Loading Notifications...

Why do solicitors never do anything?

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.

I am trying to get my solicitor to send a document to the Land Registry.  They have had the document for a week.  So far I have called three times and they always seems surprised and will "get to it".  I am paying them £450 for this.

With any other professional service I would have gone elsewhere by now but experience tells me all solicitors are like this.  Why?  Why don't they work like everyone else - perhaps having a list of tasks that get crossed off as they work through them?  Why do they always need to be told to do every tiny step multiple times?

2
In reply to MG:

Because they're all out having boozy lunches, getting tans in their drop top Porsches and playing on each other's yachts whilst the trainee / admin assistant does nothing. 

;) 

In reply to bouldery bits:

As it happens, no one could speak to me earlier because "everyone is at lunch".

 Timmd 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

It might be too late, but if you would like decent one, I could find the name of who was involved in the sale of my childhood home. They were used after finding somebody else was like you describe, and they've been better. 

Post edited at 15:24
4
In reply to MG:

Good question. Bought my first house last year. My solicitor was on the ball. The vendor's solicitor, much to both our dismay, was slow enough that it took 7 months for a no-chain purchase. They were looking at the case once a week, on Thursday and would not look ahead to what would need to be done after their current hurdle. Ask for x on Thursday, vendor would run get it and send it on Friday, received on Monday, looked at on Thursday, rinse and repeat. For *7* months.

In reply to Timmd:

THanks.  Probably past the point of no return...but I may be in touch next week!

 Doug 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

Having sold a house in Scotland & bought a flat in France over the last 18 months, my impression was that my Scottish solicitor (Aberdeen based) was much more efficient than her French counterpart. The Aberdeen solicitor almost allways replied to emailed questions the same day & never had to be reminded of any thing. Can't say the same for the other. But it does seem a lot of money to pay for not very much, and in both cases it seemed that the clerks did most of the work, no doubt for a fraction of the solicitor's pay

In reply to Doug:

I have in fact also found Scottish solicitors a bit more organised, certainly with houses.  Perhaps because the whole house purchasing process is set up to be speedy in Scotland so they have to be too.

 dread-i 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

So I take it you're buying a house? And you went with the solicitor your bank offered as part of the deal? (The one that the bank gets a referrer fee from.) The super low cost one, that thousands of others are using? Hmmm...

I'm not mocking. I had a similar experience when we moved house. Some bulk solicitor in Wales. Everything took multiple phone calls. Always speaking to a different person. It would seem to be the sort of role that could be automated, with a very small piece of code. The only reason to go with a solicitor, is if things go wrong.

Then there's the disclaimers, in case they are sh*t. We had to do a mines search, in case the house was built on a mine shaft. The doc came back with words to the effect of 'As you live in an area with a history of mining, not all mines are recorded, we accept no liability... etc'

I think next time, I'll go with a local solicitor. If they are slow, I can go and sit in their office and pester them.

2
In reply to dread-i:

That was what happened with the vendor on my purchase. They used the solicitor Purple D***s pushed on them as part of a deal and they couldn't back out of that without paying two solicitors' fees.

I got burnt by doing the same with the survey. The report was less than useless, pointed out a lot of stuff that was utter bollocks and didn't point any of the stuff that has cost me many thousands of pounds and countless hours of DIY to rectify...

In reply to dread-i:

> So I take it you're buying a house?

Nope

 > And you went with the solicitor your bank offered as part of the deal?

Nope

 > (The one that the bank gets a referrer fee from.) The super low cost one, that thousands of others are using? Hmmm...

Nope

> I think next time, I'll go with a local solicitor.

Did this

Post edited at 15:43
 gazhbo 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

> I am trying to get my solicitor to send a document to the Land Registry.  They have had the document for a week.  So far I have called three times and they always seems surprised and will "get to it".  I am paying them £450 for this.

> With any other professional service I would have gone elsewhere by now but experience tells me all solicitors are like this.  Why?  Why don't they work like everyone else - perhaps having a list of tasks that get crossed off as they work through them?  Why do they always need to be told to do every tiny step multiple times?

Send it yourself?

In reply to gazhbo:

> Send it yourself?

Honestly I probably would were it not for other parties.  I reckon I saved ~£5k (and probably several years) by handling probate of my mother's estate myself.

 Kevster 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

We have gone with a local solicitor.  I'm close to giving them the heave ho and complaining very loudly in person, at volume, with spittle. But like you, I think we're in too far for a change of company to be a realistic and sensible proposition. 

