Downing Street last year, the last thing we expected would they would actually resolve a taxation issue that affects many of their supporters.
However, we're delighted to see that after various promises over the past six months, that they are cracking down on those people looking to avoid Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT).
In addition to the budget earlier this year when many avoidance schemes were outlawed, we read that the draft Finance Bill 2012 now includes a change to SDLT rules outlawing avoidance for properties over £1m, where previously, buyers could exploit a loophole which would save them thousands of pounds.
We remain concerned that those people that have been sold such avoidance schemes in the past will end up having to find the money that they have saved (not forgetting the 50% fee that they paid to the providers that sold them the "cast-iron" schemes) when the Revenue and Customs finally catch up with them.
However, we're delighted to see that after various promises over the past six months, that they are cracking down on those people looking to avoid Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT).
In addition to the budget earlier this year when many avoidance schemes were outlawed, we read that the draft Finance Bill 2012 now includes a change to SDLT rules outlawing avoidance for properties over £1m, where previously, buyers could exploit a loophole which would save them thousands of pounds.
We remain concerned that those people that have been sold such avoidance schemes in the past will end up having to find the money that they have saved (not forgetting the 50% fee that they paid to the providers that sold them the "cast-iron" schemes) when the Revenue and Customs finally catch up with them.
Wednesday 23 November 2011
The Partnership Newsletter - November 2011
"There's something here that doesn't quite add up"
The great Quincy (MD) would no doubt be a little surprised to see himself quoted in a property newsletter. Its because we're very confused. In our experience agents always ask for the name of the solicitor to give to their clients, clients only recommend individual solicitors to friends, and clients always want to speak directly to that particular person. Therefore, as its clearly the personal approach that most clients want, why are lawyers worrying about large "nameless" firms taking business from them? We are gaining market share by simply communicating regularly with agents and clients, offering full availability and co-operation and the results have been very encouraging. It appears that its simply a case of "going back to basics" - now where have we heard THAT before?
Stamp Duty Land Tax Mitigation - more difficulties for tax avoiders
The BBC has highlighted how Revenue & Customs are taking a more robust line when it comes to home buyers using Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) mitigation schemes to reduce the amount of tax they have to pay. Revenue and Customs are also following up on their commitment to pursue people who have avoided this tax - there are now reports of clients receiving letters from them questioning the amount of tax paid on transactions from several years ago. Lenders are refusing to provide mortgages to people that are using these schemes and it is expected that their number will grow.
Recent case highlights potential problems for unmarried couples
A recent case case has highlighted the problems that can arise when unmarried couples that have bought property together, separate. Patricia Jones and Leonard Kernott, an unmarried couple, had bought a property together but following their separation, Mr Kernott had tried to claim 50% of the share of the value of the property. The court ruled that this was not the case and reinstated the original judgement giving Mr Kernott only 10%. This underlines the importance for unmarried couples to organise both a Will and also a Declaration of Trust when buying together, and all buyers should be aware of the risks of not organising these.
7 Days a week availability
Agents tell us that one of their biggest frustrations is not being able to speak to solicitors out of hours, particularly Saturdays. That's why we now offer 7 days per week telephone availability for agents. This is proving very popular where clients are looking to make a purchase and want to have a quote and paperwork organised immediately. Please email us for contact information.
The great Quincy (MD) would no doubt be a little surprised to see himself quoted in a property newsletter. Its because we're very confused. In our experience agents always ask for the name of the solicitor to give to their clients, clients only recommend individual solicitors to friends, and clients always want to speak directly to that particular person. Therefore, as its clearly the personal approach that most clients want, why are lawyers worrying about large "nameless" firms taking business from them? We are gaining market share by simply communicating regularly with agents and clients, offering full availability and co-operation and the results have been very encouraging. It appears that its simply a case of "going back to basics" - now where have we heard THAT before?
Stamp Duty Land Tax Mitigation - more difficulties for tax avoiders
The BBC has highlighted how Revenue & Customs are taking a more robust line when it comes to home buyers using Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) mitigation schemes to reduce the amount of tax they have to pay. Revenue and Customs are also following up on their commitment to pursue people who have avoided this tax - there are now reports of clients receiving letters from them questioning the amount of tax paid on transactions from several years ago. Lenders are refusing to provide mortgages to people that are using these schemes and it is expected that their number will grow.
Recent case highlights potential problems for unmarried couples
A recent case case has highlighted the problems that can arise when unmarried couples that have bought property together, separate. Patricia Jones and Leonard Kernott, an unmarried couple, had bought a property together but following their separation, Mr Kernott had tried to claim 50% of the share of the value of the property. The court ruled that this was not the case and reinstated the original judgement giving Mr Kernott only 10%. This underlines the importance for unmarried couples to organise both a Will and also a Declaration of Trust when buying together, and all buyers should be aware of the risks of not organising these.
7 Days a week availability
Agents tell us that one of their biggest frustrations is not being able to speak to solicitors out of hours, particularly Saturdays. That's why we now offer 7 days per week telephone availability for agents. This is proving very popular where clients are looking to make a purchase and want to have a quote and paperwork organised immediately. Please email us for contact information.
Monday 21 November 2011
Individual or company - who is your solicitor?
We had a contradiction arise last week that actually raises issues about the future of the choice of legal service suppliers.
