Warning - do not use wolstenholmes solicitors

Simply_Me_2

VIGILANT22 wrote: »

Lenders also have a duty to ensure applications/ID tally...

Surely that might be true in principal but we now know in practice that is not correct as plenty of people are living in properties that is not registered in their names and afterall your solicitor also acts for the lender at the same time the lender like you trusts that solicitor to act in everyone's best interest and not line their own pockets.

VIGILANT22

Simply_Me wrote: »

Surely that might be true in principal but we now know in practice that is not correct as plenty of people are living in properties that is not registered in their h names and afterall your solicitor also acts for the lender at the same time the lender like you trusts that solicitor to act in everyone's best interest and not line their own pockets.

The lender had their own legal obligation to meet and this does not mean making an assumption....ie.....one of the reasons many lenders will not allow one man bands to do conveyancing is the risk of fraud....many further advances/borrowing are not dealt with by your solicitor...

Simply_Me_2

VIGILANT22 wrote: »

The lender had their own legal obligation to meet and this does not mean making an assumption....ie.....one of the reasons many lenders will not allow one man bands to do conveyancing is the risk of fraud....many further advances/borrowing are not dealt with by your solicitor...

When you instruct a solicitor, lets say Wolstenholmes in a conveyancing matter that same solicitor acts for both you and the lender. The lender entrust that solicitor to look after its legal interest and you expect that solicitor to look after yours.

Perhaps you are really missing the point, fraud is/was not confined to one man bands, can you say Wolstenholmes. As long as that solicitor is on the banks approved panel which Wolstenholmes was then they are deemed approved.

Obviously you are not affected by this so perhaps those who are will be diligent enough will check their paperwork and discover for themselves whether they are affected or not.

Brahan_seer_3

VIGILANT22 wrote: »

You still haven't answered the question then..."do you mean they never paid off 2nd charges or are you suggesting they raised money against properties"

This truly is scaremongering, but for anyone whose purchase was completed before the intervention they should check on line at the land registry to see if they are the registered proprietors and that any charge on the property is also recorded in the charges register. That should not apply to anyone who post completion has been sent a copy of the title information document by Wolstenholmes which clearly records the necessary changes to the registers.

Horrified_Solicitor

Brahan_seer wrote: »

This truly is scaremongering, but for anyone whose purchase was completed before the intervention they should check on line at the land registry to see if they are the registered proprietors and that any charge on the property is also recorded in the charges register. That should not apply to anyone who post completion has been sent a copy of the title information document by Wolstenholmes which clearly records the necessary changes to the registers.

I suggest that even those who have been sent a copy of the title information document post completion should get up to date office copies from the Land Registry to check that the up to date entries correspond with the ones sent to them. It only costs £8 and will give peace of mind. When things to go wrong, it's wise to check everything.

mjmal51

Horrified_Solicitor wrote: »

I suggest that even those who have been sent a copy of the title information document post completion should get up to date office copies from the Land Registry to check that the up to date entries correspond with the ones sent to them. It only costs £8 and will give peace of mind. When things to go wrong, it's wise to check everything.

When I appointed a new solicitor the first thing he did was write to the LR explaining the situation that the property had not been registered and the WH intervention.
He put in a formal request to prevent anybody else trying to register the property in their name.

Mikefa

Anyone had any issues with deeds that were being held in trust at the firm? If so, I'd like to speak to you. I work for Crain's Manchester Business (newspaper) and can be contacted on [EMAIL="mfahy@crain.com"]mfahy@crain.com[/EMAIL]. I've written a couple of pieces and will continue to look at the circumstances surrounding the firm's demise.

LadyLawyer

Hi
I am new to this forum and have just registered as I am a conveyancer who has just taken over some clients who had been using Wolstenhomes before they went out of business. I don't charge £99 for conveyancing, I am closer to £600, but I would be horrified if any of my clients came out with stories like I have seen in this thread - in fact I would leave the profession and admit I was a lousy lawyer!
That said, anyone who has lost out can contact the SRA for a compensation form to claim any money they have lost and if the Stamp Duty Land Tax or Land Registry procedures have not been completed, someone else can take that over and sort it out for you. You will end up spending the money you saved on legal fees.
So please - don't panic. Get a decent lawyer to sort things out for you and learn in future that you get what you pay for.
This is not meant to sound harsh as I act for many first time buyers who are very cost conscious - so they should be - and need to save on costs. But there is a reason we all do our exams and most good lawyers, especially qualified ones, would not work for such low fees.
Having also dealt with the solicitors who dealt with the intervention in Manchester, if anyone needs their details let me know - I am dealing with a very good lady there who has helped me to rescue a purchase transaction for some clients and she is always happy to help.
All the best
LadyLawyer

Horrified_Solicitor

LadyLawyer wrote: »

Hi
I am new to this forum and have just registered as I am a conveyancer who has just taken over some clients who had been using Wolstenhomes before they went out of business. I don't charge £99 for conveyancing, I am closer to £600,

I totally agree with what you say. Interestingly enough, it appears that WH were not that cheap after all. They advertised £99 conveyancing but this headline figure seems to have covered little more than filling in a TR1. All the rest of the work involved in the average transaction was charged for seperately and the final bills seem a lot nearer what you are charging than the £99 quoted.

VIGILANT22

Who in their right mind would expect to have conveyancing done for £99.00!....why do people want such important matters like financial/legal advice for nothing/next to nothing...yet many are prepared to spend that money on a night out....If people can't afford the fees involved they shouldn't be buying a house.........