Years ago, the department of transport spent millions of pounds widening the M40 and merely ended up relocating traffic jams a few miles down the road from Greenford into west London. It was fundamentally a good idea, but in reality, merely helped a few people get into London more quickly outside the busiest periods.
For people buying and selling properties, the experience can be very similar to sitting in lines of traffic - aggravating, slow and completely unpredictable.
That's why, in theory, the Law's Society's latest attempt to speed up conveyancing with its Veyo conveyancing project, whose logo is an orange bunny, is laudable and well-intentioned.
Sadly, in our opinion, it is doomed to fail and will join a growing list of failed projects designed to improve the conveyancing process.
The previous government tried to help with Home Information Packs, which even the most cynical estate agents now recognise was a good idea, undermined by poor implementation and party politics.
The Land Registry tried with their "econveyancing" project of centralising transactions, which was very sensible as they control the transactional data, but sadly, again, was let down by delays and inertia.
Whilst we salute the Law Society's gallant efforts to try and help their fee-paying members like us, we feel that maybe they should have talked to someone first before embarking on this exercise in futility.
There are fundamental problems with chains and keeping systems updated that they don't seem to have taken into account.
Unless everyone in a chain is using the same system, then, like today, transactions will only be able to move at the pace of the slowest element. If only a couple of law firms in a chain are using Veyo, the benefits will be extremely limited. This means that whilst it may well speed up certain elements of communication, overall, it will have minimal impact on overall transaction times.
Secondly, given that most lawyers are already struggling to keep their internal case management systems updated, if they are expected to keep another system updated as well, the chances seem slim at best. Any direct integration between case management systems will lag at least six months behind the launch, by which time, its credibility will be sorely tested.
If Veyo ever does see the light of day, the reality will be a system with incomplete data from only part of a chain, containing information that is likely to be out of date and therefore cannot be trusted.
We would suggest that the Law Society reconsiders its revolutionary plans for conveyancing before it meets a similar fate to a cuddly bunny that strays onto the Westway.
The results are going to be messy and probably a bit bloody.
Saturday, 28 February 2015
Sunday, 1 February 2015
The legal "profession" really needs to grow up a bit ...
OK - we'll admit it.
As relative newcomers to the legal business, we understand that traditional law firms are upset by the changes that companies like ours are bringing to the house buying and selling process.
When we started the company five years ago, we were told of a "dive to the bottom" and the good old days when solicitors were respected were well and truly behind us. People would say "it's such a shame, law used to be considered a profession, now it is just a business". Indeed, we are constantly on the receiving end of numerous patronising comments and criticism from competitors, purely because our business wasn't established before those new computer-things were invented.
However, even we were surprised when a client came to us this week, who had been upset by an email from her former solicitor when she asked him to send her documents to us. His response to her very polite and professional email was extraordinary. "I try and look after all of my clients ... in the expectation they will remain loyal ... the estate agents urged you to use their pet solicitors but it is difficult not to hide my disappointment that you have chosen not to use me."
REALLY?
Sadly, we see this hard-done-by sentiment all too often.
Whether it is complaining about estate agent fees, trying to score points by blaming someone else, or just merely upset that they have lost business to a competitor, such schoolyard histrionics seem part and parcel of the daily life of some property lawyers.
To be clear. The legal market is going through some major changes and will continue to do so.
However, contrary to what many lawyers believe, these changes are not about fees, but about service, which is borne out in numerous surveys. The challenge is that service goes beyond being knowledgeable and doing the work properly. It's also about acting in a professional manner at all times with everyone involved in the transaction.
We think that its probably time for many law firms to sit up and take notice and would like to offer some general pointers to those who are not clear what professional service really entails;
- Answer your telephone
- Return telephone calls
- Offer solutions not problems
- Don't expect respect as you've been doing this for years or have the word "Partner" in your email signature
- Charge appropriate fees so that you can employ enough people
In our opinion, it would make all our lives a lot easier if everyone involved in the legal side of the house selling and buying process started to show a little more maturity and rather less nit-picking grandstanding.
