When Boris Johnson exclaimed, “Christ!” in a cabinet meeting last week, you knew change was coming.
His response to the realisation that continuing the current lockdown will cause serious economic issue is the reality wakeup call we all need.
The frenetic pace we’ve seen in buyers and sellers in the past few weeks has been extraordinary – last Friday was the busiest in my company’s history.
However, given the rise of client expectations, agents tell me that lawyers are plumbing new depths when it comes to service incompetence and this is causing significant concern.
As the owner of a law firm, (I know I’ve mentioned that before but just thought I’d better remind those who accuse me of bias or something) I see the increase in activity as a unique opportunity for agents when it comes to influencing people’s choice of lawyer.
But, it is going to take a change of attitude and approach.
And cajones.
To recommend or not – that is the question
An agent told me last week “I only recommend you guys because you’re the only ones I can rely on”.
Now, before anyone gets too excited and accuses me of self-promotion (my Zoom-based Walking-On-Water classes have been disappointingly ineffective) the point of this comment is clear.
The agent had the confidence to recommend us alone.
Since Moses was a boy, agents have always felt they cannot be seen to recommend lawyers, let alone just one.
The obvious concern is that if the lawyer’s service does not meet expectations, this would reflect on them.
Which, it does.
We know first-hand the speed with which clients complain to agents about “the lawyer YOU recommended” puts a Tesla to shame.
The reality is that our service isn’t flawless and there are times we could do better.
So when an agent calls saying “we’re upset because we recommended you” it’s tough, but rather than us throw our toys out of our respective pram, we have to address the problem and then exchange.
Because fences are easily mended by rapid exchanges and that same frustrated agent usually refers another client to us a few days later.
The reality is that issues are always going to arise, but agents must take a leap of faith and realise that committing to recommending a really good law firm isn’t going to damage them. In reality, if the law firm messes up, then they can just stop referring.
Obviously, and unfortunately, this option isn’t available to agents who don’t have the luxury of free-will and are forced to recommend low-rent law firms who have been pimped out by panel managers.
For those readers who take offence to such comments, last week I was offered work where we would be paid £240 per case.
If that’s not turning tricks for peanuts then I’d like to know what is.
And firms are really messing up
In the past, incompetent law firms with out-dated practices could get away with just being good enough.
However, in this new world where speed and efficiency is key, just being good enough just doesn’t cut it.
Indeed – our experience over the last few months with law firms of all sizes has been abysmal.
Firstly, the policy (a heart-chilling word) of law firm owners to refuse to work on any cases unless they are simultaneously exchanging and completing is causing chaos.
It is having a devastating effect on chains, and, frustratingly, is totally unnecessary. Of the 200 deals we exchanged in April and May only 74 were simultaneous – only a third.
Agents need to look long and hard at the firms they work with if they are refusing to transact the majority of deals.
Secondly, those firms with poor cash management (probably due to their owner’s business strategy of trick-turning for panel managers) who simply furloughed their lawyers without notice and without cover.
Irritatingly, we have many stuck deals due to this problem.
Lawyers have a duty of care to their clients to represent their interests, which means helping them move house.
While some sympathy can be extended to owners forced to furlough their staff, perhaps if they had employed the aforementioned cajones in the first place, they wouldn’t find themselves in such a bind.
Conclusion
With the spectacular heating up of the market, agents really do need to seize this opportunity and start taking the lead when it comes to influencing buyers and sellers to pick good lawyers.
“Buy cheap, buy twice” has never been more appropriate.
Now is the time to strike – agents should follow Boris’ example and just exclaim “Christ!” when a client tells them they are considering using a lawyer just because they are low-priced.
Peter Ambrose is the owner and managing director of The Partnership specialising in the delivery of conveyancing service.
Comments (13)
educating negotiators who are then more confident educating sellers and buyers is key. There is a real lack of understanding of the sales progression process
A tad sexist Peter maybe?
