Wednesday 18 April 2012

Why moving home with a mortgage will cost more and take longer

Why do some mortgage companies insist you go to one solicitor for your mortgage and a different one for your purchase?

For many years one solicitor would act for both you and the lender because in the main your respective interests would be the similar.    You both wish to purchase a property without any adverse legal consequences.   This is known as a “joint representation” transaction.

The benefit of this is that providing your solicitor was on the lender’s general panel one overall fee would be charged.

However, some mortgage lenders in response to increasing concerns with levels of mortgage fraud and poor conveyancing practice have decided to limit the number of firms that can act on their behalf.

This “separate representation” approach means the lender will appoint a solicitor to act on their behalf and you are able to instruct your own solicitor.   Generally there is no restriction on which firm you choose providing they are on the lender’s general conveyancing panel.  

However there is one lender namely HSBC which has through charging extra legal fees made it very difficult for you to exercise a free choice.  

If you are involved in a transaction where you have two firms of solicitors acting this can often cause delay because your solicitor will not be able to exchange contracts on your behalf until the lender’s solicitor has confirmed approval.

The likelihood is that separate representation is likely to figure more in the future with the consequence of  adding extra expense and time to the  already slow and stressful process of moving home.  

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

Friday 13 April 2012

New energy rules for those selling and buying homes

The rules on the display of energy ratings (Energy Performance Certificates (EPC)) for homes have changed.

Those advertising property such as estate agents must now (as from the 6th April) :

  • Include the 1st page of the EPC for all sales and lettings properties in printed and electronic property particulars.

  • Have ordered an EPC prior to marketing and to produce  it within 7 days of marketing
If you are looking to market or let your property it is important for you to make sure your agent is complying with these requirements. 

Your agent must include a copy of the entire front page of the EPC document and not just the EPC graph as has currently been the case.  This includes any literature containing particulars of the property to be marketed including electronic communications such as emails.

Property particulars are defined as including at least two of the following elements:

  • a photograph of the building or any room in the building,
  • a floor plan of the building,
  • the size of the rooms in the building,
  • the measured area of the building, or,
  • the proposed rent in relation to a building being rented out,.
This may therefore (depending on how the new rules are interpreted) extend to the pictures and particulars of your home that appear in the agent’s window or in the local paper.  As for rentals the new rules seem must clearer and there seems no getting away from the requirement to display in any advertisement the front page of the EPC.

Almost all lettings adverts will include a property photo and the rental price, and thus it will be hard to avoid this.

The size of the EPC extract shown in the particulars must be sufficient for the details to be read – don’t allow the agent to print it very small nor to try and circumvent the rules by simply adding a link to the EPC.

Interestingly the first page of the EPC contains the full address of the property.   Agents do not normally like to display the full address in literature as this provides marketing opportunities for competitors.   Unfortunately there now seems no way around it and the address must remain within the published first page of the EPC.

What about properties appearing on agent’s websites?  Arguably as there is a picture of the property and often other particulars such as room sizes etc the first page of the EPC ought to be reproduced possibly in full rather than through clicking on a link.  

Rightmove it is reported recently emailed all of its agent clients and made the claim as quoted below:

"Rightmove is a property advertising website and the information displayed on Rightmove by all our member agents takes the form of property adverts and not property particulars. This is clearly stated at the bottom of every page on Rightmove that displays the details which have been provided to us by the agent about a specific property and will continue to do so.

It is our view that the new regulations do not place any additional obligations on Rightmove, although you may wish to consider separately how the new regulations might affect your own company website. We do, however, understand that some of our member agents may wish to display the EPC as part of the property advert on Rightmove. Rightmove does provide the functionality for you to do this if you so wish."

I do not necessarily agree that is correct; looking at the new rules and the elements that must exist for the publication of the EPC it is difficult to see how one can in this way distinguish ‘adverts’ from publication of property particulars.  Rightmove publishes pictures and particulars of property and this is no different from details published in newspapers or in an agent’s window.

Let’s not forget the purpose that lies behind the rules, and that is those looking for a property to buy should be able when searching to have immediate access to the energy rating for that property.

The problem is that as with the fated Home Information Pack some agents are reluctant to go to the expense of ordering and paying for an EPC until they know a buyer has been found for the property.  They view these requirements as an unnecessary hurdle to the marketing of the property.

My advice to those selling and renting is to always ensure that any agreement reached with an agent to sell or rent you home includes a clause that the agent orders and pays for the EPC. If you are buying always insist on seeing the EPC before viewing a property and if the EPC’s first page does not appear in the particulars of sale wherever these might appear always ask for an explanation.

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 29 March 2012

Solar panels could make your property difficult to sell


Solar panels may be associated with green issues but beware as they might be viewed as a red card when it comes to re-mortgaging your house or when looking to purchase a property with a mortgage where solar panels are fitted .  This is according to an article recently appearing in the Guardian.

