Money back on conveyancing?

dekh

I'm busy creating an online quote system for a firm of solicitors and I'm getting to know more of the Solicitors Regulation Authority regulations than I care too

The rules that solicitors operate under, (in England and Wales no idea about Scotland), changed on the 1/July/2007. Here's a point of interest for anyone who bought, sold,remortgaged or had any conveyancing done since then:

Rule 2.06 states that if a solicitor gets a commission for recommending you a service of more than £20 the solicitor has to offer you that commission.

Here's the really interesting bit: in the guidance notes (55) solicitors can't take a payment at all from a provider of for example, searches, if it is really a rebate.

"Such payments are disbursements and the client must get the benefit of any discount or rebate."

What I've noticed in my research into the competition is that some solicitors take payment for taking out insurances or performing searches on the clients behalf.

All those 'referral fees' belong to the client not the solicior - check your bills - you could be due money back!!

http://www.sra.org.uk/code-of-conduct/195.article

Scroll down to 2.06 and further to note 55.

I hope someone benefits from this now or in the future.
:beer:

BTW, I would be really grateful if anyone could send me recent quotes for conveyancing. It would help enormously with pricing cheers

Richard_Webster

some solicitors take payment for taking out insurances or performing searches on the clients behalf.

There probably are some that do this but only really the big boys because the insurance companies/search providers won't provide discounts unless they get big quantities.

I get a slight discount with my main search provider for doing a "pack" of searches in one hit (which is cheaper than doing the searches as separate items) but pass this discounted price onto the clients. They pay what I get charged.

As far as quotes are concerned, OP's employers will have to decide whether they are going to go in for the con jobs that I have seen out there with low headline fees and then things that you would expect included in the main fee such as "completion of SDLT form", "acting for your lender in connection with your mortgage", "arranging searches and interpreting them", and "professional indemnity contribution"...

The solcitors will look much more open and honest if they don't do that kind of thing...

dekh

Richard_Webster wrote: »

There probably are some that do this but only really the big boys because the insurance companies/search providers won't provide discounts unless they get big quantities.

I get a slight discount with my main search provider for doing a "pack" of searches in one hit (which is cheaper than doing the searches as separate items) but pass this discounted price onto the clients. They pay what I get charged.

I think Richards Gray do something like that it does seem to cut the cost of searches, they may even average the costs nationally for LA searches. I might be wrong on that.

Richard_Webster wrote: »

As far as quotes are concerned, OP's employers will have to decide whether they are going to go in for the con jobs that I have seen out there with low headline fees and then things that you would expect included in the main fee such as "completion of SDLT form", "acting for your lender in connection with your mortgage", "arranging searches and interpreting them", and "professional indemnity contribution"...

Richard_Webster wrote: »

They're not my employer. I'm self employed, and loving it!

They were recently audited by the SRA, I've seen audits in other industry sectors but this was definitely something different. (I get the impression that the SRA are trying to put as many solicitors out of business as possible - but hopefully that's just an impression) But it did put a huge spotlight on how quotes had to be presented.

There was a big focus on hiding 'fees' - what the solicitor charges for acting for the client - as 'disbursements' - payments to third parties like searches/no search insurance, HM land registry fees etc. and also on taking referral fees from search providers etc.

The debate is on internally about how to present the supplemental fees.

Either give a straight cost which will average the effort for all clients, or pass on the benefit of not having to do certain work as lower fees to those clients that meet the criteria.

It's where to draw the line.

Do you say £250 in fees to do a £150,000 remortgage whatever
or do you say £150 to do a freehold remortgage and £250 to do a leashold remortgage
or do you say £150 to do a freehold remortgage and £250 to do a leashold house and £300 to do a leashold flat

Which is fair? If you are a leasohld flat you'll say £250 for the lot, but then that's the only business you'll get...

Richard_Webster wrote: »

The solcitors will look much more open and honest if they don't do that kind of thing...

The quotes I've seen from some of the online sites are so confusing, it has to be deliberate. It would certainly help honest solicitors if everything was presented fairly.