They are next to useless. Lease extension, land registry thing, and they missed the time limit for registering it. No communication, no nothing, except costs. Having now sold the flat, they needed to do the sale part. OMG they're slow. Grrrrrr.  Making me hotter than a hot thing on the hottest day of the year. Going to jump in with the newts and toads, maybe that'll be calming...

 Philb1950 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

Are you a teacher or lecturer?

In reply to Philb1950:

Are you a manufacturing engineer?

In reply to Philb1950:

Err, why? (Less than half a lecturer as it happens)

Post edited at 16:17
 dread-i 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

>> I think next time, I'll go with a local solicitor.

>Did this

So why aren't you sat in their office pestering them? Spend each lunchtime down there. Yes, they may be out to lunch, but they'll get to heart about you turning up each day and picnicking in their reception.

1
In reply to dread-i:

> >> I think next time, I'll go with a local solicitor.

> >Did this

> So why aren't you sat in their office pestering them? Spend each lunchtime down there. Yes, they may be out to lunch, but they'll get to heart about you turning up each day and picnicking in their reception.

a) I have other stuff to do, like post about it here, at lunch.  Or, more seriously, actually do my own work on time!

b) They are only open for appointments face-to-face so I would be standing in the street peering through the window.

c) I shouldn't have to and I have been phoning, as above.

In reply to Alkis:

> Good question. Bought my first house last year. My solicitor was on the ball. The vendor's solicitor, much to both our dismay, was slow enough that it took 7 months for a no-chain purchase.

They always blame the other solicitor. Our last 2 house sales were a joke and in both cases our solicitor was blaming their solicitor, thing was for the first one we were buying from a friend and in the second one we were selling to a friend and they were being told it was our solicitor by theirs. 

Things started to happen once both sides knew that we knew each other. 

 DerwentDiluted 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

I once shared a house with a solicitor. Unfortunately it burnt down, I was banging and shouting on their door to no avail to try and get them out but needed to save myself and I crawled out suffering major burns and smoke inhalation.

3 weeks later I got a letter saying my instruction to evacuate the building had been received and was under due consideration and would I mind paying an initial deposit into my client account to cover costs incurred and thinking time while they awaited formal confirmation from the Fire and Rescue service that the building was in fact, on feckin fire.

 John Gresty 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

My wife is a solicitor, but not involved in conveyancing, she is working very hard at the moment, non-stop ten hour days as are all her colleagues doing similar work

Sort out the title of your post.

John

32
In reply to Dax H:

Oh, this wasn't my solicitor blaming the other solicitor, or the other solicitor blaming my solicitor. This was the vendor blaming their solicitor and the vendor's solicitor blaming the vendor, but it got so ludicrous that the vendor just started sending me every communication between them, the tracking info for anything she sent etc, since she was worried I was going to pull out thinking she was taking the piss.

Even when they found out that we are talking to each other and we both put complaints in with PurpleSquits (who basically provided the solicitor as part of the deal) the horror continued, as they are too big to care.

Just to give you an indication, they were "drafting contracts" from the 6th of May until mid-July, if I remember rightly, then they were not satisfied with ID checks from the vendor until November. If you feel *truly* bored, I can email you the full timeline, it was unbelievable.

 marsbar 31 Jul 2020
In reply to Alkis:

I had issues with the other sides solicitor.  After a while I told the estate agents that if they didn't sort it I would put it back up for sale.  With a different agent.  It had gone on long enough that I could do that without penalty.  The estate agent hassled the solicitor for me. I will remember not to use purple in future, so thanks for that.  

 SAF 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

When buying our house an issue concerning a possible wayleave came up. My solicitor was insisting there was one but didn't know what type and stating it was up to the vendors solicitor to explain it. Vendors solicitor wasn't sure there was one and was stating that if our solicitor was that bothered to research it thereself.

This and another issue were holding up exchange/completion.

So in one afternoon I educated myself on what a wayleave was, excluded water/drains on the grounds that the property wasn't on mains water or drainage. Rung bt and electricity board, who were both great, emailed them scans of title deeds property outlines. One got back to me that evening the other first thing the next morning (but in terms of office hours both came back with the answer within 2 his of the initial phone call). No wayleave, it was an electricity pylon in next doors garden (used to ask be one property).

Job done and wasn't that hard. Still had to pay a fortune for the solicitors services!!

1
In reply to John Gresty:

Is actually doing what clients need and are paying for? This thread suggests she is unusual if so.

