Tuesday 8 November 2011

New low cost case and risk management portal for conveyancers

Norwich based Property IT Company, Move and Log, has recently launched an online portal aimed at suppliers of conveyancing services, and which is designed to assist busy practitioners in managing multiple transactions and the risks associated with conveyancing

David Pett, lawyer and designer, of the system explains the background to the idea:

‘We have in the past spent a small fortune on purchasing case management systems many of which promised the world but in the event fell miserably short of our expectation. 

Designing our own system was relatively straightforward and with an in-house IT team we have produced a highly practicable and low cost on line portal for managing the common risks associated with conveyancing transactions.

It doesn’t make the tea or coffee, nor does it do the work for you. It is however a system that delivers in full on everything it says it can do on the ‘tin lid’.   It has revolutionized the way in which conveyancing is processed in our office and the way in which partners can monitor the level of work and the performance of those working in the department’.

The portal that can be accessed by clients and agents 24/7 has according to Mr. Pett helped to cut down on calls coming into the office and has also helped to significantly improve the line of communication to both client and agent.

In designing the system the focus was fixed on risk management and what could be done to reduce the risks surrounding the conveyancing process.   This objective, explains Mr. Pett:

‘is achieved with features built in to address concerns over money laundering, mortgage fraud, complaints, undertakings and the recording of key dates.   By adding these processes my firm was able to secure a 5% discount when it came to renewing this year our professional indemnity insurance’.

Looking ahead, Mr. Pett adds:

‘We are now looking to share this technology with other practices that might be looking to introduce case and risk management systems and to offer the portal with no set up costs or ongoing support charges.    At the same time we are busy integrating the system with third party suppliers such as search and indemnity insurance providers in the hope that in time with commission payments funding the maintenance and future development of the system we will be able to offer the portal as a free service’.


For further information David Pett can be contacted at david.pett@moveandlong.co.uk





Is the client always right?

It was once said that as a nation we are very reserved in our ways and are reluctant to complain when something goes wrong. This may be down to a sense of reasonableness, a desire to give people the benefit of doubt and to realise that in life mistakes do from time to time occur.

I have in recent times however noticed a major shift in attitude, people in general I find are less tolerant when it comes to mistakes and are less likely to be forgiving when things do not go their way.  This may be to do with the lack of money; the scramble to make savings and even the hope that by complaining a financial gain may follow.

Working in the service industry I work hard putting into place procedures and training sessions for staff to ensure that customer relations is given the priority it deserves.  I work tirelessly to do all I can to ensure mistakes do not happen but as with most aspects of life it is inevitable that there will be times when oversights or mistakes are made.  

I always like to think that if you admit the mistake as soon as it happens and do not fall into the trap of trying to defend the indefensible that the client will understand and a swift resolution should then follow.  

In the majority of cases this is often the outcome, though speaking to others it seems there is of late an increasing trend for complainants to seize the opportunity to make life difficult for the person or company responsible for the mistake.  More often than not this particular stance in money motivated  - the hope is that by taking the offensive it will result in a financial reward.

The difficulty this causes is that however hard one works to find a satisfactory resolution if the agenda of the complainant is different the chances of preserving a congenial relationship with the client/customer is almost bound to be lost.  You find yourself in a ‘no win’ situation and one that leaves even the most conscientious practitioner feeling extremely deflated. 

Much emphasis is given to the use of complaints procedures and of the need to follow these at all times.    There is no doubt that a process of this type is essential but I do question the effectiveness of such procedures in dealing with the hard nosed complainant who is determined to get his or her ounce of flesh irrespective of the merits or otherwise of the complaint.

The problem service providers face is that with increased access to consumer redress schemes, and the fear of adverse publicity on Google and other sites where the client/customer can rate the supplier, the complainant will always have the upper hand.    How many of us would risk finding ourselves on the end of a negative rating and one that could be set in stone even where there is no justification. 

So what can one do to avoid this?  Well in short very little as even with the best will in the world one can not avoid the serial complainer or the complainant who complains for no reason other than to seek a reduction in your fee or some other financial gain.  All one can do is to operate a robust complaints procedure and to be firm and fair in its application. 

Undertaking high volume of work particularly as low cost increases the risk of complaint not only statistically but in terms of clients/customers seem to expect more for their money and are more likely to complain if the service does not live up to their expectation.

The upshot of all of this is that complaints are an occupational hazard and one that in addition to operating a complaints procedure we should make provision for both financially and in the setting aside of management time.


Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Thursday 6 October 2011

What is equity release?

