The Residential Logbook Association (RLBA) has launched a ‘Digital Deed Pack’ to manage the creation of Logbooks at the completion stage of any purchase.
This pack is intended to allow integration between Logbook systems and the case management systems run by Conveyancers.
Currently 15 conveyancing companies are providing their clients with RLBA verified Logbooks at the completion stage of the conveyancing process and listing them on the RLBA Register. These ‘pioneering’ integrations allow for both data and documents to be passed into the Logbooks as they are created.
The new Digital Deed Pack specification is a refinement of the packs being used by this first cohort of conveyancers and is intended to standardise the process across RLBA Logbook providers.
This new specification consists of a data schema and a schedule of documents that has been created from research with both conveyancers from the pioneering group and their users who have recently completed a transaction. The data schema in the specification contains a full property ID and many of the fields contained in the BASPI.
“Using the data created during conveyancing to create a logbook completes the circle promised by Upfront Information. It answers the question “what happens to the data at the end of the transaction?” said Simon Lumb, RLBA Treasurer and Managing Director of Logbook company NDD.
The schedule of documents in the specification includes a ‘required’ documents list and one for the much longer list of ‘potential’ documents to be included. Key to the initiative is a set of conventions for both document names and categorisations – so that the databases underpinning each logbook can recognise the documents by type when they are transferred from a case management system.
The RLBA chair, Nigel Walley, MD of Logbook company Chimni, commented: “Most legal case management systems don’t categorise documents in their databases. In the conveyancer trials to date we’ve had to include code to identify documents from their titles. The specification creates a platform for case management systems and PropTech companies to work together to set new standards”
This standardising of names and categories is a key area to be refined through work with other industry bodies like the LSSA. This new standard will then be included in the RLBA’s campaign to roll out ‘Completion Logbooks’ across all conveyancers.
Top and tail the process. Compile an upfront information pack when a seller markets their property, and create a property logbook on completion. Then you will have most, if not all, of the documents (at best currently kept in a shoe box in the loft, or at worst mislaid) available next time the property is sold.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
In spite of your false presumption that conveyancers are all diligent hard working people THEY are the real problem.
As you said you are not on the “coal face ” so you really do not have a clue what it is like in tne real world
As seen below
Host Ben Madden, of Fine & Country Turnham Green Terrace, said communication is also important, from both agents and conveyancers as well as buyers.He said he has had conveyancers who only return calls one day a week.
Wendy agreed, revealing she is currently dealing with a case where the conveyancer can only be contacted between 10am and 4pm on a Tuesday and Thursday.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
“no clue what goes on in the real world”
I actually laughed out loud at that.
Do you know what I do now?
Your interest in me is becoming obsessive Jan. Stick to the issues and not character assassination maybe?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Isn’t that two days a week??
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Totally agree Rob. Take this to its natural conclusion, and would that mean you would not need two solicitors? If all the required information was there, what would the sellers solicitor be needed for? Perhaps one solicitor acting for the mortgage company or title guarantee company?
I believe this is one of the reasons there appears to be no real appetite for meaningful change in the conveyancing industry.
But I would be interested in others thoughts and please correct me if I am a million miles away.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I think you would still need two conveyancers because of a possible conflict of interest GreenBay. Even though the majority of the documents would hopefully be available, the owners may have had a neighbour dispute, carried out some works without the relevant permission (i.e. breached a covenant), discovered Knotweed, or moved a boundary etc, etc.
Also lenders would need to be happy that only one conveyance acts as would the Professional Indemnity Insurers.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Hi Rob, thanks for the reply. I do not believe having two conveyancers prevents sellers with holding the information such as neighbours dispute and I have never known a conveyancer visit to check for Knotweed. Which is why in my post yesterday I said about making sellers responsible for ensuring the property is ready for sale and transfer.
The PI and mortgage issues you suggest are dealt with happily in other countries where only one conveyancer acts.
I don’t understand why what is a transaction that both parties want to happen, has to be dealt with in a legally adversarial way?
Is that the best way of making these transaction’s easier and quicker? Or is there a better way?
I think everyone on here agrees the current system is not really working for any parties, except perhaps a few at the top who are making large amounts of money?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
“I do not believe having two conveyancers prevents sellers with holding the information such as neighbours dispute and I have never known a conveyancer visit to check for Knotweed.”
If I was acting for both parties (and I thank my lucky stars everyday that I am no longer a coal face conveyancer), and my buyer client pointed out, that their is small, newish, extension on the back of the property, and my seller client had not disclosed that, and even worse not obtained the necessary permissions, I am suddenly in a tricky (conflict) position of having to challenge my seller client.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
(and I thank my lucky stars everyday that I am no longer a coal face conveyancer),
Clearly not
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Ask a conveyancer why they feel frustrated at the pace of conveyancing, and we don’t say ‘upfront information’ or ‘property logbooks’ – neither are even remotely on our top 20 list of why.
Yet why are these the focus – all very odd.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Maybe these are two changes that others (i.e non conveyancers) can make from the outside. I am guessing that many on your list of 20 IC would need addressing by the legal profession itself. If so, how, who and when would that happen?
There are no silver bullets but we need to start somewhere.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Exactly
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Hi Rob, sorry for some reason can’t reply directly to your post.