In reply to John Gresty:

> My wife is a solicitor, but not involved in conveyancing, she is working very hard at the moment, non-stop ten hour days as are all her colleagues doing similar work

> Sort out the title of your post.

> John

Better get her on the conveyancing and sorting it out  

 peppermill 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

Makes no sense does it? 

If they've quoted a fixed fee surely it's in their interest to smash through the work as fast as possible. Besides. £450 will just about cover two rear tyres on their Porsche ;p

Personal experience in Glasgow when buying a flat was superb. To the point they were chasing me for various things (I'm self employed so there was a couple of days fannying about with the mortgage)

 Philb1950 31 Jul 2020
In reply to bouldery bits:

I am an engineer

2
 Philb1950 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

Because as it happens my wife is a solicitor and she has previously told me that ask any solicitor who are the worst clients and they will reply teachers/ lecturers because they know everything about everything and you can’t tell them anything 

8
In reply to Philb1950:

> I am an engineer

I'm absolutely class. Go me.

In reply to Philb1950:

> Because as it happens my wife is a solicitor and she has previously told me that ask any solicitor who are the worst clients and they will reply teachers/ lecturers because they know everything about everything and you can’t tell them anything 

Probably true.

I'm probably the worst client for a conveyancer.

Teacher and ex-mortgage adviser / financial services corporate stooge. I'm a nightmare! 

Post edited at 20:25
In reply to Philb1950:

I see. I'd quite like them to tell me something...

 Rob Parsons 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

> I am trying to get my solicitor to send a document to the Land Registry. ...

> With any other professional service I would have gone elsewhere by now but experience tells me all solicitors are like this. ...

A particularly stupid and insulting post. Well done.

21
In reply to Rob Parsons:

> A particularly stupid and insulting post. Well done.

It's statement of fact for (English) solicitors. But thanks for your valuable contribution.

1
 timjones 31 Jul 2020
In reply to Rob Parsons:

> A particularly stupid and insulting post. Well done.

Are you a solicitor by any chance?

My experience of dealing with solicitors is pretty much identical to MG's and looking at other peoples experiences it doesn't seem at all unusual.
 

In reply to timjones:

It's noticeably that all the solicitors and their adherents are getting huffy at criticism without offering any explanation or response to what is clearly a widespread experience.

Post edited at 20:45
 Rob Parsons 31 Jul 2020
In reply to timjones:

> Are you a solicitor by any chance?

No; nor are any of my acquaintances. But my own experience of solicitors has been perfectly satisfactory.

In this case, I can imagine that if MG's personal approach is as arrogant as his first post here, the solicitor might be having a bit of fun with him/her. I think I would.

​​​​​​Anyway, I now look forward to MG's 'All doctors are shit' post when he/she is forced to wait slightly longer than necessary for his/her all-important ingrowing toenail appointment.

11
In reply to Rob Parsons:

I'm sure you are quite right. For example when I was paid twice for selling a house, that was due to my arrogance  bamboozling the poor solicitor and not their incompetence. 

Post edited at 20:59
 Tiggs 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:  the secretary who is doing the work of sending it off is totally snowed under doing all the other stuff for the solicitor and also coping with being constantly interrupted by phone calls from clients and other solicitors and the solicitor asking them what is going on with every case on their books as the solicitor is f*ing clueless........

In reply to MG:

> I'm sure you are quite right. For example when I was paid twice for selling a house, that was due to my arrogance  bamboozling the poor solicitor and not their incompetence. 

Gold!

 gazhbo 31 Jul 2020
In reply to MG:

> It's noticeably that all the solicitors and their adherents are getting huffy at criticism without offering any explanation or response to what is clearly a widespread experience.

You seem to be talking about conveyancers rather than solicitors in general but here goes...

I’m a family solicitor.  I spend around 25% of my time dealing with people who genuinely need my help and the rest of the other time writing stupid letters to other solicitors about things that they should be able to sort out themselves, but are to stupid or stubborn to, like whether the kids get dropped off at 6 or 6.30, or who gets to keep the Jamie Oliver crockery.  My clients include teachers, engineers, medical professionals, accountants, and plenty of other “professionals”.  I repeatedly discourage them from paying me to do things they would be better of doing themselves, but they rarely listen.

