In the 1993 legal drama “Philadelphia”, Tom Hanks asks Denzel Washington;
“What do you call a thousand lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean?”
“A good start.”
For years, agents have been complaining about how lawyers run their businesses.
Accusations of inefficiency or the use of out-dated practices typically degenerate into slanging matches dominated with phrases such as “stop being patronising”, “we bear the risk” or “we can’t charge enough”.
I run a law firm (yes, I know I’ve disclosed this before, but heaven forbid I get accused again of a lack of transparency) so I understand this stuff is tricky, and lawyers can be excused for being defensive.
But.
In the same way we are given glimpses into the realities of people’s home lives through the wonder of Zoom, the current situation has revealed the dreadful string and sticking plaster operations of so many law firms.
The sheer number that cannot operate today highlights their owners’ shambolic approach to running a sustainable business.
Technology can never replace a good lawyer
Whenever I mention the importance of technology in conveyancing, I get angry condemnation along the lines of “technology will never replace a good solicitor”.
Obviously technology doesn’t make an incompetent case worker a brilliant problem solver, but if we learn anything from this experience, that to survive, things must change.
For those who think putting a quoting engine on their website means they have embraced technology, I suggest they re-read the tale of the “Emperor’s New Clothes.”
Most lawyers we are speaking to recently are sitting at home surrounded by piles of files, writing letters that they email to an office based worker to print out and put in the post.
It’s no wonder so many law firms are struggling.
The last few weeks should have made it obvious to any law firm owner who thinks case management systems and paperless environments are luxuries they can’t afford, that maybe they in the wrong game.
Ongoing financial support for the Post Office
To keep the conveyancing wheels turning, every day I visit the local sorting office to pick up the seemingly never-ending piles of post that are waiting for us.
Being responsible for opening and scanning this post has opened my eyes to the shocking way that people use paper.
Despite the frantic efforts of many law firms to try and adapt to remote working, they are showing a remarkably effective resistance to change when it comes to writing letters.
Just last week alone, we scanned over 550 documents.
What makes it more shocking is the nature of the letters.
One confirmed they had “received our enquiries and are reviewing them”.
Another gave an answer to one enquiry we had raised.
The winner of Choice Letter of the Week was the one that took two pages to inform us that their client had pulled out of the deal.
The biggest irony, is that many of these letters helpfully include the wording “By post and email”.
Could this be the start of electronic signatures?
Ask a lawyer why the conveyancing process can’t be made more efficient, the typical response will be a pause, followed by a sigh.
That’s because, even the simple things are always more complicated than you can imagine.
Like why we need original client signatures on paperwork – what is wrong with an electronic version?
The simple answer is, “no reason really, but we don’t want to be first company to be sued and not have a signature to rely on”.
Unfortunately, when it comes to transfer deeds these do need real signatures.
That’s why, when Land Registry announced last week that they were temporarily changing the rules, all those days being stuck at home were forgotten and our ice-cold lawyer hearts started to beat a little faster.
And then we looked into the detail and sure enough, the devil was found there alive and kicking.
The good news is clients can now scan or photograph signed deeds and return them to their lawyers electronically.
The bad news is that video calling can’t be used for witnessing their signature.
With social distancing, the main problem clients are having is finding an independent witness for their signatures, so this change doesn’t solve that issue.
The other potential problem is that many lawyers will not accept scanned signatures.
Given the intransigent approaches we have seen to how some are refusing to progress deals right now, I’m not sure how open they will be to such a radical idea.
Conclusion
It’s obvious that many law firms have drawn inspiration from the Wizard of Oz.
For years they’ve been hiding behind those green curtains spinning all those wheels and pulling all those levers and have got away with it.
The harsh reality of the current situation is that many of those firms will pay the price for their owners’ denial.
Given the Law Society’s recent forecast that over 5000 law firms will not survive this ordeal, Tom Hanks’ figure may just be the starting point.
Peter Ambrose is the owner and managing director of The Partnership specialising in the delivery of conveyancing service.
It’s an old story Peter but I recall meeting a conveyancer who was understood to be “leading the way” at our offices. He was very impressed with our technology, and admitted that they took emails, printed them out and put them in the post tray with the other letters. I am sure they will have changed by now ………
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
They now print out in colour and put in the post tray 🙂
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Lawyer/solicitor/conveyancer = Rotary/golf/Masons/quill pen. Plus ca change.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I fail to see any real benefit in this article, yes some law firms are old fashioned, get over it!
I suppose at least there was no veiled attack at panel managers this time…..
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The point is not to highlight the fact that law firms are old-fashioned, that is too easy.
The point of the article was to highlight that impact of the current situation on the decision making processes of the owners of law firms and how it will force change upon many.