In this way, maybe our jobs would be easier and all our clients would receive a better service.
And perhaps they might even refer their friends.
As relative newcomers to the legal business, we understand that traditional law firms are upset by the changes that companies like ours are bringing to the house buying and selling process.
When we started the company five years ago, we were told of a "dive to the bottom" and the good old days when solicitors were respected were well and truly behind us. People would say "it's such a shame, law used to be considered a profession, now it is just a business". Indeed, we are constantly on the receiving end of numerous patronising comments and criticism from competitors, purely because our business wasn't established before those new computer-things were invented.
However, even we were surprised when a client came to us this week, who had been upset by an email from her former solicitor when she asked him to send her documents to us. His response to her very polite and professional email was extraordinary. "I try and look after all of my clients ... in the expectation they will remain loyal ... the estate agents urged you to use their pet solicitors but it is difficult not to hide my disappointment that you have chosen not to use me."
REALLY?
Sadly, we see this hard-done-by sentiment all too often.
Whether it is complaining about estate agent fees, trying to score points by blaming someone else, or just merely upset that they have lost business to a competitor, such schoolyard histrionics seem part and parcel of the daily life of some property lawyers.
To be clear. The legal market is going through some major changes and will continue to do so.
However, contrary to what many lawyers believe, these changes are not about fees, but about service, which is borne out in numerous surveys. The challenge is that service goes beyond being knowledgeable and doing the work properly. It's also about acting in a professional manner at all times with everyone involved in the transaction.
We think that its probably time for many law firms to sit up and take notice and would like to offer some general pointers to those who are not clear what professional service really entails;
- Answer your telephone
- Return telephone calls
- Offer solutions not problems
- Don't expect respect as you've been doing this for years or have the word "Partner" in your email signature
- Charge appropriate fees so that you can employ enough people
In our opinion, it would make all our lives a lot easier if everyone involved in the legal side of the house selling and buying process started to show a little more maturity and rather less nit-picking grandstanding.
In this way, maybe our jobs would be easier and all our clients would receive a better service.
And perhaps they might even refer their friends.
Wednesday, 1 May 2013
Lenders really are surpassing themselves these days ...
Being at the sharp end of the property market, means that we get very clear visibility as to the reality of how mortgage lenders are working with our clients.
A current trend that we have found is lenders continuing to try and push their own "preferred" conveyancers. Whilst we fully understand that they need to reduce risk, and there is still much mortgage fraud going on out there, we do find their attitude towards conveyancing solicitors a little intriguing to put it politely.
On most days, we take telephone calls from clients who have been "urged" by their mortgage adviser or lender to use another solicitor. Indeed, we had one client that used a high volume firm, "because their mortgage adviser had a good relationship with them which meant the deal would go through more quickly". Obviously we didn't point out that their advisor doesn't really control the process, nor that the firm would pay their advisor a large referral fee".
Nationwide have upped the ante recently - given that they closed their panel over four years ago, and are actively removing solicitors from it, their decision to force all work through their panel management company reduces the choice for consumers even further.
With the ongoing debacle that is HSBC refusing to allow firms to represent them depending on their regulator, it really is time for us to follow the lead in Scotland (where all the decent property ideas seem to come from) and force everyone to use a separate solicitor for the lender.
A current trend that we have found is lenders continuing to try and push their own "preferred" conveyancers. Whilst we fully understand that they need to reduce risk, and there is still much mortgage fraud going on out there, we do find their attitude towards conveyancing solicitors a little intriguing to put it politely.
On most days, we take telephone calls from clients who have been "urged" by their mortgage adviser or lender to use another solicitor. Indeed, we had one client that used a high volume firm, "because their mortgage adviser had a good relationship with them which meant the deal would go through more quickly". Obviously we didn't point out that their advisor doesn't really control the process, nor that the firm would pay their advisor a large referral fee".