We support www.solicitor.info a comparison website aimed at promoting solicitors that offer good service. Last week, a competitor complained that because our company is regulated by the Council of Licensed Conveyancers, we should not be allowed to be on the site. (Our competitor has since retracted his complaint as we employ solicitors and the site is aimed at rating solicitors.)
However, this raises a wider question about how people buy legal services, and whether the recent liberalisation of the legal market will have a large an impact as many traditional lawyers fear it will.
It is clear that many consumers select a solicitor based on a recommendation, the most effective being a friend or work colleague. Indeed, we have found that it is very common for an individual to be named on the reviews on www.solicitor.info which usually includes a reference to a person rather than a company.
In our opinion, this calls into question the importance of company branding and how consumers perceive quality from a legal provider. Do consumers buy legal services from a company or an individual and given that the Law Society is promoting the use of solicitors, how important is the branding of the firm in which those particular solicitors work?
This raises further questions about the value of some of the new branding schemes that have been introduced such as QualitySolicitors where the plan is to subvert the names of even the company by trading under a single banner.
However, the major challenge is that a good solicitors' time is finite. In our opinion, the firms that will succeed will be those that combine the smart use of supportive technology with intelligent support staff, ensuring consistency of support throughout the organisation.
After all, the days of "I'm sorry but the person handling the file is not available and no-one else can help you" should be long gone by now.
We support www.solicitor.info a comparison website aimed at promoting solicitors that offer good service. Last week, a competitor complained that because our company is regulated by the Council of Licensed Conveyancers, we should not be allowed to be on the site. (Our competitor has since retracted his complaint as we employ solicitors and the site is aimed at rating solicitors.)
However, this raises a wider question about how people buy legal services, and whether the recent liberalisation of the legal market will have a large an impact as many traditional lawyers fear it will.
It is clear that many consumers select a solicitor based on a recommendation, the most effective being a friend or work colleague. Indeed, we have found that it is very common for an individual to be named on the reviews on www.solicitor.info which usually includes a reference to a person rather than a company.
In our opinion, this calls into question the importance of company branding and how consumers perceive quality from a legal provider. Do consumers buy legal services from a company or an individual and given that the Law Society is promoting the use of solicitors, how important is the branding of the firm in which those particular solicitors work?
This raises further questions about the value of some of the new branding schemes that have been introduced such as QualitySolicitors where the plan is to subvert the names of even the company by trading under a single banner.
However, the major challenge is that a good solicitors' time is finite. In our opinion, the firms that will succeed will be those that combine the smart use of supportive technology with intelligent support staff, ensuring consistency of support throughout the organisation.
After all, the days of "I'm sorry but the person handling the file is not available and no-one else can help you" should be long gone by now.
Monday 14 November 2011
Unmarried couples and their rights
We've been working hard to ensure that anyone buying a property in joint names who isn't married is aware of some of the pitfalls that they might endure.
Many people that we speak to are not aware of the legal difference between being married or just living together. Some go so far as assuming that such things as "common-law rights", however, in reality, when things go wrong in a relationship where the couple is not married, then this can present major challenges.
Therefore, we were pleased to see this highlighted in the recent case between Leonard Kernott and Patricia Jones which highlighted some of the problems involved when couples split up.
This case involved a couple that had split up 20 years ago, and Kernott (who left) was then claiming a higher proportion of the value of the property than he was originally granted. The judge decided that even though Kernott had paid the mortgage and much of the costs, he was not entitled to claim the 50% of the value of the property.
We recommend all unmarried couples buying a property should obtain a Declaration of Trust - contact us for more information.
Many people that we speak to are not aware of the legal difference between being married or just living together. Some go so far as assuming that such things as "common-law rights", however, in reality, when things go wrong in a relationship where the couple is not married, then this can present major challenges.
Therefore, we were pleased to see this highlighted in the recent case between Leonard Kernott and Patricia Jones which highlighted some of the problems involved when couples split up.
This case involved a couple that had split up 20 years ago, and Kernott (who left) was then claiming a higher proportion of the value of the property than he was originally granted. The judge decided that even though Kernott had paid the mortgage and much of the costs, he was not entitled to claim the 50% of the value of the property.
We recommend all unmarried couples buying a property should obtain a Declaration of Trust - contact us for more information.
Monday 7 November 2011
And now the pursuit begins ...
We learned on Friday about a client (not one of ours) who had bought a property three years ago, and had taken advantage of the supposed benefits of avoiding paying Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT). This client had received a letter from HMRC warning them that they were investigating the transaction, and even supplied a copy of his tax return to jog his memory.
Now - although HMRC have been promising to take strong action against those avoiding this tax, this is the first time that we have come across an actual case, but we are sure that it won't be the last.
This is why we always say to people who insist that they want to go down this route, if you do want to avoid paying tax, please make sure that you hold this money in your bank account, just in case of unexpected letters such as these.
Our advice continues to be that these SDLT mitigation schemes pose no risk to the suppliers, but all the risk lies with the client and so should be avoided where possible.
Now - although HMRC have been promising to take strong action against those avoiding this tax, this is the first time that we have come across an actual case, but we are sure that it won't be the last.
This is why we always say to people who insist that they want to go down this route, if you do want to avoid paying tax, please make sure that you hold this money in your bank account, just in case of unexpected letters such as these.
Our advice continues to be that these SDLT mitigation schemes pose no risk to the suppliers, but all the risk lies with the client and so should be avoided where possible.
Friday 28 October 2011
Stamp Duty Land Tax avoidance - now the BBC is on the case
Delighted to see that the BBC has picked up the intiative on the problems that are potentially in store for people trying to avoid paying Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) when buying their property.