Solicitors business models (particularly for conveyancing) are generally based on volume rather than quality of work.  I probably have between 150 and 200 files at one time.  If I did literally nothing else than respond to queries for updates I would be flat out.  I work reasonably long hours.  As I regularly see my clients’ income information I am aware that I earn substantially less than a teacher of equivalent post qualification experience.  I use this example only as I know teachers are considered to be underpaid.  I don’t drive a Porsche.  I know that solicitors in average probably earn more but this is skewed but massive incomes at the top end.  Working as a solicitor/cilex for a conveyancing factory, which is where most people on this thread’s experience comes from, is awfully paid.

There’s a huge threat of litigation for solicitors.  You might think that it’s a waste of your time to wait for a mining report that tells you nothing, but if your solicitor doesn’t advise you to get one, and your house falls down a mine, you’ll pay another solicitor to sue him or her.  You can do these things yourself quickly and less expensively than paying a solicitor to do them for you, because you take that risk yourself.  There is however a lot of work just to be compliant when opening a file.  This takes time and has to be paid for.

That said I quite like my job. I also have more experience of terrible solicitors than the rest of you put together, but it’s a bit unfair to slag us all off.

Post edited at 21:23
1
In reply to gazhbo:

Thanks. Can't reply properly on phone but  see where you are coming from.

In reply to gazhbo:

Thank you for your reasoned response. And I hope you know all my comments are ofcourse in jest 

I've encountered excellent, good, mediocre and atrocious solicitors - I know you're not all duff!

In reply to gazhbo:

> I’m a family solicitor.  I spend around 25% of my time dealing with people who genuinely need my help and the rest of the other time writing stupid letters to other solicitors about things that they should be able to sort out themselves, but are to stupid or stubborn to,

So the OP's title is incorrect; it should read 'why do 75% of solicitors never do anything'...?

 Timmd 01 Aug 2020
In reply to John Gresty:

> My wife is a solicitor, but not involved in conveyancing, she is working very hard at the moment, non-stop ten hour days as are all her colleagues doing similar work

> Sort out the title of your post.

> John

You know, I was musing that it might be like going to pick up prescriptions, in how it doesn't take long at all to process one if I'm nipping just before they close, but it takes 20 minutes when I go in during midday because they likely have other people's to be processing as well, for a while just out genuine curiosity I wanted to ask them how it could take 20 minutes to process 1 prescription, I'm sure it just must be because they're busier.

Post edited at 00:42
3
 gazhbo 01 Aug 2020
In reply to captain paranoia:

> > I’m a family solicitor.  I spend around 25% of my time dealing with people who genuinely need my help and the rest of the other time writing stupid letters to other solicitors about things that they should be able to sort out themselves, but are to stupid or stubborn to,

> So the OP's title is incorrect; it should read 'why do 75% of solicitors never do anything'...?

My post was a bit unclear (probably because I’m a solicitor - it was full of typos as well).  But I meant things that the clients should be able to sort out themselves, rather than other solicitors.

 gazhbo 01 Aug 2020
In reply to bouldery bits:

> Thank you for your reasoned response. And I hope you know all my comments are ofcourse in jest 

No offence taken.  I always find it surprising given the “widespread experience” how busy we are all the time!

 gazhbo 01 Aug 2020
In reply to Alkis:

> That was what happened with the vendor on my purchase. They used the solicitor Purple D***s pushed on them as part of a deal and they couldn't back out of that without paying two solicitors' fees.

> I got burnt by doing the same with the survey. The report was less than useless, pointed out a lot of stuff that was utter bollocks and didn't point any of the stuff that has cost me many thousands of pounds and countless hours of DIY to rectify...

This is a case in point.  I’d have told you that if you try and save money by getting a cheap survey (which, assuming it was part of the deal with your lender, is to protect them, not you) it’ll be useless.  You could always have got a better survey, or looked round the house a bit more.

 MeMeMe 01 Aug 2020
In reply to MG:

Some months after buying a house I found that my solicitor had failed to register the house sale with the land registry. On contacting them it turned out that they’d also lost all means of contact with the vendor and couldn’t get the the documents or the signatures or something to register the sale/purchase.

To their credit they somehow sorted this out so I was eventually the registered owner of the house but this caused me some stress at the time!

They were very cheap, maybe if I’d paid more they’d have more diligent!

 BnB 01 Aug 2020
In reply to MG:

Early in my adult life I experienced the same frustration using local solicitors, but I soon worked out that if you are only paying £200 for conveyancing (this was well back into the last century) then you have only bought an hour of that professional’s time for the whole job of sorting searches, registering deeds, checking and exchanging contracts etc. Not only does it give you little right to be demanding, but it puts in perspective how this is a volume process, not a boutique one. Think of it as a mass produced garment, not a bespoke suit. The tailor works in a sweatshop and certainly doesn’t drive a Porsche.