I understand your point about conflict of interest, but that ceases to be an issue if you were acting for a title guarantee company, or perhaps Land Registry as final arbiter.
I don’t pretend to know all the legal ins and outs, but from taking to other people who operate in other countries, or process is by far the slowest and anything that could speed that up works help.
With regards to Impressive Conveyancing, I get your point, but yesterday I gave the example of how HIPS saved two weeks at the start of a transaction just by having everyone signed up and ready to go, without even taking about legal difficulties!!
But I really believe nothing will change unless the government decides to get involved. To many conflicts of interest in the industry that will always block change!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The home buying and selling process was quicker, and in some ways easier and less stressful pre 2007 (certainly pre the 21st century) when I became a HIP provider (that went well!). Move forward 16 years and we are where we are. Excuse the pun, but continually going round and round the houses:(
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Having a log book sounds like a great idea.
However, a quick & simple solution would be to insist that the property could not be marketed in any shape or form without being “contract ready”.
I thought HIPS were a great idea. They were killed off because they were blamed for causing a dead market that was really caused by the Credit Crunch. Such a wasted opportunity. They weren’t perfect but it was close.
In this internet age it is absolutely ridiculous that it takes so long to buy a property. I’ve been financially ready to buy for 12 weeks. There is no chain whatsoever. As mentioned yesterday that I have only just discovered that the owners do not have the paperwork they told the agent they had. This is after 5 months!!!
I will still buy the property even if the paperwork is not provided but I’m going to want a price reduction.
Everybody has wasted so much time and effort.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The home buying and selling process was quicker, and in some ways easier and less stressful pre 2007 (certainly pre the 21st century)
I suspect you did not have to deal with conveyancing factories which have become the bane of our lives; teams of unqualified case managers dealing with the transaction which all requiring sign off from the Team Leader throughout the process. Ridiculous proforma enquiries, slow response times and unable to be contacted by telephone, all of which has impacted the conveyancing timeframe.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Nor:
AML checks
Source of Funds
Japanese Knotweed
Climate change issues
The Building Safety Act
Complicated SDLT
etc
etc
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Yes totally agree we are also having to deal with new compliance requirements and regulations.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Tim, you may well be a self-professed “Impressive Conveyancer” and you could be the exception, but there are lots of people that feel the conveyancing industry is doing very little to help itself! Maybe, Trethowans should run courses in Conveyancing and bring the rest of the industry up to your standards?
Disrupters often come from outside the industry because they they don’t have anything to lose, or vested interests.
Rob is spot on, upfront information and logbooks can be created by PropTech companies, using technology and data..not paper files..!
AI is going to be that disrupter, and this will be taken out of your hands.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I don’t usual comment on stories but there’s a question many have asked and few have ever answered…
Why do we have to have an adversarial system of conveyancing? A notarial system works perfectly well in France etc and could surely work just as well here, couldn’t it? Especially if all relevant information was available for inspection?
Or is it that having two sets of conveyancers/solicitors involved means more mouths get fed from a single transaction?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I feel that any conveyancer who comes on here and says the problem is factory conveyancer’s is approaching the idea of change as really wanting to go back in time.
Factory conveyancers are here to stay.
I agree with anonymous coward and feel that my suggestions are not dissimilar.
Can someone please tell me why it takes two solicitors having an argument with each other to sort out either a title issue or get a conveyance through.
Excuse my naivety maybe, but I don’t understand why in the 21st century, the mechanics of conveyancing are not wildly different to over 100 years ago?
More information agreed, but the process virtually identical. Please tell me I am wrong?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Nick, nice to see you on here! Perhaps you can give us your thoughts in an article on how the industry has changed since HIPS were abolished?
I think your take, given your involvement would be helpful and enlightening.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Thanks GreenBay. Might well do that in August.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Let me know when that will be published Nick, I might need to keep my diary free that day:)
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It is the way our system has been designed Nick, and changing it to a French system, or a Norwegian one, or an Australian one, or a Scottish one (all supposedly better) would be a massive undertaking, and we cant even get the most basic of changes in place it seems.
“Or is it that having two sets of conveyancers/solicitors involved means more mouths get fed from a single transaction?”
That comment is a bit beneath you now surely:(
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Rob – I’d suggest that getting any material improvement in the home buying and selling process will require a ‘massive undertaking’ so why not go the whole hog and have something better? Saying we have an adversarial system because ‘it is the way our system has been designed’ doesn’t mean it is fit for purpose or the best we could have. You haven’t actually said Notarial would not work here. It could, couldn’t it. My comment about more mouths was deliberate. If you can put your hand on heart and tell me the Law Society would welcome a change that might mean fewer solicitors needed for the conveyancing system I will withdraw it.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I don’t think TLS are particularly interested in their conveyancing community Nick. At least that is what some of my members feel.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Rob, I think you may be stretching the definition of the word designed when using it to describe the conveyancing process.
Is it not something that has grown out of the adversarial court system? If we were to design the system from scratch, I’d the current one, an idea that people would come up with today?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I can’t go into the history of English Land Law here GreenBay (party because I have forgotten most of it), but it goes back centuries, and then on to The Law of Property Act 1925 and other subsequent Acts. To change it would need Government intervention, and they couldn’t even get HIPs right!, or the more recent Building Safety Act!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register