As we have been warning, Revenue and Customs (HMRC) are continuing to crack down on this; an HMRC spokesman said: "The schemes rely on an interpretation of law that produces an outcome different from that envisaged when the law was enacted, and that HMRC does not accept."
As we continue to warn our clients, HMRC have confirmed that they are gearing up to challenge the schemes through the courts - all the risk is with the client on this one.
As we have been warning, Revenue and Customs (HMRC) are continuing to crack down on this; an HMRC spokesman said: "The schemes rely on an interpretation of law that produces an outcome different from that envisaged when the law was enacted, and that HMRC does not accept."
As we continue to warn our clients, HMRC have confirmed that they are gearing up to challenge the schemes through the courts - all the risk is with the client on this one.
Wednesday 19 October 2011
We're not letting this one go
Having just got off the telephone from a buyer seriously considering using a Stamp Duty Land Tax savings scheme, we continue to be surprised by the tactics firms are using to convince people to use them.
In this particular case, the client was told that "a leading political party used such a scheme to save money on buying the Dickens & Jones building in London", so they must be OK. Now, we don't want to cast any aspersions here, but are they serious?
The other problem as clients are now finding out is that many lenders will simply not lend to anyone that is using such a tax savings scheme. The rationale is quite simple - lenders are concerned that the revenue will come after them (and there is no time limit on that) for the outstanding SDLT tax that they didn't pay. This means that the client may potentially be out of pocket and may not be able to keep up the payments on the mortgage. Hence, they wouldn't want to lend to such people.
Simple really, but clients can be influenced by the very attractive proposition so we continue to urge caution.
Oh and yes, our client did decide to instruct us for their purchase because, in their words, the other method "wasn't worth the risk"
In this particular case, the client was told that "a leading political party used such a scheme to save money on buying the Dickens & Jones building in London", so they must be OK. Now, we don't want to cast any aspersions here, but are they serious?
The other problem as clients are now finding out is that many lenders will simply not lend to anyone that is using such a tax savings scheme. The rationale is quite simple - lenders are concerned that the revenue will come after them (and there is no time limit on that) for the outstanding SDLT tax that they didn't pay. This means that the client may potentially be out of pocket and may not be able to keep up the payments on the mortgage. Hence, they wouldn't want to lend to such people.
Simple really, but clients can be influenced by the very attractive proposition so we continue to urge caution.
Oh and yes, our client did decide to instruct us for their purchase because, in their words, the other method "wasn't worth the risk"
Thursday 6 October 2011
It's October 6th ... and the world hasn't ended
October 6th - the day when the world was due to end for all lawyers trying to earn an honest living from selling their legal wares.
However, it was more of a whimper than a bang, although we were amazed to hear the BBC Radio 4 news announce the change in the law throughout its morning bulletins this morning.
According to the BBC News, from today, supermarkets and other companies will be able to offer legal services and this was going to be of huge benefit to consumers.
Forgive us for being a little sceptical - a quick search on the internet today will reveal companies promising to carry out conveyancing for £99 (plus VAT of course) so is this really an appealing opportunity to "major brands". In reality, it is unlikely that more than just a few companies will be willing to take on the risks associated with such provision.
Financial services are often used as an example of where major firms have made inroads, but the comparisons are not necessarily valid. It is unlikely that legal services will ever be as commoditised as financial services, simply because there's far more involvement required from the client. Buying insurance products is a relatively straightforward process whereas buying a house or organising a Will takes a great deal of time and effort from all parties. For those clients looking for expertise and advice, such an alternative route is unlikely.
Although we've pioneered this new model several years ago, we look forward to seeing how other new firms approach this potential new market, but expect it will be several years before any wholesale changes will come.
However, it was more of a whimper than a bang, although we were amazed to hear the BBC Radio 4 news announce the change in the law throughout its morning bulletins this morning.
According to the BBC News, from today, supermarkets and other companies will be able to offer legal services and this was going to be of huge benefit to consumers.
Forgive us for being a little sceptical - a quick search on the internet today will reveal companies promising to carry out conveyancing for £99 (plus VAT of course) so is this really an appealing opportunity to "major brands". In reality, it is unlikely that more than just a few companies will be willing to take on the risks associated with such provision.
Financial services are often used as an example of where major firms have made inroads, but the comparisons are not necessarily valid. It is unlikely that legal services will ever be as commoditised as financial services, simply because there's far more involvement required from the client. Buying insurance products is a relatively straightforward process whereas buying a house or organising a Will takes a great deal of time and effort from all parties. For those clients looking for expertise and advice, such an alternative route is unlikely.
Although we've pioneered this new model several years ago, we look forward to seeing how other new firms approach this potential new market, but expect it will be several years before any wholesale changes will come.
Sunday 2 October 2011
The Partnership Newsletter - September 2011
"Mirror mirror on the wall ... who is the fairest of them all?"
In our opinion, it's certainly not some lawyers. We find the recurrent concerns raised about regulating estate agents ironic, given the increase we've seeing in the dubious practice of "salami slicing" of fees by lawyers, who are highly regulated. We've seen examples this week of clients being quoted for spurious items such as "Land Transaction", "Investigation" and "Fast Completion" designed to confuse the client who thinks they are standard items making the base price appear lower. If agents used such weasel words to confuse their clients, they would be held up under the Property Misdescriptions Act. We know firsthand about pressure on fees, but we would like to see an end to this questionable practice and we will continue to offer fixed, transparent pricing to our clients.
