Now they are sending us cheques ...
Remember back in March we were convinced the world was going to end.
Well THAT didn't happen.
Then Boris told us not to move house. Unless it was vital. Which law firm owners interpreted as "don't do anything unless it's a simultaneous exchange and completion" and furloughed all their lawyers.
Then LinkedIn started overflowing with comments about how this new era was going to change EVERYTHING when it came to property transactions.
The future was electronic and this was the wake-up call the industry needed.
Did I miss the revolution?
So here we in are June - Boris has told us to move house and the sun has come out.
But while we were blinking in that sunlight, it seems that the opportunity for change never actually materialised.
And as if to rub it in, last week we received a deposit cheque from a buyer's solicitor for ￡98,000 - there are SO many things wrong with that.
Someone had to write the cheque and get the partner to sign it and then they had to put it in an envelope with a stamp and take it to the local post box.
Now, because we don't drive Ford Anglias and live in the 1950's, we don't accept cheques. So the sender's assumption that it is OK to expect us to take it to the bank, fill in a paying-in slip and pay it in, is depressing at best.
Obviously, we sent it back.
Sadly, that's not the only thing that hasn't changed.
Lawyers and lenders are still sending us post - in April, we scanned 1986 separate pieces, and because May got busier, we had to scan in 2347.
Which was particularly annoying for me, because I was doing an awful lot of that scanning.
I had to refuse this generous offer
Sometimes panel managers or online agents approach me in the mistaken belief that they are selling something that I want to buy.
So when I was approached a couple of weeks ago by a ￡99 online agent, I was interested to see just how they were managing to tempt desperate law firms owners with promises of conveyancing work.
I do consider myself reasonably informed about the typically hideously low prices these sorts of outfits offer, but I was quite surprised by the figure of ￡260 they offered for a sale file.
Especially, since, according to their website, they charge this at ￡1000 to their clients.
From an ethical point of view, a 400% markup is getting into quite sticky grounds, although they kindly gave me the names of those law firms who have no such qualms.
So now, I've got another problem - whether to publicise the names of those firms who think that supporting this behaviour is acceptable - a decision for another day I guess.
As I mentioned earlier, many law firm owners interpreted Boris's comments to mean that it is simply not possible to exchange contracts unless clients complete on the same day.
So I thought I'd take a quick look at our last two months figures and of the 200 deals we exchanged, only 74 (about a third) were simultaneously exchanged and completed.
Which is strange because that means the other two thirds were impossible.
Finally, over the last 8 days, we've given more quotes then the whole of April and the first three weeks in May put together. Which is made even more interesting by the fact that the vast majority of the properties are either at asking price or just a couple of percentage points below it.
So thank you Boris - just in case you were wondering - your housing minister's actions really DID restart the housing market.
Director at Mansell McTaggart Estate Agents
4 年Great post Peter. It won’t surprise to know that I regularly still get cheques from solicitors paying our fees post completion. When I challenge this (which I do every time to try and avoid it happening again) I either get told they can bacs a payment if I’m happy to pay a ￡35 fee for the privilege, or they don’t answer at all! In a world where unnecessary travel etc is encouraged, why would you deliberately make me drive to a different town, to queue with an unknown number of people etc? Bonkers!
Legal Services Director & Group General Counsel at Peninsula Group
4 年Urgh... cheques. That word makes me shudder. As do the words ‘post’ and ‘fax’.
I agree with much of what you say Peter. But in the absence of change imposed by central dictat it can only come through two routes. One is client demand and the second is the economics for the law firms. Electronic or paper or hybrid mean nothing to most clients nor do portals secure email or data aggregation. What they want is a quick efficient process to facilitate the transaction through a process they don't understand. That essentially means meaningful contact with their conveyancer personally not via email and text. For the law firm some.simple maths. Sending that cheque for example probably cost the law firm between ￡5 and ￡10 when you add banking charges stamps ink time etc. This cost is not born by the client. To send by BACS of faster payment would cost anything from free to 50p and some firms.would also add a tt fee. Add those up over a year and see where that leaves you. Simple evolution would get results if firms just didn't waste money and got to know their clients. Being efficient would be driven by a desire to give service make a profit and not dogma. Electronic conveyancing only works when hand in hand with providing what a client wants otherwise we simply impose one new set of shackles - emperors new clothes
Head of UK at Digital Ventures
4 年Well done Peter, great post! Witty and insightful (with a small hint of frustration). Speak soon.
Complete ASAP, Managing Director
4 年Great article Peter but isn’t it time we looked at how we can change and improve things?