Guardian Money reported on a Southampton couple who were refused by several companies when they tried to re-mortgage their home. The couple had previously agreed, with their lenders permission, to allow a firm to install solar panels on their roof for the duration of a 25-year lease.  They now face the prospect that their property has become ‘unsalable’.


The owners are reported to have said:


"We signed up to this scheme on the basis that we were doing the green thing, but it has turned out to be a nightmare," says John, who works as an air traffic controller.


The implications for us are that we cannot re-mortgage our house on a lower interest rate. We would still have a mortgage but one on the standard variable rate which will increase with the Bank of England interest rates.


We are extremely concerned that we will not be able to sell our house as no buyer will be able to get a mortgage on it. We can't be the only people in this position, can we?"


The big question is how many more home owners are there out there who are oblivious to this potential problem.  Solar leasing deals were heavily marketed last year by companies  looking to take advantage of  Government backed incentives to  those with solar PV panels on their roofs.


The most credible companies advised their customers to seek their lenders agreement, but many didn't.


The issue does not affect those who paid for their panels to be installed. It only relates to those installations undertaken under a lease arrangement.


One can only surmise as to why lenders are struggling to come to terms with these arrangements.    They may be concerned that if they have to repossess and sell quickly there could be a problem in finding someone to purchase the property where there is lease with financial obligations to take on.   This is because the leasing arrangement for the panels follows the property and not the owner who installed the panels. The lease company will only remove the panels if the lender can show it has tried and failed to sell it.


The article suggests having contacted the Council of Mortgage Lenders that the  issues which have begun to arise  may be down to  a failure on the part of the banking sector to formulate a clearer policy on solar panels and how these cases should be approached.


This reported case should however send out a warning to those looking to install panels under a leasing arrangement and also to those acting for those looking to purchase a property where an arrangement exists.   Time will tell whether those homeowners who have sought to reduce their energy bills in line with Government advice and encouragement will be left with problems in selling their property at  market price.  

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 22 March 2012

Prediction of 19% rise in housing transactions in 2013

Much of today’s focus has been on Budget headlines and little comment has been made of the detail supplied by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), particularly about its view of what is likely to happen to  the property market over the next 36 months.
According to the OBR the future looks bright and forecasts a dramatic increase in stamp duty receipts by 2016, when it expects the Treasury to receive £11.1 billion a year, nearly double the current level of around £6 billion. 
This suggests the OBR is expecting housing market to spring back to life in 2013, with a 19% rise in transaction levels and a further 14% increase in the number of sales in 2014.
This is based on the OBR’s expectation of an easing in credit conditions in 2013
The downside is the OBR has downgraded its housing price forecast expecting prices to rise by only 0.5% next year. This is in line with independent forecasts published this year.  
Looking ahead the picture is even better as prices are predicted to pick up more strongly in 2014, along with further strong rises in transaction numbers.
Let’s hope the OBR is right with its predictions.  The success of this budget clearly rests on the generation of extra Stamp Duty suggesting the Government has put  a lot of faith in the OBR's assessment. 

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

Sunday 11 March 2012

Conveyancing firm marks successful year with launch of new website


Entering the market in late 2010 was not the easiest.  The property market was in free fall and the recession was still biting.  Every indicator was pointing to contraction and on the face of it this was not the time to look at expansion.



Not deterred however the partners in MJPconveyancing.co.uk  decided this was the best time to invest in people and information technology and look to build for the future. 

Partner, David Pett, explains:

“At the time of receiving my brief to reorganize and develop our conveyancing department we were operating with one conveyancer and two support staff.  We were fixing fees in line with expectations that predated the rise in competition caused by the introduction of the Legal Services Act.  


The philosophy was to ensure we could provide a service to our litigation clients who were looking for a conveyancing service.  To be honest we had not idea whether we were making any money and as for case management this simply did not exist.

The first step was to invest money into creating a new case management system.  Along with our IT programmer, Leon Williams, we designed and introduced a unique risk and case management system  - Quick Conveyance.  Straight away this put us in a position to develop a new low cost conveyancing model without having to make any sacrifices on risk management or the quality of service.  It also gave me the tools to see how much money we were making and to ensure profit margins were maintained.’

The investment has clearly paid off for MJPconveyancing.co.uk .   The business has gone from strength to strength and is now operating with six case handlers and a support staff of six.  It s handling around 100 completions each month and has recently released a new website whereby instant quotes for conveyancing services can be sought.

The Partners are also looking to see if they can ‘resell’ to other conveyancers the risk and case management system – Quick Conveyance

The next stage in the plan is to operate the business as an alternative business structure which MJPconveyancing.co.uk  hopes will be up and running in August of this year. 

For further details of MJP Conveyancing or Quick Conveyance please email davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Monday 27 February 2012

Compensation for delay in referring patient for physiotherapy

Compensation recovered for a Claimant who had a delay in referring her for physiotherapy which only took place some months later which had caused her condition to actually become worse. 

For further details on this or indeed any other clinical negligence claims contact:

Simon Bransby at simonbransby@m-j-p.co.uk or call 01603 877064

Featured post

If it's not broken don't fix it