Nationwide have upped the ante recently - given that they closed their panel over four years ago, and are actively removing solicitors from it, their decision to force all work through their panel management company reduces the choice for consumers even further.
With the ongoing debacle that is HSBC refusing to allow firms to represent them depending on their regulator, it really is time for us to follow the lead in Scotland (where all the decent property ideas seem to come from) and force everyone to use a separate solicitor for the lender.
Monday, 25 February 2013
The Partnership Newsletter December 2012
"It's behind you!!"
EPCs not required on property particulars This anti-red-tape campaigning government that introduced the ridiculous notion of including a copy of the first page of the EPC on property particulars has just announced that from January 9th 2013 they are changing this policy. Naturally. From that date, the first page of the EPC does not need to be included on advertising, which includes brochures. The official guidance states that the coloured charts should be included although it is not clear that this is mandatory and "it is recognised that this is not always possible". In short, the requirement is rather elastic. | ||
| We believe that if clients have a better understanding of the legal process of house buying and selling, this will reduce stress levels so we have produced a free conveyancing guide. Following on from the outstanding response to our unique agent handbook, a new Client Edition is now available to all our referrers to give to clients. There is an online version available for browsing purposes but if you would like copies of this booklet, just send an email to us and we'll put a set in the post to you |
| Our reputation for efficiency and a uniquely agent-friendly approach has lead to a significant growth in sales, with results up 250% over last year. To meet this growing demand, we continue to recruit enthusiastic and dynamic solicitors and assistants to join our company. In just the last few weeks, Lucy Eldred has joined as a solicitor, Ceri Bromwich as an administrator and Tim Kirkconel will be joining us in January as a Legal Assistant. We'll take a rest over Christmas before the recruitment process starts again, and then start the joyous process of looking for new larger offices to cater for all these new desks! |
Wednesday, 20 February 2013
Nationwide thwarts the latest efforts to put lipstick on the financial services pig
Well ... at least we thought there were some rules, but it seems that lenders can play quite fast and loose when it comes to advising their clients.
First, it was HSBC that broke the mould by selecting their clients' lawyers for them. For one of the world's most conservative banks it was a brave move. Someone in head office decided that if their clients wanted to get a mortgage with HSBC then they wouldn't be able to choose their own solicitor to represent them.
Suffice to say, it didn't go down terribly well, and even BBC Radio 4 listeners got to hear about the issue.
Bowing to the inevitable pressure from estate agents who were obviously frustrated by the huge delays that this decision caused, HSBC revisited the idea and allowed a few more solicitors to represent them.
So that's the old news.
Now, it seems that Nationwide have decided to embark on a similar, but altogether more aggressive course. Not content with refusing to allow any law firms that haven't represented them for more than four years ago, now they have dictated that they will "encourage" their clients to use their recommended lawyers.
If any client has the temerity to try and select their own lawyer, Nationwide (and their brokers) will do their utmost to dissuade them from this free choice. We've seen a significant increase over the past few months in clients being strong-armed by the lender and their brokers alike to use their own lawyers.
These lawyers all receive work through a panel, LMS, for whom, no doubt, this is good business.
Unfortunately, for both the lawyers that receive this panelled work, the fees are necessarily reduced (after all, LMS have to get paid) and for Nationwide's clients, they inevitably suffer the consequences that arise out of solicitors working for reduced fees.
Sadly, the FSA, (the Financial Services Authority, rather than the Food Standards Agency, but equally known for their toothlessness) cannot do anything about this.
It seems that while lenders can act against their clients' wishes, the efforts to rehabilitate the disgraced financial service industry and still akin to putting lipstick on a pig.