Stamp Duty Land Tax Avoidance - A risk worth taking?
Despite the changes in the budget that outlawed many of the schemes that clients have been using to try and avoid paying Stamp Duty, we are still finding a few clients who want to take the risk. The firms that provide the schemes confirm that they are not foolproof, and we are aware of cases where they have gone wrong. While today, the practice is not illegal, Revenue & Custom have made it clear that they will crack down on it and in the future there is the possibility of further action. We have highlighted our opinions on our blog and continue to warn our clients to be aware of the risks involved with such schemes.
Lack of disclosure invalidates insurance
It is standard practice in insurance that the policy holder must fully disclose any facts that may impact their position, otherwise the insurance may be invalidated. Insurers have refused to pay out on buildings insurance when they learnt that a person living at the property has a criminal record that had not been previously disclosed. The classic scenario is the student arrested for being drunk and disorderly whilst away at university and returns home without telling his or her parents. Then, there is a catastrophic fire and the insurer learns of this offence and avoids paying out under the buildings insurance. Policy holders should be aware of this potential risk.
The Partnership League
We are aggressively rolling out our Partnership League to an increasing number of agents around the country and it is proving extremely popular. In the last week alone, we have received over 20 referrals from agents who are on the scheme, and we are recruiting more every day. Contact us us for more information on how to join our unique scheme.
In our opinion, it's certainly not some lawyers. We find the recurrent concerns raised about regulating estate agents ironic, given the increase we've seeing in the dubious practice of "salami slicing" of fees by lawyers, who are highly regulated. We've seen examples this week of clients being quoted for spurious items such as "Land Transaction", "Investigation" and "Fast Completion" designed to confuse the client who thinks they are standard items making the base price appear lower. If agents used such weasel words to confuse their clients, they would be held up under the Property Misdescriptions Act. We know firsthand about pressure on fees, but we would like to see an end to this questionable practice and we will continue to offer fixed, transparent pricing to our clients.
Stamp Duty Land Tax Avoidance - A risk worth taking?
Despite the changes in the budget that outlawed many of the schemes that clients have been using to try and avoid paying Stamp Duty, we are still finding a few clients who want to take the risk. The firms that provide the schemes confirm that they are not foolproof, and we are aware of cases where they have gone wrong. While today, the practice is not illegal, Revenue & Custom have made it clear that they will crack down on it and in the future there is the possibility of further action. We have highlighted our opinions on our blog and continue to warn our clients to be aware of the risks involved with such schemes.
Lack of disclosure invalidates insurance
It is standard practice in insurance that the policy holder must fully disclose any facts that may impact their position, otherwise the insurance may be invalidated. Insurers have refused to pay out on buildings insurance when they learnt that a person living at the property has a criminal record that had not been previously disclosed. The classic scenario is the student arrested for being drunk and disorderly whilst away at university and returns home without telling his or her parents. Then, there is a catastrophic fire and the insurer learns of this offence and avoids paying out under the buildings insurance. Policy holders should be aware of this potential risk.
The Partnership League
We are aggressively rolling out our Partnership League to an increasing number of agents around the country and it is proving extremely popular. In the last week alone, we have received over 20 referrals from agents who are on the scheme, and we are recruiting more every day. Contact us us for more information on how to join our unique scheme.
Thursday 22 September 2011
Stamp Duty Land Tax savings schemes
We've always made it clear that we think that the current rash of Stamp Duty Land Tax savings schemes are risky for buyers. The problem for us, is that even though they are not illegal, it is the client that is bearing all the risk, and the firms that are charging them 50% of the savings have nothing to worry about.
Although the government cracked down on many of these schemes in the budget there are still a number around and people are still being tempted into using them.
Our question is straightforward - if they are so straightforward, why do companies sell indemnity insurance policies to cover them? Also, given that those policies typically only last for 9 months - what about the remaining 6 years that Revenue & Customs have to pursue these claims?
Just for clarity - if anyone was in any doubt that the revenue is pursuing these cases, maybe this Revenue and Customs link will make it clear.
This is obviously quite a formidable warning, and buyers should also be aware that in the future, Revenue & Customs could encourage new legislation that could potential make this a fraudulent transaction. This could be introduced retrospectively as well.
We will continue to urge caution amongst buyers thinking that this is a straightforward money-saving scheme.
Anyone thinking of using them, must be sure that they keep the money saved in a bank account ... just in case.
Although the government cracked down on many of these schemes in the budget there are still a number around and people are still being tempted into using them.
Our question is straightforward - if they are so straightforward, why do companies sell indemnity insurance policies to cover them? Also, given that those policies typically only last for 9 months - what about the remaining 6 years that Revenue & Customs have to pursue these claims?
Just for clarity - if anyone was in any doubt that the revenue is pursuing these cases, maybe this Revenue and Customs link will make it clear.
This is obviously quite a formidable warning, and buyers should also be aware that in the future, Revenue & Customs could encourage new legislation that could potential make this a fraudulent transaction. This could be introduced retrospectively as well.
We will continue to urge caution amongst buyers thinking that this is a straightforward money-saving scheme.
Anyone thinking of using them, must be sure that they keep the money saved in a bank account ... just in case.
Tuesday 30 August 2011
The Partnership Newsletter - August 2011
"I'm sticking with you ... 'cos I'm made out of glue ..."