On the other hand, you can work the simplicity of the task to your advantage by laying out your own rules of engagement. I needed to complete a house purchase within 24 hours of my offer being accepted in order to pre-empt a pending auction on the property. I obtained a quick meeting with the conveyancer who was happy to commit to execute all searches, registrations, exchange and completion within the day. All satisfactorily delivered for less than £300. I’d suggest that, in the dull day to day administration of a thousand bog standard conveyances, this demanding approach actually made his day a lot more interesting as he was able to be a “superhero” in conveyancing terms.

Since then, I’ve always been sure to make the process of engagement as interesting as possible for the solicitor, and not been afraid to be demanding in my expectations.

Post edited at 10:00
1
 timjones 01 Aug 2020
In reply to gazhbo:

> There’s a huge threat of litigation for solicitors.  You might think that it’s a waste of your time to wait for a mining report that tells you nothing, but if your solicitor doesn’t advise you to get one, and your house falls down a mine, you’ll pay another solicitor to sue him or her.  You can do these things yourself quickly and less expensively than paying a solicitor to do them for you, because you take that risk yourself.  There is however a lot of work just to be compliant when opening a file.  This takes time and has to be paid for.

Therein lies the problem and it can only be policed by the profession itself.  I've had to waste time dealing with empty threatening  letters from solicitors acting on behalf of clients that we all know are just chancing it. The solicitors know damn well that they haven't got a leg to stand on but take the clients money rather than advising them not to pursue something that they cannot win.  Maybe if some of the profession had a bit more honour they would refuse to take the work?

> That said I quite like my job. I also have more experience of terrible solicitors than the rest of you put together, but it’s a bit unfair to slag us all off.

You have a professional body, how often do you report a "terrible solicitor" for their misconduct?

 John Gresty 01 Aug 2020
In reply to BnB:

We had a problem with the Building Society when we bought our house. The branch office said that they did not deal with that sort of thing and we would have to ring up HQ, that got us nowhere. Each office was named after a different British city, so we got referred to the Cardiff office, Edinburgh office etc, in time worked out that each of these locations was actually in their HQ.  Eventually I got all the documentation together, drove down to their headquarters and asked to see someone to discuss the problem. At first they said that they did not deal with problems in person there and would have to sort it over the phone, when I refused to budge they were amazed that I had driven there to see them and even questioned my identity, I had ensured I had all the relevant paperwork including my passport, I still politely refused to go away

It took several hours, but in time they relented and I did get to see the correct person and the issue was sorted amicably in an hour.

My wife, who I said earlier is a solicitor, does child protection work. 

John

 SouthernSteve 01 Aug 2020
In reply to MG:

I have very good experience of our solicitor, 3 houses, an estate and a few other small issues. They even use email now. I suspect you get what you pay for, but the current situation is seeing many businesses wiped out with the very high level of communications and contacts so at present I would not be surprised if even they were slower.

On the bad side, a colleague was getting divorced in the early 90s and she had a quote for the work for a certain amount and the final bill came to three times this. When she complained about / questioned this she received a supplemental bill for the letter of reply!

In reply to gazhbo:

> This is a case in point.  I’d have told you that if you try and save money by getting a cheap survey (which, assuming it was part of the deal with your lender, is to protect them, not you) it’ll be useless.  You could always have got a better survey, or looked round the house a bit more.

Ah, no, it wasn't the lender's survey, that one was useless anyway. It was a full building survey, which I made the mistake of ordering via the conveyancing firm that I used, since I was happy with their services thus far (the solicitor assigned to me was excellent and incredibly helpful). It was a good £800 and I thought it would be a good idea considering the property is of non-standard construction. The report is literally full of general comments about things that *could* affect the property but not much about things that *are* affecting the property, and being a first time buyer I didn't know better. A lot of the things that were wrong I should have spotted myself but didn't, such as a very water-damaged ceiling in one of the rooms, and there was other stuff that should have been picked up, like damp due to a water leak in the kitchen.

The property being Wimpey No Fines, it is affected by the usual render cracks. Unfortunately, in some places those are actually through cracks in the concrete itself which I have had to fix. I expected a full building survey to at least point out that possibility, he assured me that in his professional opinion they are all superficial and the house would need re-rendering. At the same time he kept saying I need to get a concrete specialist in to evaluate the state of the steel reinforcements, while I knew and had checked that the property has no steel reinforcement, or steel joist hangers for that matter.

