Do solicitors make commission from insurance they sell?

Thrugelmir

ijrwe wrote: »

Iand the solicitor agreed to go ahead regardless, the lender wouldn't even know or care and my loan would be released just the same, surely?

Solicitor isn't going to ruin his business or reputation over such a trivial matter.

Thrugelmir

ijrwe wrote: »

I feel like I'm !!!!ing them off every time I speak to them and I think I get charged per email/letter as well, and their reading time.

How much time have you wasted on other matters during the transaction?

Time is money.

ijrwe

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Solicitor isn't going to ruin his business or reputation over such a trivial matter.

Yorkie1 wrote: »

OP, you asked the following question:



Kingstreet's answer dealt with that question. The solicitor has to advise the lender of the position before he draws the funds down. The solicitor would not go ahead regardless, as it is his professional responsibility to comply with lender instructions and the CML handbook. So, the lender would know and therefore the loan is not guaranteed.

The CML handbook in reality doesn't take an position on the matter, see my link above. There are examples on this site of people with mortgages who refused CRL insurance, too, and I expect some solicitors don't push the matter while others prefer to.

My position currently is that the reason my solicitor gave for my requiring it does not stand up to scrutiny. If they tell me that the lender has in any way themselves asked for it, that's an entirely different matter. But I think they're acting alone on this one, and the CML handbook doesn't back them up.

ijrwe

Thrugelmir wrote: »

How much time have you wasted on other matters during the transaction?

Time is money.

I don't understand the question...

ijrwe

Interesting post:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=51676777&postcount=3

ijrwe

Richard_Webster wrote: »

If a client getting a mortgage asks why I tell them they have a choice - either pay £10/£15 for a policy or wait around for weeks until I get an answer to a letter to his lender asking for clarification of their policy in this respect!

Why isn't there a third option - just not taking the insurance?

If lenders don't ask for it... and the CML doesn't require it (barely even mentions it)... why do we assume it IS necessary? Why don't we also assume that any of the dozens of other loosely-related insurances are necessary, in the absence of written clarification to the contrary?

In fact, there's an unlimited number of things my lender might require of me, but they make absolutely no mention of. For all I know perhaps they'd quite like me to paint the house in their brand colours and record their tagline on my answering machine. Or maybe they want me to insure against hauntings in the house, or the possibility that it is in fact not a house but a very convincing hologram that could fail at any moment.

The approach of "well, they don't ask for it... so we better do it just in case" makes no sense to me.

kingstreet

There is a third option. Unfortunately it needs qualification.

Just not taking the insurance is an option, but only after the solicitor has written to the lender to ask it to clarify its position on the issue and to wait for a written response confirming that.

Richard has put it quite succinctly. You wait for a response, which may take a long time to get, or you pay the £10/£15 premium he mentions so the written response isn't needed.

It's simply the lesser of two evils. Buying the cover takes away the need for the enquiry. You mitigate the possibility, rather than resolving it during the purchase process.

As I said before, the solicitor is acting for the lender and cannot simply ignore the matter. In discharging his responsibility to the lender he;-

- makes a written enquiry of the lender and awaits a written reply
or
- the purchaser buys the cover to make the enquiry unnecessary.

During the purchase process there are many issues which may crop up on which the solicitor requires clarification from the lender. Chancel repair is just one of them.

ijrwe

kingstreet wrote: »

There is a third option. Unfortunately it needs qualification.

Just not taking the insurance is an option, but only after the solicitor has written to the lender to ask it to clarify its position on the issue and to wait for a written response confirming that.

Richard has put it quite succinctly. You wait for a response, which may take a long time to get, or you pay the £10/£15 premium he mentions so the written response isn't needed.

In my case the figure is 3-5 times that amount. Still low compared to what others have paid, incredibly.

It's simply the lesser of two evils. Buying the cover takes away the need for the enquiry. You mitigate the possibility, rather than resolving it during the purchase process.

As I said before, the solicitor is acting for the lender and cannot simply ignore the matter. In discharging his responsibility to the lender he;-

- makes a written enquiry of the lender and awaits a written reply
or
- the purchaser buys the cover to make the enquiry unnecessary.

During the purchase process there are many issues which may crop up on which the solicitor requires clarification from the lender. Chancel repair is just one of them.

I don't really see why the enquiry has to be made in the first place. Like I said - the lender doesn't mention in their materials. The Council of Mortgage Lenders handbook mentions the matter only in passing and doesn't even come close to a requirement of insurance. Why would we assume that it is required? There's just no reason to default to that position.

As I said - considering the near-infinite number of possible requirements the lender may have (i.e. absolutely anything they don't mention in their own materials), the only sensible approach is to assume something's not required unless we have a very good reason to think otherwise.


Anyway, I just sent my solicitor a long-winded email setting out my objections to it, so we'll see what they (or the assistant, more likely) has to say. I'm probably a nightmare client - always so reluctant to flush money down their toilet.

Hailstorm

The other thing could be solicitors covering themselves.

If like you said they didn't make the enquiry and then the church demanded the liability is paid you can be sure that buyer is going to say "my solicitor never enquired about this, that is negligence" and off to court they go.

The thing that annoys me the most about chancel liability is that it is hardly in the "christian spirit" that the church preaches about is it

ijrwe

Hailstorm wrote: »

The other thing could be solicitors covering themselves.

If like you said they didn't make the enquiry and then the church demanded the liability is paid you can be sure that buyer is going to say "my solicitor never enquired about this, that is negligence" and off to court they go.

I'm not talking about the enquiry being made. That's been done, and the result, as usual, came back as a "possible". A bit like how when you get a survey all they ever tell you is maybe's, might's and could's.
That's done, though, and my objection is being compelled to take out the insurance in the absence of any indication that the lender requires it.

The thing that annoys me the most about chancel liability is that it is hardly in the "christian spirit" that the church preaches about is it

Yes it's been terrible PR for the Church. Of course in reality only that one case actually occurred in modern times (and in very special circumstances) and nothing since. The Church even wanted the whole thing dismantled some time ago because other sources of funding are being denied to them while it remains a possibility.

Angry homeowner, reading about the same CRL case for the fiftieth time: ":mad: How could the church be so cruel and rob people like that?!? They're going round taking people's hard-earned money against their wishes, for their own selfish needs!!! SCUM!"

Insurance salesman, complete with red horns and a tail, stepping up behind them and putting an arm round their shoulder: ":D Hey there... I think I can help!"