It seems the Velvet Underground had a point. We often hear from agents that they suffer the consequences of their client's choice of lawyer. Whether it is a low-cost internet-based firm that cannot afford to take their telephone calls or a traditional solicitors' practice that refuses to, all too often, the outcome is poor communication and deals slowed or put at risk.
However, we are finding agents refusing to take instructions if they feel the client's choice of lawyer may stand in the way of a successful outcome. The problem is that clients often feel intimidated by the threat of abortive fees and refuse to change. Hopefully the introduction of greater competition later this year will overcome this and we'll see them making decisions to change lawyers if they don't get the service they need.
Japanese knotweed causes concern for sellers
Until recently, Japanese Knotweed was a problem that was restricted to gardeners trying to halt its path. However, many people are not aware that landowners have a legal obligation under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 not to cause it to spread if it occurs on their land. Due to this risk, we are now receiving an increasing number of lawyers asking about the presence of this weed in their preliminary enquiries, and we are advising sellers to deal with the issue before they put their properties on the market.
Recent case highlights problem of leaving child out of a Will
When Heather Ilott left home at 17 and refused to stay in touch with her father, despite his best efforts, he decided to exclude her from his Will. However, after his death, Ms Ilott contested the Will, and was awarded £50,000. Ms Ilott felt that this figure wasn't high enough and successfully appealed. Although the Supreme Court is due to hear this case later this year, currently, anyone considering cutting out a child from their Will should be aware that potentially, the courts may not uphold their wishes.
The Partnership League Launches in September
Over the past few months, we have been working with a small number of agents testing our new Partnership League system. This unique, web-based application enables agents to compete against their colleagues and competitors, with the most successful winning vouchers for websites and shops of their choice. Please email us for more information about how to join the League.
It seems the Velvet Underground had a point. We often hear from agents that they suffer the consequences of their client's choice of lawyer. Whether it is a low-cost internet-based firm that cannot afford to take their telephone calls or a traditional solicitors' practice that refuses to, all too often, the outcome is poor communication and deals slowed or put at risk.
However, we are finding agents refusing to take instructions if they feel the client's choice of lawyer may stand in the way of a successful outcome. The problem is that clients often feel intimidated by the threat of abortive fees and refuse to change. Hopefully the introduction of greater competition later this year will overcome this and we'll see them making decisions to change lawyers if they don't get the service they need.
Japanese knotweed causes concern for sellers
Until recently, Japanese Knotweed was a problem that was restricted to gardeners trying to halt its path. However, many people are not aware that landowners have a legal obligation under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 not to cause it to spread if it occurs on their land. Due to this risk, we are now receiving an increasing number of lawyers asking about the presence of this weed in their preliminary enquiries, and we are advising sellers to deal with the issue before they put their properties on the market.
Recent case highlights problem of leaving child out of a Will
When Heather Ilott left home at 17 and refused to stay in touch with her father, despite his best efforts, he decided to exclude her from his Will. However, after his death, Ms Ilott contested the Will, and was awarded £50,000. Ms Ilott felt that this figure wasn't high enough and successfully appealed. Although the Supreme Court is due to hear this case later this year, currently, anyone considering cutting out a child from their Will should be aware that potentially, the courts may not uphold their wishes.
The Partnership League Launches in September
Over the past few months, we have been working with a small number of agents testing our new Partnership League system. This unique, web-based application enables agents to compete against their colleagues and competitors, with the most successful winning vouchers for websites and shops of their choice. Please email us for more information about how to join the League.
Friday 26 August 2011
Nothing new here then ...
Looks like we've been causing a bit of a storm when it comes to referral fees.
In the days of Home Information Packs we were extremely vocal that paying referral fees was nothing less than the work of the devil. Indeed, we even did a piece for Channel 4 news exposing the story. The problem that we had with the issue is that clients were not being given a choice in the provision of Home Information Packs and just knew that they had to buy them, so our view was that providers were manipulating the market by paying fees to agents.
However, our launch of The Partnership League, a marketing incentive to encourage agents to include us in their recommendation lists to clients for conveyancing, has been picked up by the trade press (The Negotiator Magazine, that we have somehow changed our stance.
However, we believe in competition and know that agents always give clients a choice - we don't pass on any costs to clients and it is an excellent marketing idea. Well we think so anyway!
If you're an agent and want to know more about The Partnership League, please just email us and we'll let you know.
In the days of Home Information Packs we were extremely vocal that paying referral fees was nothing less than the work of the devil. Indeed, we even did a piece for Channel 4 news exposing the story. The problem that we had with the issue is that clients were not being given a choice in the provision of Home Information Packs and just knew that they had to buy them, so our view was that providers were manipulating the market by paying fees to agents.
However, our launch of The Partnership League, a marketing incentive to encourage agents to include us in their recommendation lists to clients for conveyancing, has been picked up by the trade press (The Negotiator Magazine, that we have somehow changed our stance.
However, we believe in competition and know that agents always give clients a choice - we don't pass on any costs to clients and it is an excellent marketing idea. Well we think so anyway!
If you're an agent and want to know more about The Partnership League, please just email us and we'll let you know.
Thursday 28 July 2011
The Partnership Newsletter - July 2011
“Please can we book the pitch next to the Gloucester Old Spot sausage seller?”