Not sure about whether panel managers will suffer from this downturn …
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The article is simply highlighting the elephant in the room.
A law firms inability to grasp remote working without breaching data protection in a climate like this is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
As opposed to investing in the correct IT infrastructure in order to serve the client, they’re too busy buying fancy stationary.
Kudos to firms like the Partnership who’ve taken the leap to innovate and meet the correct standard.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Always good to see you sticking your head above the parapet Peter. The home buying and selling process cannot move in to its next phase until someone forces lawyers to adopt tech AND works with LandReg to modernise too, all whilst keeping it safe from ever more sophisticated hackers. I still don’t understand why Auction practices, with simple datarooms from outfits like PiPreport, aren’t more commonplace. Question – how can the luddites be forced out in to the daylight, and who is in a position to do the forcing?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Thanks Ed – that is the EXACT point of the article.
It’s not about out-dated practices, it’s about whether this current situation will force the change.
I suspect it might …
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Don’t see many houses selling at the moment and any ideas (technical or otherwise) how this can be overcome but hey, lets take our minds off this and indulge in our favourite past time of having a dig at “lawyers” ( by the way anyone can call themselves a lawyer)
Yes I appreciate that the article was written by a lawyer but it was obviously for consumption by others
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It does not appear to have been written by a lawyer.
I don’t think many lawyers would have started with such an opening gambit.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It seems silly how far behind lawyers are when it comes to online signing and emails. I don’t even want the letters I get from Lawyers, I often call and ask for them to be emailed over so i can save them on our software without the need to scan them, they are usually over minutes later. When as an Agency we adopted online electronic signatures I just evaluated the risk potential. No one ever denies signing anyway, the dispute is always in the content. How many times have you been in a court room and at what cost? Arguing about a signature?, compare this to the ongoing daily cost of administration. I will take my chances in Court if i ever have to and so far i never have. I hope Covid 19 teaches us all about making improvements in the way we work simpler and faster, especially Lawyers as i think it would improve the service. My friends in the Law are swamped with reading and study and work long, long hours often into the night, sleep badly, eat badly. Conveyancing is under paid and under valued, the Land Registry is a dinosaur. If Lawyers are snowed under then they need to push for this change to make the conveyancing business faster and more efficient and more profitable for them. I would love a faster system and would help to make it happen if I could.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Peter – a worthwhile commentary as usual.
The whole issue (not your article) is very odd, the discussion about accepting e-signatures or copies of signatures. We’ve had email and scanners for 25 years but why are we having the discussion now. Its nothing new. Its just weird.
Either the law states a photocopy of a signed document (or an electronically signed X) is as good as an original or it doesn’t. The only issue then, is risk. Did the right person sign, or is it a forgery.
Emails can be intercepted by one of a couple committing fraud, a letter not as easily. Easy, but not as easily. Sending to an address also acts as a way to ID the client/corroborate their address ID.
(Maybe lenders can seek their own signatures leaving the mortgage deed without the need for one. That removes one key signature in a purchase. Otherwise, you know they will say ‘e’ signatures are ok provided the lawyer assumes risk for fraud. So instead, lenders should seek their own signatures by, for example, attaching the mortgage deed to their letter of acceptance, then liaise with HMLR to agree this change.)
In a sale, we post the contract and transfer out very early and that’s that. With a pre-paid envelope, taking no risk (nor exposing the rightful owners, if a fraud is happening, to a greater ID risk) at all with e-signatures and photocopied/scanned in signed documents. We leave that risk to our competitors who choose to go ‘e’.
As for a purchase, we send the mortgage deed, our bound Property Report and any TR1 all at at the same time, with a pre-paid envelope. And it all comes back.
Never had any issues, none whatsoever, all delighted clients. Seems to be a discussion about solving a non-issue, when there are far bigger changes needed to the conveyancing industry – e.g how tragic the quality of some conveyancers are, which to me is a breach of the SRA Code for lawyers.
But if we discover a need to change methods of signing, clearly, we shall consider the options out there.
Conveyancers already carry the greatest – and are sued so frequently as a result – risk in the moving process, yet receive the lowest reward, the last thing they need is an assumption of more risk.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I had a call from a client a couple of years ago who had received a letter in the post from his solicitor asking for a copy of the EPC.
That letter was presumably dictated, transcribed by a secretary, typed, printed and taken to the post box.
To have done that the solicitor would have received a letter in the post from the buyer’s solicitor, similarly typed etc, asking for a copy of the EPC.
Both firms of solicitors has received an identical sales memorandum pointing out that the EPC was held at http://www.epcregister.com just in case they did not know about this resource that had been in existence since 2007.
Really!! Hello Sprift, Gazeal etc developed by estate agents in an effort to improve the customer experience.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register