Equity release is a term that refers to various ways in which mainly older homeowners can use their homes to generate income or lump sums, either with a mortgage repayable on death, or by selling the property (or part of the property) but continue to live in it during their lifetime.

If anybody thinking about entering into a scheme of this type it is most important to seek advice from a solicitor who has experience in dealing with these transactions.

A good solicitor will warn you about certain aspects of these arrangements which are as follows:

Maintenance and repair

You will continue to be responsible for maintaining and repairing the property and therefore you should ensure that you have sufficient reserves to meet your obligations.

Some arrangements place an obligation on you to seek the consent of the lender before carrying out any alterations or making any additions.

All adult owners and occupiers in these arrangements have to be part of the loan agreement. If they are not and you were for example to die then the other adults in the property would have to move out.

Moving home

Most of these arrangements will allow you to move home providing the new home that you are moving into will act as sufficient security for the loan. If you were to move to a property which didn’t act as sufficient security you may have to repay all or part of the existing loan before you could move.

Welfare benefits

Receiving a large amount of money from an equity release could affect your entitlement to means tested welfare benefits and services both now and in the future. One area is of particular importance and that concerns possible financial support towards the cost of the care services.

Tax

There could be tax implications and it is important that you should seek advice from an accountant or tax specialist about these. Some arrangements can be structured in such a way as to reduce or eliminate liability to inheritance tax.

Beneficiaries

Releasing equity from the property will of course diminish the value of your estate and the amount your beneficiaries will inherit upon your death. It is always important therefore to discuss the issues with your beneficiaries to ensure that they fully understand the implications to avoid any misunderstanding in the future.

There are a lot of credible schemes out there that operate in this field but equally there are a number of less desirable schemes and it is for this reason as I say at the beginning it is important to seek expert advice from a solicitor on these arrangements before making a final decision.

Any questions please feel free to email me.

Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Dont let romance blind you when buying a home!

I have acted for many first time homebuyers and as you would expect many of these clients have had to make significant financial sacrifices to save money for a deposit.  For many of these clients their heads are very much in the clouds. The romance of living and owning a home together for the very first time makes it difficult to discuss and provide advice on the financial implications of what is clearly a major life changing decision.

In a number of these cases advice has to be given because one partner may be putting more money into the transaction than the other. It is not uncommon for the deposit to be as much as 30% of the purchase price and for this to be funded by savings accumulated before the couple met. This is not of course an arrangement confined to the first time buyers.  There are also clients who are for example looking to buy a property with a new partner following death, separation or divorce.

The common thread is that at this point in time the relationship may be at an early stage and the buyers are only really concerned about the immediate future, and not what might lie ahead.

In general, couples purchasing a home instruct me that they wish to purchase the property as “joint tenants”. The significance of this is that if one of the partners were to die then the share of the profit in the property would automatically pass to the other partner, even if the deceased partner makes a different provision in his or her will.  A Court would not be able to interfere in that arrangement even if the deceased partner had contributed more towards the purchase of the property when it was originally purchased.

Even though it is often an unpalatable exercise I always advise my clients that they should think about whether it would still be their wish for their share to pass to the other in the event of death or separation.  More than often they shrug their shoulders and I am greeted with a perplexed look.

There are times however when I am instructed to set up the way in which the property is bought so as to provide for the equity (money left over after the mortgage and fees are paid) in the property once it is sold, to be divided on an unequal and predetermined basis.

If one party for example put 2/3 of the money forward for the deposit and the other the remaining 1/3 then they might instruct me to ensure that the property is held in such a way so as to provide that 70% of the equity/profit in the property goes to one, and 30% of it goes towards the other.

There are also three or four other different ways in which unequal contributions can be recorded and it is therefore important that if you are in this situation and seeking advice that you ask your solicitor to explain these options to you. The way in which the division of the proceeds is expressed at the outset can have quite a substantial bearing on the financial outcome in the event of a future sale.

Even though your solicitor may try and persuade you to look beyond the romance of owning your first home together you may still decide even though unequal contributions are made, for the property to be held jointly. This is understandable. There is however a half way house in that you can instruct your solicitor to record that you are holding the property as joint tenants but that if anything happens in the future, and one of you decides that you want to serve notice to say to the other to say this arrangement should no longer apply, that the net process should then be divided in accordance with shares predetermined at the point of purchase.

I am happy as ever to answer any questions you might have about this or any aspect of property transactions. Please feel free to email me at my email address shown below.

Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Thursday 18 August 2011

Save our Countryside

Close your eyes, cast you mind back to when you last visited the countryside. Remember how beautiful and tranquil everywhere looked, and how relaxed I bet you felt.  Now keep those thoughts and just think how you would feel if the tranquil and idyllic setting you are remembering was suddenly turned into a battlefield with 40 to 50 excitable people running around in combat gear and  repeatedly  firing a paintball gun and shouting and screaming?.  How would you feel when the landscape that you were escaping too was littered with smoke bombs and inflatable objects reminiscent to an episode of ‘It’s a Knockout’? I bet you would not be too pleased.

This may all sound like the promo for a Paul McKenna self-help CD, but there is a serious edge to it.  The fact is that over the past 12 months or so there has an increasing number of planning applications seeking permission to make use of large areas of our countryside for urban purposes. The worrying aspect is that a vast number of these are being passed even in areas where settlement limits apply.   The consequence of this worrying trend is that it has and continues to adversely impact on the visual attributes of our countryside as well as the amenity of those who live within it and the ecology.  In short there are many areas of our countryside that are becoming urbanized.

So where is the justification for this?  I am not really sure but a clue may be found in the case of a pending application for change of use to allow a Norfolk farmer to use woodlands and agricultural land, in an area of the beautiful and mainly unspoilt Wensum Valley, north of Norwich (Ringland) for the purposes of operating a paint balling park.  

I along with others living within the area have over the past couple of weeks been working hard to oppose this application and during our campaign we have come across wide support from local people and also people from around the country.  We have come very few who see any benefit from turning this lovely piece of countryside into a noisy and visually unpleasant combat zone.  However a local Councillor at a recent meeting said he thought it would be good for the area as it would create jobs.  He added with an air of arrogance that the Council had recently received a directive from Government to do all they can to allow development of this type to take place if this in turn created job opportunities.

It is a sad state of affairs when one of the last barriers in place to ensure our countryside is protected appears to have been removed because of economic pressures.  I am sure David Cameron did not intend for Councils to forget their obligation towards the protection of the countryside when his Government issued the directive, and I am even more certain that it was not intended to be acted upon without giving thought to other equally important planning considerations.  The daft thing about all of this that the farmer in question believes only 2 full time jobs will be created.

I seriously question whether the sacrifice of the local wildlife inhabitants, the loss of amenity to those who live in the area and the destruction of a piece of countryside that plays an important part in bringing tourists to the area, is worth the ‘benefit’ of creating two jobs.

I would invite you to add your support to our campaign to protect the countryside from unwanted and wholly unnecessary development of this type by lodging your views with the local planning authority – Broadland District Council planning.administration@broadland.gov.uk .   Just keep in mind the next application of this type could be on your doorstep! 


Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Thursday 11 August 2011

Solicitors face rise in professional indemnity premiums

There was an interesting article in Mortgage Strategy recently which caught my attention. The article predicted that around 50% of Lloyd’s customers could fall victim to negative equity if property prices decline by a further 10-15%. If this is correct then as is happening in Southern Ireland institutional lenders will inevitably be seeking recovery from somewhere or someone when they begin to suffer loss.  In Southern Ireland it is known that Conveyancing now counts for 70% of all professional indemnity insurance claims.

What is happening in the background should be taken seriously particularly at a time when many solicitors are now looking to renew their professional indemnity cover.

There is no doubt that premiums will rise.

The problem practitioners’ face is that there is a complete and total lack of transparency within the professional indemnity insurance arena.  Many of us are asked to complete quite detailed risk assessment documents. These are required by the insurers to that they can access the risk each firm presents and to then tailor a quote accordingly.

The problem is that when completing these forms there is little understanding on how an answer to a particularly question will affect the risk assessment and consequently the size of the premium to be paid. There is no guidance within the proposal form or risk assessment form that helps to understand how risk is assessed.

Knowing how membership of one particular accreditation scheme can affect the level of premium is important because it will encourage firms to invest time and money into obtaining ‘badges’ of this type.

Surely it is in the interests of the insurers to be transparent to make it clear what percentage reduction certain actions will result in so that all of us can then do all that we can to make sure those actions are taken in the  knowledge that this will result in lower premiums in the future.

I question what the Law Society is doing to assist in brining pressure on insurers to make this information available. Our insurer broker mentioned that being a member of the Conveyancing Quality Scheme is of importance but could not say whether it would actually result in a significant reduction in future premiums.

The other issue I have with insurance is that there are so many brokers out there looking for your business but the majority of these are tied in with certain insurance companies. Surely this must present a conflict of interest and not always lead to the best deal.

It would be better use of Law Society resources if it took the time to review and investigate this market and to bring in measures to improve the situation for practitioners who are for the majority of the time working very much in the dark.  Is this likely to happen?  No.

Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Featured post

If it's not broken don't fix it