We don’t want to pour cold water on the democratisation of the provision of legal services, but we think Quality Solicitor’s idea of having a promotional stand in WH Smiths for discussing legal matters and booking appointments with a lawyer, is intriguing. We agree you don’t need to visit your family solicitor to receive advice on matters such as conveyancing and wills, but the idea of going into a high street shop and discussing your personal matters does raise questions of confidentiality and credibility. We await with interest to see how their launch in London goes tomorrow and how the public respond to discussing their private affairs in public. If it is positive, then obviously we’ll be straight on the telephone to book our place at the next farmer’s market - we assume the best location will be between the Gloucester Old Spot sausages and the Big Pie Company– our A-boards will say something like, “Specially Local Conveyancing For Specially Local People”. It could work …
Delays to implementation of lawyer ownership change?
Most agents we speak to are not aware of the impact of the changes that were planned to affect the provision of legal services this October. These changes will allow any company to offer legal advice, so naturally, clients will be encouraged to shop around for the cheapest price. For the housing market, this obviously raises the spectre of potentially lower service levels and consequently further delays in the buying and selling process. However, we have learned today that due to legislative reasons, it is likely that this change will be delayed for several months. but are assured that it will be before Christmas.
Even more delays ... this time to EPCs
The government is learning that it’s easier to suspend housing legislation than introduce it. In recent months there has been talk of changes to the commissioning and use of Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) that would have reintroduced the same delays that so dogged the implementation of Home Information Packs. It was planned that the responsibility for providing an EPC would fall to the agent rather than the individual and that the entire report would to be included with property particulars and had to be available before marketing. However, this change has been delayed until October and will be watered down so that only a single page of the report is required but this will need to be supplied within 7 days of commissioning. We await the next change ...
Social Networking in business?
Like many people we speak to, we have been sceptical about the value of social networking when it comes to promoting professional services. However, despite this, we have been quietly promoting our Twitter feed and LinkedIn pages in conjunction with our blog. Obviously we’ve been proved wrong as we’ve seen a significant interest from agents in our services and so we will be extending our coverage and are now redesigning our website for a September launch to reflect the change in marketing. We are monitoring this closely and are interested in feedback from our subscribers and how we can improve the information that we provide.
We don’t want to pour cold water on the democratisation of the provision of legal services, but we think Quality Solicitor’s idea of having a promotional stand in WH Smiths for discussing legal matters and booking appointments with a lawyer, is intriguing. We agree you don’t need to visit your family solicitor to receive advice on matters such as conveyancing and wills, but the idea of going into a high street shop and discussing your personal matters does raise questions of confidentiality and credibility. We await with interest to see how their launch in London goes tomorrow and how the public respond to discussing their private affairs in public. If it is positive, then obviously we’ll be straight on the telephone to book our place at the next farmer’s market - we assume the best location will be between the Gloucester Old Spot sausages and the Big Pie Company– our A-boards will say something like, “Specially Local Conveyancing For Specially Local People”. It could work …
Delays to implementation of lawyer ownership change?
Most agents we speak to are not aware of the impact of the changes that were planned to affect the provision of legal services this October. These changes will allow any company to offer legal advice, so naturally, clients will be encouraged to shop around for the cheapest price. For the housing market, this obviously raises the spectre of potentially lower service levels and consequently further delays in the buying and selling process. However, we have learned today that due to legislative reasons, it is likely that this change will be delayed for several months. but are assured that it will be before Christmas.
Even more delays ... this time to EPCs
The government is learning that it’s easier to suspend housing legislation than introduce it. In recent months there has been talk of changes to the commissioning and use of Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) that would have reintroduced the same delays that so dogged the implementation of Home Information Packs. It was planned that the responsibility for providing an EPC would fall to the agent rather than the individual and that the entire report would to be included with property particulars and had to be available before marketing. However, this change has been delayed until October and will be watered down so that only a single page of the report is required but this will need to be supplied within 7 days of commissioning. We await the next change ...
Social Networking in business?
Like many people we speak to, we have been sceptical about the value of social networking when it comes to promoting professional services. However, despite this, we have been quietly promoting our Twitter feed and LinkedIn pages in conjunction with our blog. Obviously we’ve been proved wrong as we’ve seen a significant interest from agents in our services and so we will be extending our coverage and are now redesigning our website for a September launch to reflect the change in marketing. We are monitoring this closely and are interested in feedback from our subscribers and how we can improve the information that we provide.
Great client stories - Part 1
Not that we're implying that this is going to be a regular piece on amusing anecdotes about agent's experiences with clients but we did hear one the other day that demonstrates how little people know about the conveyancing process, and why maybe cheap isn't always best.
As per the usual instruction process, one of our agents asked their prospective seller whether they had a date in mind that they should aim to move by. Naturally, client pulled a date out of the air, and thought that it would be convenient to move on that date (approximately 6 weeks time).
Instruction started and was going through the usual process - hadn't got to exchange or anywhere close, but our agent received a call from the client the day before that aformenationed date, explaining that she had booked the removal firm, was all ready to go and could she come into the agent's office to sign the paperwork.
Suffice to say. our agent had to put her straight and told her to cancel the removal firm.
The client had been using a large conveyancing firm who obviously hadn't explained that the process involved a little more than just wishful thinking on her part!
As per the usual instruction process, one of our agents asked their prospective seller whether they had a date in mind that they should aim to move by. Naturally, client pulled a date out of the air, and thought that it would be convenient to move on that date (approximately 6 weeks time).