What “pair” do you advocate our female staff “strap on”?
Answer on a postcard to………..
Hmmmmm ….
My only comment would be that this option is available to anyone.
I have met many people of both sexes for whom such additions would be most useful…
The alternative, that does not cost anyone anything, is the sellers can be encouraged to complete their own logbook. This allows them to collect their relevant information in one place and make it avaliable to others who need it later in the sales process. Tim Main
Sadly this is an exercise in optimism over practicality I am afraid.
There is no incentive for sellers to do this.
And, as before, it’s not particularly relevant to the issue I highlight in my article which is that an agent has a window of opportunity now whilst people are in a hurry to ensure that they are steered the right way. Not sure that having a seller upload a gas Safe certificate to a website is going to radically help the process right now with many firms struggling to answer the telephone let alone make the process more efficient?
The one thing, that can be done immediately, that will take weeks off of exchange and completion times is to work with a conveyancer who will compile a seller’s pack whilst the property is on the market. It often takes two weeks for a conveyancer to get their T & Cs back, ID check done and AML carried out. Doing that and nothing else would help! If conveyancers also get copy deeds in and a completed PIQ etc you could speed up the process (and reduce cashflow times and fall through rates) by another month or so. Happy home mover, agent, conveyancer and removal company.
Spot on but the big obstacle here is getting sellers to accept the idea that they need to incur costs before they agree a sale. No matter how many times you try to get them to understand that there is a direct relationship between fall through and time between agreeing a sale and exchange. The longer the interval, the greater the chance of the deal going through (Sorry, Rob, I know I am preaching to the converted)
There doesn’t need to be much upfront cost (if any). So are you saying that agents can’t explain to a seller that £50.00 (approx) now will speed up, make safer and less stressful your sale? Even though in this tricky times it will help reduce the cash flow time for all of the stakeholders. I dont get it? The agents I worked with 15 plus years ago did it.
It would help, if the two thumbs down explain why:(
Not sure getting up front information is really going to solve this particular issue.
Just getting information up front does not a good lawyer make.
“……this option isn’t available to agents who don’t have the luxury of free-will and are forced to recommend low-rent law firms who have been pimped out by panel managers”
If agents want freedom of choice about the law firms they work with, they can have it. There’s several decent conveyancing quote and instruct platforms available, like tmconnect which allow agents to choose which law firms they work with.
There’s also more integration between conveyancing platforms and agents platforms like mio meaning the conveyancer, agent, buyer and seller see the same view of the chain.
This stuff isn’t rocket science anymore but businesses have to want to change and they have to recognise that a good conveyancer helps get the transaction done faster and helps to keep the customer happy which means fewer calls to the agent and an earlier commission payment.
Feel for the lawyers here. The race to the bottom on fees has been no different to Agency work and they carry are far larger risk profile.
As for the panel work at pish take fees, again, very similar to the receivers and asset manager fees for agencies. Embarassing.
I would only entertain it, bizzarely at times like this if there was no income.
So I can fully empathise with the OP.
So my two penneth.
Agents make sure you’re involved heavily with the sales process and not just reliant on the feedback from your Sales Manager. Critique and analyse the times and variables in the sale process from the information supplied and get on the phone to the lawyer and tell him/her to up their game or ship out.
Still a bit old and crusty n those lawyer ivory towers unfortunately. But it is changing slowly.
I find some lawyers we have tested have a pitch “We not cheap, but we deliver results” then once a few instructions start coming in they just don’t deliver -as they are busy pitching for more new business.
We are also finding alot of solicitors are not on lender panels for specialist lenders either. Such as Fleet, The Mortgage Lender etc
The lawyers who won’t innovate are making themselves obsolete , those who pretend to innovate but actively block innovation are going to struggle to hide in their pile of excuses . New kids on the block are already seeing a huge uplift in interest from estate agents and the public . You want to do it better and faster . Take a look at people like Gazeal , iamsold , GOTO group , OneDome, Mio