First, it was HSBC that broke the mould by selecting their clients' lawyers for them. For one of the world's most conservative banks it was a brave move. Someone in head office decided that if their clients wanted to get a mortgage with HSBC then they wouldn't be able to choose their own solicitor to represent them.
Suffice to say, it didn't go down terribly well, and even BBC Radio 4 listeners got to hear about the issue.
Bowing to the inevitable pressure from estate agents who were obviously frustrated by the huge delays that this decision caused, HSBC revisited the idea and allowed a few more solicitors to represent them.
So that's the old news.
Now, it seems that Nationwide have decided to embark on a similar, but altogether more aggressive course. Not content with refusing to allow any law firms that haven't represented them for more than four years ago, now they have dictated that they will "encourage" their clients to use their recommended lawyers.
If any client has the temerity to try and select their own lawyer, Nationwide (and their brokers) will do their utmost to dissuade them from this free choice. We've seen a significant increase over the past few months in clients being strong-armed by the lender and their brokers alike to use their own lawyers.
These lawyers all receive work through a panel, LMS, for whom, no doubt, this is good business.
Unfortunately, for both the lawyers that receive this panelled work, the fees are necessarily reduced (after all, LMS have to get paid) and for Nationwide's clients, they inevitably suffer the consequences that arise out of solicitors working for reduced fees.
Sadly, the FSA, (the Financial Services Authority, rather than the Food Standards Agency, but equally known for their toothlessness) cannot do anything about this.
It seems that while lenders can act against their clients' wishes, the efforts to rehabilitate the disgraced financial service industry and still akin to putting lipstick on a pig.
Monday, 29 October 2012
The Partnership Newsletter - October 2012
| "Remember, remember, the 5th November ..." |
| Gunpowder, treason and "phut". We were promised a revolution with expensive solicitors being run out of town and everyone having access to cheap legal services. However, in reality, the radical change in the law allowing non-lawyers to buy law firms has been nothing more than a damp squib, resulting in embarrassing adverts of spring onions in suits and Saga offering the over-55's last-minute Wills as they board their Mediterranean cruises. With a year gone and less than 35 companies currently licensed, there is either no appetite or simply no demand. The promise of Lidl Legal Services seems further away than its ever been - not exactly a "bang" - more of a whimper. |
Investors facing challenges from lenders
| We have seen the improvement in the buy-to-let market being challenged by recent changes in processes from mortgage lenders. In the past, either a lawyer was able to act for a lender, or they weren't. However, in recent months, lenders have been creating "sub-panels" for clients choosing certain types of mortgages. In some cases, lenders are only offering specially reduced interest rates on the condition that the client uses a specific lawyer, irrespective of whether their solicitor is on their panel. Given that on occasions, the lender's own staff are not clear about the policy this change has introduced even more unwelcome delays into the conveyancing process. |
EPCs now available through property address
| One of the most frustrating aspects of retrieving Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) is that the unique reference code was required before they could be downloaded. However, after only five years, it has now become possible for vendors and agents to retrieve reports based on the property address. Somewhat surprisingly, this change was not announced, but just appeared on the central government database a few weeks ago. The reports are available from the Landmark database immediately. More positive responses from agents |
| Our new Conveyancing Discussions continue to go from strength to strength with these free 1 hour sessions currently being run 4-5 times a week at agents' offices. Feedback has been very positive from negotiators and managers, with improved levels of confidence and understanding helping negotiators progress deals more effectively. The free pens and handbooks have been particular popular - our website has more information about the sessions. |
Monday, 24 September 2012
The Partnership Newsletter - September 2012
You're an embarrassment to the Quality Street name
The toffee penny is, in our opinion, possibly one of the least popular sweets invented, and illustrates how the word "Quality" can be abused. Even though the manufacturers write the word on the tin, this dullard's very existence calls the brand into question. Indeed, we've recent experience of exactly the same problem with the word being used by legal providers. Whether its the Law Society's Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) or the Quality Solicitors franchise, neither provides sanctions where their members abuse the brand. This means that unfortunately, unlike the toffee penny which can be given to the dog, as our blog indicates, for now, we're going to have to put up with those companies that don't follow the rules and insist on being rude, inefficient and frankly, no-one's favourite.