Instruction started and was going through the usual process - hadn't got to exchange or anywhere close, but our agent received a call from the client the day before that aformenationed date, explaining that she had booked the removal firm, was all ready to go and could she come into the agent's office to sign the paperwork.
Suffice to say. our agent had to put her straight and told her to cancel the removal firm.
The client had been using a large conveyancing firm who obviously hadn't explained that the process involved a little more than just wishful thinking on her part!
Santander - a breath of fresh air!
Really pleased to see that given all the anecdotal doom and gloom about lenders withdrawing panel status and changing criteria to make life more difficult for solicitors, we see that Santander (one of our favourite lenders) are implementing a new panel management scheme and extending this to new firms.
Obviously there are major challenges for some legal firms but if large lenders such as Santander are accepting panel applications then this gives us great encouragement.
Obviously there are major challenges for some legal firms but if large lenders such as Santander are accepting panel applications then this gives us great encouragement.
Monday 25 July 2011
Interesting development from a lender
We have just been informed by one of the main high street lenders that in future, we're going to have to pay to remain a member of their panel. This is due to the overheads involved in their managing our panel membership.
We expect that they won't be the last to implement such a scheme, and we are watching carefully to see what approaches other lenders will take when it comes to working with solicitors.
We expect that they won't be the last to implement such a scheme, and we are watching carefully to see what approaches other lenders will take when it comes to working with solicitors.
Thursday 23 June 2011
The rise of the Lagger
The Legal Services Act was intended to bring with it benefits for the consumer - indeed, our company has based its entire business on providing a high level and expert service to clients.
However, it is quickly becoming apparent that the companies moving into this market are finding ways to simply squeeze existing law firms, without, it appears ingadd significant value.
We have experienced this first hand this week, with aggressive telephone calls from progressors within panels, not party to the transaction but simply with a vested interest to get the deal through. They are not lawyers and have not been instructed to represent their client, and yet they take up time of instructed lawyers, potentially driving up costs for consumers. We like the phrase "Laggers" (short for Legal Naggers) that we are hearing, and hope that consumers will become more aware of the impact that they have on the costs that solicitors will need to charge for dealing with them when working on an hourly rate.
Finally, we are surprised that a firm with designs on dominating the market is looking to charge nearly 50% of the fee that will be paid to their panel lawyers simply for passing on the work. This is profiteering at its worst, and we fear that the liberalisation of legal services may not generate cost savings for consumers that might be hoped.
However, it is quickly becoming apparent that the companies moving into this market are finding ways to simply squeeze existing law firms, without, it appears ingadd significant value.
We have experienced this first hand this week, with aggressive telephone calls from progressors within panels, not party to the transaction but simply with a vested interest to get the deal through. They are not lawyers and have not been instructed to represent their client, and yet they take up time of instructed lawyers, potentially driving up costs for consumers. We like the phrase "Laggers" (short for Legal Naggers) that we are hearing, and hope that consumers will become more aware of the impact that they have on the costs that solicitors will need to charge for dealing with them when working on an hourly rate.
Finally, we are surprised that a firm with designs on dominating the market is looking to charge nearly 50% of the fee that will be paid to their panel lawyers simply for passing on the work. This is profiteering at its worst, and we fear that the liberalisation of legal services may not generate cost savings for consumers that might be hoped.
Tuesday 21 June 2011
and we thought they were ripping up the rule book ...
The new government arrived with big scissors, red tape and a dolls house promising to reform the housing market. So they scrapped HIPs because they said that this would "free the housing market".
Clearly this didn't work as demonstrated by the pitiful volumes of transactions we're seeing at the moment. We accept that mortgage lending is weak, but the idea that scrapping one of the few seller qualifiers by getting rid of HIPs would encourage the market was fanciful at best.
Then, we were promised sweeping changes were going to be made to the Energy Performance Certificates, surely the most questionable aspect of recent property reforms. Amusingly, the shackles that were supposed to have been removed with their big scissors were being tightened up with the plan that agents couldn't market a property without the EPC,and the complete report needed to be included with the particulars.
We were surprised to say the least, that such reforming zeal could somehow be driven off-track so quickly, especially since the only real failings with HIPs was tying them to the marketing activity.
But ... Mr Pickles has now realised how difficult making changes to housing policy can be, and at the last moment, has delayed the decision until October.
We await the next instalment from the Great Reformers
Clearly this didn't work as demonstrated by the pitiful volumes of transactions we're seeing at the moment. We accept that mortgage lending is weak, but the idea that scrapping one of the few seller qualifiers by getting rid of HIPs would encourage the market was fanciful at best.
Then, we were promised sweeping changes were going to be made to the Energy Performance Certificates, surely the most questionable aspect of recent property reforms. Amusingly, the shackles that were supposed to have been removed with their big scissors were being tightened up with the plan that agents couldn't market a property without the EPC,and the complete report needed to be included with the particulars.
We were surprised to say the least, that such reforming zeal could somehow be driven off-track so quickly, especially since the only real failings with HIPs was tying them to the marketing activity.
But ... Mr Pickles has now realised how difficult making changes to housing policy can be, and at the last moment, has delayed the decision until October.
We await the next instalment from the Great Reformers
Thursday 9 June 2011
Its just a theory we've got ...
Over the past few months, we've seen a flurry of activity around what we like to call "The Democratising of The Law". (That's a new expression that we've just thought of, but it's quite apt.)
