Christmas Conveyancing

So here we are again. Four more working days to Christmas and still trying to do simultaneous exchanges and completions so the beloved clients can "be in by Christmas". This annual scenario with its attendant stress levels is the reason most people think I'm a miserable bastard every Christmas. This annual extravaganza drains me to such an extent that I function much like a zombie during the holiday and I find I am barely refreshed when we return to the fray in the new year.

So, what will next year bring and what (if any) resolutions will I make so far as my practice is concerned. Well, I doubt I will think of any major changes to the way we turn out the work but then, of course, we have the prospect of HIPS to look forward to in the summer and the ever approaching adoption of e-conveyancing by the Land Registry. On balance I will probably concentrate on finding my ideal retirement home in Dorset and try to convince my senior assistants that they would be well served by joining me in partnership and then allowing me to retire. I can't wait.

Happy Holidays.

Chancery Woes

The reason for my recent lack of postings is due to preparation for a three day Chancery trial on the Isle of Wight. I acted for clients when they bought a property in Cowes which included a Boat Park subject to use by the other 10 properties on the development and mooring on a Sea Wall adjoining a Boat Yard. A dispute arose with the Boat Yard owner over the ownership of the Sea Wall which was in my clients' title but which he claimed and he sought Rectification of the Registers of the two titles.

I rarely these days deal with litiguous matters but got sucked into this one having started dealing with it by corresponding with the Land Registry but they got cold feet and directed that the matter be referred to the High Court for a decision and by then I was in too deep to back out.

The Trial finished yesterday and we lost but I am now seeking an indemnity for my clients' losses from the Land Registry under Schedule 8 of the Land Registration Act, 2002 which is a first for me in 38 years of practice.

So today its back to conveyancing. Roll on the weekend

Home Information Packs

Well what was that all about? After much anxiety in the High Street and the forecast death of the small firm conveyancer we read that the whole thing was a load of bollocks and the compulsory pack will now be meaningless and better still can be knocked together in about 15 minutes. After the SIPPS debacle where pension companies spent millions devising their products and organising seminars for the anticipated rush to put residential properties into pension schemes only for Gordon to change his mind at the last minute and scrap the proposals, this time Two Jags old department have done much the same to Rightmove, Countrywide and others (I must admit to some satisfaction to their plight).

The compulsory part of the packs will now be an Energy Rating which I think any Surveyor can do, local search and a copy of the Land Registry entries. What this does to help the Buyer I don't know and any solicitor with a PC and Broadband can organise this in no time for the Agent leaving the Pack Providers with nothing to sell.

The people I feel sorry for are the 300 poor sods who've shelled out a reputed £7,000 to be Home Inspectors and now will have nothing to inspect. Will the Government compensate them ? Answers on a postcard to You must be joking, P O Box 1, Luxury flat, Admiralty Arch, London

HIPS

I received an email from the Law Society's HIP thing yesterday advising that the regulations had just been published. Logging on to the website I only had a short time to review the details but it appears the "packs" must contain certain documentation and may contain other documents. The must have documents appear to be a copy of the land registry entries (or deeds if unregistered), a local search and the Home Condition Report and thats about it. What about a Contract, Property Information Form, Fixtures and Fittings form etc.

I cannot see any benefit to a prospective Buyer in having any of these documents available at the point of viewing other than perhaps the Home Condition Report. I believe that Estate Agents will only put in a HIP what they have to in order to get the property on the market and they would be able to source the search and copy entries without the need for solicitor involvement (transaction online etc). I can't see this as being the "death" of the High Street practice or am I missing something?

CHAPS Payments

Another Friday and another load of grief with our Bank. Our Bank (nameless of course) has chosen to outsource its CHAPS receipts and payment procedures to Malaysia or somewhere that way.We telephone a UK number where the details of the payment are noted and the telephone call recorded and they then give the details to Malaysia who action the payment. The receipts by CHAPS are actually credited to our account by Malaysia and we receive a telephone call from them to advise receipt. You may already see that this is a crap system for the customer as there are too many people involved where delay may occur.

Today we needed funds off deposit to complete a transaction. They were sent to us by CHAPS before 9.30 am this morning. At 1.45 pm we were still waiting for a call to confirm receipt of the funds. We telephoned the UK number to enquire as to the receipt to be told "we can see the funds but they are not yet credited to your account". The funds "arrived" at 11.06 am but at 1.45 pm we had still not received them in our account i.e. Malaysia had sat on the funds for 2hrs 45 mins and done nothing to credit the funds. I have spoken with our "relationship manager" (sic)previously about these delays and how badly it affects clients waiting for keys but he seems powerless to do anything about it. I know we could change banks but this is a major excercise with client account.

I wonder how these sort of problems will affect e-conveyancing and the Land Registry matrix and just pray that I can retire before all this is in place.

Completions and Bank Holidays

Friday 26th May and another Bank Holiday Monday looms. As usual we had a number of completions and you just know something is going to go wrong. On this day the Buyer's Solicitors had a problem with their mortgage advance. Apparantley, their change of status from partnership to LLP had been approved by the head office of the lender but someone forgot to tell the completions dept. The story is the completions dept. said earlier in the day that the advance would be sent and then changed their mind later so that the funds were never received. The Partner dealing with the matter was on leave, his experienced assistant went home at lunchtime and it appeared to me that the matter was left with the receptionist to sort out. Late in the day (4.30pm) the Senior Partner got involved and we managed to cobble something together to enable the clients to move into their new houses but this was around 5.00 pm. Much stress and tears from my client.