Lenders - There's more trouble ahead
HSBC's decision to force their clients to use their choice of lawyer was the first time the impact of separate lender representation was felt widely. Given the negative feedback to this approach which lead to HSBC's humiliating climbdown, many agents and clients hoped we'd seen the end of this practice. Unfortunately, we are seeing increasing numbers of lenders forcing specific types of clients to use their selected lawyer. In recent weeks, clients getting buy-to-let mortgages and one applying for an offset mortgage, were all forced to use the bank's lawyers. This is definitely a growing trend, and clients and agents should be aware where such representation is required, as it will slow transactions and cause unexpected frustration for buyers and sellers alike.
HSBC - not exactly a level playing field
HSBC have backtracked on their decision to allow only a handful of lawyers to represent them, and from the beginning of September, have now allowed a slightly larger handful of firms who have joined the Law Society's CQS to represent them. However, citing "technical difficulties", the bank is not allowing licensed conveyancers onto the panel. Which is curious, as they already have several such companies on their existing panel. And licensed conveyancers can also represent them for First Direct mortgages. Which at least demonstrates a consistent lack of inconsistency.
Partnership New Conveyancing Discussions are proving a Hit
Following successful trials with a number of London estate agents, our new, free Conveyancing Discussion is now being launched. Accompanied by a unique handbook and materials, this informal 45 minute session reviews recent changes to the conveyancing process, how agents can help resolve problems and actually get to see the documents involved in the process. To learn more about this new service, send an email for more information and we'll send you a free sample of the handbook.
The toffee penny is, in our opinion, possibly one of the least popular sweets invented, and illustrates how the word "Quality" can be abused. Even though the manufacturers write the word on the tin, this dullard's very existence calls the brand into question. Indeed, we've recent experience of exactly the same problem with the word being used by legal providers. Whether its the Law Society's Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) or the Quality Solicitors franchise, neither provides sanctions where their members abuse the brand. This means that unfortunately, unlike the toffee penny which can be given to the dog, as our blog indicates, for now, we're going to have to put up with those companies that don't follow the rules and insist on being rude, inefficient and frankly, no-one's favourite.
Lenders - There's more trouble ahead
HSBC's decision to force their clients to use their choice of lawyer was the first time the impact of separate lender representation was felt widely. Given the negative feedback to this approach which lead to HSBC's humiliating climbdown, many agents and clients hoped we'd seen the end of this practice. Unfortunately, we are seeing increasing numbers of lenders forcing specific types of clients to use their selected lawyer. In recent weeks, clients getting buy-to-let mortgages and one applying for an offset mortgage, were all forced to use the bank's lawyers. This is definitely a growing trend, and clients and agents should be aware where such representation is required, as it will slow transactions and cause unexpected frustration for buyers and sellers alike.
HSBC - not exactly a level playing field
HSBC have backtracked on their decision to allow only a handful of lawyers to represent them, and from the beginning of September, have now allowed a slightly larger handful of firms who have joined the Law Society's CQS to represent them. However, citing "technical difficulties", the bank is not allowing licensed conveyancers onto the panel. Which is curious, as they already have several such companies on their existing panel. And licensed conveyancers can also represent them for First Direct mortgages. Which at least demonstrates a consistent lack of inconsistency.
Partnership New Conveyancing Discussions are proving a Hit
Following successful trials with a number of London estate agents, our new, free Conveyancing Discussion is now being launched. Accompanied by a unique handbook and materials, this informal 45 minute session reviews recent changes to the conveyancing process, how agents can help resolve problems and actually get to see the documents involved in the process. To learn more about this new service, send an email for more information and we'll send you a free sample of the handbook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)