From the "Solicitors-in-Smiths" initiative through to "Free Legal Services" from the Co-Op (there's got to be some sort of catch there, because otherwise that business model looks a little challenging) it seems that Law is the new consumer product.
Move over the Wii and TripAdvisor, because the fashion for 2011 is obviously comparing legal providers - I would guess that consumers are in for quite a lot of disappointment this year, with sky-high expectations being set...
From the "Solicitors-in-Smiths" initiative through to "Free Legal Services" from the Co-Op (there's got to be some sort of catch there, because otherwise that business model looks a little challenging) it seems that Law is the new consumer product.
Move over the Wii and TripAdvisor, because the fashion for 2011 is obviously comparing legal providers - I would guess that consumers are in for quite a lot of disappointment this year, with sky-high expectations being set...
Thursday 19 May 2011
The Bold Group - a Bold move?
There are some huge changes coming in the legal profession this year, with the breaking of the monopolies that mean that only lawyers can own law firms.
We've been working hard over the past year to establish ourselves as an innovative provider of legal services from conveyancing to wills, so its interesting to see that other firms are now looking at ways to innovate.
That's why we're delighted to be associated with The Bold Group, who are working with hundreds of firms looking to promote a personal yet highly efficient service for their clients.
Given the challenges ahead with lenders and large firms, we recognise that smaller firms hava a great deal to offer and so are delighted that Rob Hailstone has taken up the challenge.
We've been working hard over the past year to establish ourselves as an innovative provider of legal services from conveyancing to wills, so its interesting to see that other firms are now looking at ways to innovate.
That's why we're delighted to be associated with The Bold Group, who are working with hundreds of firms looking to promote a personal yet highly efficient service for their clients.
Given the challenges ahead with lenders and large firms, we recognise that smaller firms hava a great deal to offer and so are delighted that Rob Hailstone has taken up the challenge.
Thursday 7 April 2011
Would you like some advice to go with your Will kit sir?
OK - so we knew that the liberalisation of the legal market was going to introduce some changes into the market, but we're a little surprised by the proposition that Quality Solicitors are now offering.
According to today's Law Society Gazette in over 150 branches of WHSmiths from this summer, it will be possible to book appointments for customers to provide conveyancing quotes, sell wills package and even offer their new loyalty card scheme.
This is a very interesting departure from the way that legal services are being sold, and we will watch carefully to see if it works.
Obviously, if it is successful, we'll be despatching our own solicitors onto the streets of Guildford with A-boards offering legal services to passers by.
According to today's Law Society Gazette in over 150 branches of WHSmiths from this summer, it will be possible to book appointments for customers to provide conveyancing quotes, sell wills package and even offer their new loyalty card scheme.
This is a very interesting departure from the way that legal services are being sold, and we will watch carefully to see if it works.
Obviously, if it is successful, we'll be despatching our own solicitors onto the streets of Guildford with A-boards offering legal services to passers by.
Tuesday 8 February 2011
Stamp Duty Land Tax savings schemes
Once again, the old adage has proved itself to be true.
"If it looks too good to be true, then it probably is".
Over the past couple of years, we have been approached by a number of companies trying to convince us of the merits of Stamp Duty Land Tax savings schemes. The idea is that there is a loophole in the law that "cannot be closed" according to one supplier that tried to convince us to work with him.
There are a number of variations on a theme, but fundamentally, the concept is that if you are buying a property, there are various schemes available to you that will enable you to legally avoid paying Stamp Duty Land Tax.
These schemes often involve sub-selling or buying through another company, so avoiding the tax that is normally due.
We have been extremely concerned about these schemes, not because it would cause us problems, but that our clients could suffer the consequences of when HMRC (formerly the Inland Revenue) finally catches up with those that have used them.
That's why we were very pleased to learn to read the lastest release from HMRC that explains their position, and that they are investigating instructions where they suspect such tactics were used.
This guidance note can be downloaded here which explains how HMRC view such schemes.
"If it looks too good to be true, then it probably is".
Over the past couple of years, we have been approached by a number of companies trying to convince us of the merits of Stamp Duty Land Tax savings schemes. The idea is that there is a loophole in the law that "cannot be closed" according to one supplier that tried to convince us to work with him.
There are a number of variations on a theme, but fundamentally, the concept is that if you are buying a property, there are various schemes available to you that will enable you to legally avoid paying Stamp Duty Land Tax.
These schemes often involve sub-selling or buying through another company, so avoiding the tax that is normally due.
We have been extremely concerned about these schemes, not because it would cause us problems, but that our clients could suffer the consequences of when HMRC (formerly the Inland Revenue) finally catches up with those that have used them.
That's why we were very pleased to learn to read the lastest release from HMRC that explains their position, and that they are investigating instructions where they suspect such tactics were used.
This guidance note can be downloaded here which explains how HMRC view such schemes.
Thursday 27 January 2011
Confusion about Stamp Duty Land Tax rise
As most people are aware, from April 6th 2010, Stamp Duty Land Tax for properties costing over £1m will increase from the current 4% rate to a new 5% rate. This has caused a little confusion amongst buyers as to whether the tax is due at exchange of contracts or completion.
The law is clear on this, the tax is payable only on completion of the contract so anyone looking to purchase a property over £1m will need to complete the transaction before April 6th to ensure that they do not incur the additional cost.
The law is clear on this, the tax is payable only on completion of the contract so anyone looking to purchase a property over £1m will need to complete the transaction before April 6th to ensure that they do not incur the additional cost.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)