The motto of this story is to ask for your mortgage advance the day before completion and if it doesn't arrive you have time to sort out the problem before it becomes time critical.

Developers

I dont act for many developers and those I have tend to build the odd property or maybe a pair. I have a small development of four new houses for a builder client all selling for in excess of £500K and since day one the client has been on my back. The last plot is due to exchange and complete tomorrow and I received a fax this afternoon from the buyers' solicitors advising me that one of the previous purchasers has done a search of whole rather than in respect of the plot they were purchasing. The following points arise:-

1. The wrong search was in respect of the first plot sold and since then two others have completed. The searches of part of the two later completions must have revealed the earlier search of whole which has priority and on checking the day list it confers priority for a charge in favour of Coventry Building Society. Neither of the solicitors has raised a query about this.
2. I've told the client this afternoon as it may affect the proposed completion tomorrow and all he wants to know is who is going to pay him compensation if he doesn't receive the sale proceeds tomorrow and why this has arisen at the last minute.

Is there a lesson from this I don't know. The solicitor who lodged the search of whole is nearly as old as me so I guess he delegated the search to someone lower down the food chain who clearly didnt know what they were doing. Needless to say he is out this afternoon and will be in tomorrow at 10 a.m. when he will have to fax the land registry to cancel his search of whole and lodge the correct search of part unless he has already lodged his AP1 but I doubt that given the delays with SDLT if you dont submit the returns online. I will probably use up £200 of fee earning time sorting this out so the question is "who will pay me compensation" and the answer is nobody.

Roll on the weekend

High worth divorce

It's been many years since I practised matrimonial law. Those were the days when Wachtel v Wachtel and Lord Denning (who incidentally signed my admission certificate) were the buzz.I've just read the full decision of the House of Lords in Miller v Miller and McFarlane v McFarlane at Bailii.org and wonder why anyone with large capital assests or high income would want to enter the state of matrimony. Don't get me wrong I have no problem with a just division of assets on divorce but it seems to me that today there is little realistic prospect of marriage for life in many cases and the financial consequences for high earners are now so dire following these decisions I believe many will think twice before going down on bended knee.Perhaps the pre-nuptial agreement should be given legal force so that the individuals can set out what is to happen if the relationship ends with maybe differing outcomes depending on the length of the marriage rather than allowing the Judges to make that decision.

That said, my high street practice matrimonial clients rarely have a pot to piss in so it wont make a blind bit of difference to my matrimonial legal executive.

Converted Properties

I heard today of an issue raised with a conveyancer in another firm. She acts for a developer who has converted offices over a shop into residential flats with all appropriate planning and building regulation approvals. The flats are now being sold and the first purchasers solicitor has asked for NHBC, Zurich, Architect's Certificate etc. It appears none of these is available only the building regs completion certificate which is, of course, not a guarantee. A close study of the CML handbook reveals in para 6.6.3 that there is a mortgagee requirement for "newly converted property" to have one of the specified documents. In this particular case the proposed mortgagee has been asked whether they will proceed with the loan with only the building regs certificate and an answer is awaited.

I recently acted for a developer who converted a large victorian house into four flats and we sold them on new 99 year leases and none of the purchasers solicitors asked for any documentation pursuant to 6.6.3 of the CML handbook which was not available in any event.

Am I missing something or are most solicitors unaware of the CML handbook requirements?

Reneging Sellers

Once again I have today got to the point of exchange on a sale and purchase only to find that the one of the sellers has gone back on her word to vacate and now wants to synchronise her sale with a purchase but she hasn't even found yet. Its the usual story. At the outset we were told the Sellers were divorcing, Mr has already vacated and Mrs was going into rented. We argued about completion date on Friday last week and yesterday finally compromising on the 9th June then we hear this bombshell this morning.

Give me strength and also tell me how Sellers Packs will make any difference to this oft repeated scenario. The only saving grace is I dont do "no sale no fee" so I will at least get paid for all the wasted work.

Sole Practitioner Prejudice

Do you wonder sometimes if conveyancers actually think about what they are doing or whether they see a supplemental enquiry raised by someone else and think "that looks good, I'll add that to mine" without further thought.The particular enquiry that springs to mind is aimed at sole practioners and is usually along the lines of:

In view of the case of Patel -v- Daybells (2000) please confirm that you are authorised by the mortgagee to receive the redemption funds on completion.

This enquiry was deemed neccessary as in the absence of such confirmation and in the event the sole practitoner absconded with the funds or for some other reason failed to redeem the mortgage the buyers' solicitors could be held liable in negligence.In the circumstances a reasonable enquiry. However in 2001 the case found its way to the Court of Appeal from the original 2000 decision of Gray J in the Queen's Bench Division and as a result of the appeal decision the supplemental enquiry is otiose.

I recently debated this point with a partner in a local firm of solicitors and despite referring her to the appeal decision she still insisted on me obtaining a letter from the Lender saying I was authorised to receive the redemption monies on their behalf. This was impossible as I was not on their panel, a fact already known to her. I invited her to redeem the mortgage directly with the Lender on completion and offered to send her a copy of the redemption statement which was how the matter resolved in the end although she still insisted on obtaining a letter from the Lender addressed to her firm saying they agreed that she could redeem the mortgage (this was after she had consulted with her senior partner).

This exchange of letters took some three weeks and caused extreme frustration to both sets of clients, Estate Agents etc. The same enquiry still appears on their additional enquiries.