Our conveyancing system has remained more or less untouched for close on 100 years. In 2007 there was an attempt made by the then rather brave and progressive Labour Party to introduce Home Information Packs.
Sadly, due to conflict between stakeholders and political change this move to ‘improve’ the house moving process suffered an almighty fall from grace. Jobs, livelihoods and political will for progression were lost overnight.
Since then we have witnessed the growth of professional bodies and trade associations flying the flag for change, and advancing ideas based solely around the production of upfront information.
Government has taken a backseat, and not surprisingly, has left the industry to take the lead. It seems there is very little appetite for a change in the law, and indeed, I recently heard a Government spokesman highlight the fact that in the light of transactions completed each year the system seems, on the whole, to be working pretty well.
Transactions do collapse, and yes, there are wasted costs as a consequence. The time it takes to move home is also at times excessive.
The question I pose is should the Industry be putting its eggs all in one basket. Is the current obsession with the production of upfront information a healthy one, when although it will probably help, it is by no means, a complete solution. Do we really need more paperwork to complete when as conveyancers we are already up to out eyes in forms and documents?
If you have attended a conveyancing conference within the last couple of years you will know all of the talk has been about pre-instruction information forms, property log books and digitalisation. In fact, there has been little other discussion, which is pretty amazing when the industry has and continues to face rising challenges posed by Covid 19, a major shift in the outlook of professional indemnity insurers, shortage of staff and ever increasing AML obligations.
That aside, the absence of focus on other causes of transaction fall out and delay, is in my opinion a notable failing.
Generally, the level of competency within the industry is not high, and probably reflects low fee structures and training deficiencies. If standards could be improved, this would make a big difference to time scales. There can be little doubt, delay is often caused by a lack of knowledge and or experience on the part of one or more case handlers. Moving a transaction forward, rather then side ways, is as important, if not more important, than knowing where the stop cock can be found.
As an industry should we not be doing more to make sure those engaged in the process are fully trained, are monitored and supervised more closely and are required to maintain and produce continuing education records.
Better educated, trained and equipped case handlers, will not only improve service times, but will also help to reduce crippling high PII premiums.
Combine this with the use of the right technology, and an alternative, or supplementary solution, can then begin to take shape. The conveyancing process might be old, but there is nothing to prevent conveyances from moving from a more traditional outlook to one that embraces and is constructed around the benefits of technology.
Hiding behind paper files, practicing within a ‘smoke and mirror’ environment, can no longer be a feature of how a modern day conveyancer practices. Its not rocket science. If there was more transparency and better and more instant channels of communication between clients, their conveyancers and other stakeholders, we would all start to see less failed transactions and a marked improvement in transaction time.
Yes, upfront information will help, but this should not be the only focus. There needs to be a wider and more holistic approach. The system is far from broken, and with better educated and experienced players combined with the use of technology, it is more than capable of facilitating a more efficient and positive journey for the client.