Unfortunately, the biggest cost I've had would not have been picked up by any survey and was a case of the previous owner acting in bad faith and not letting me know that the subfloor structure in the kitchen had sulfite attack and had been destroyed, in their full knowledge as they tried to patch it.

I went through the report again after I found on this and found that it is basically just covered with weasel clauses, the reason all the general comments are there is that it makes it impossible for them not to to be able to say "I told you that's possible in a house".

Edit: I think the term to use is live and learn. Having been through this I am now pretty intimately familiar with the construction of the property at all levels, so I'll go into future purchases with a lot more knowledge.

Post edited at 12:15
 gazhbo 01 Aug 2020
In reply to timjones:

> Therein lies the problem and it can only be policed by the profession itself.  I've had to waste time dealing with empty threatening  letters from solicitors acting on behalf of clients that we all know are just chancing it. The solicitors know damn well that they haven't got a leg to stand on but take the clients money rather than advising them not to pursue something that they cannot win.  Maybe if some of the profession had a bit more honour they would refuse to take the work?

That’s not really what I’m talking about.  I mean the threat of being sued by your own client, years after the event, for something you didn’t tell them at the time, even if they didn’t want to know about it.  The biggest source of negligence in my area is failing to advise people properly about pensions.  They don’t generally care at the time but if the they find out 20 years down the line that their ex did better out of the settlement than they did, they might sue (successfully).  This isn’t necessarily driven by the industry but it does mean that there is more involved in relatively simple instructions than people realise.

Your point I agree with, and I will always advise by clients that I can’t threaten courses of action on their part that I can’t follow through on.  But it still takes time to advise them, especially if they don’t agree with what you tell them.

> You have a professional body, how often do you report a "terrible solicitor" for their misconduct?

Barely ever, but not never.  Partly because there’s a fine line between misconduct and incompetence and, generally, you can’t just report someone to the SRA for being bad at their job.  Partly because I’m not that invested in my profession to try and be part of its police force.  It’s enough for me that I (try to) do my job properly.  If things get worse I’d rather just leave and find something else to do.  But mainly because I don’t have time.

In reply to MG:

Frustratingly slow seems to be a pretty common experience with conveyancing. It is of course a fairly simple legal process, in a lot of cases done by an assistant / paralegal, to be honest they are probably the best people to do the process driven work. What you are of course paying for is the knowledge that will help if there is anything untoward about what for many people is the biggest purchase they will ever make.

The last house that I bought, my solicitor was OK, I had used him before and knew he would be, the vendors solicitor was awful. We had given the vendor (woman in her late 70s) my phone number and she rang us a couple of times, worried that we were pulling out of the sale, because the solicitor had told her that we were not supplying documents etc. We were and our solicitor was able to show that they were passed on in a timely fashion. The vendor also volunteered how much she was paying the solicitor and it double what we were paying.

Post edited at 13:12
 DancingOnRock 01 Aug 2020
In reply to gazhbo:

Some solicitors (like every profession) are better than others. The worst I deal with are the big teams who seem to read a clause in the TP1 document, and send a pro forma letter to cover it. I manage a small estate and have dealt with a few exchanges. The best one was a request to remove whole sections containing clauses in the TP1 document. They clearly had no idea what the purchaser was buying into. Usually these are solved very quickly with a phone call. If I ever have to start writing a second email to one, I pick up the phone as experience tells me they’re fond of spending hours writing emails and letters trying to get you to do all the work, rather than understanding what they’re actually supposed to be supplying themselves. 
 

Usually the telephone conversation starts with “Oh yes, that’s just our standard letter we send to everyone.” 

 timjones 01 Aug 2020
In reply to gazhbo:

> Barely ever, but not never.  Partly because there’s a fine line between misconduct and incompetence and, generally, you can’t just report someone to the SRA for being bad at their job.  Partly because I’m not that invested in my profession to try and be part of its police force.  It’s enough for me that I (try to) do my job properly.  If things get worse I’d rather just leave and find something else to do.  But mainly because I don’t have time.

I guess that the line is fine but maybe if there were sanctions for incompetence then many of us would have a lot more respect for a profession that we really should be able to trust.

 henwardian 01 Aug 2020
In reply to MG:

I think that in the last 2 weeks my solicitor has sent me 10 e-mails with documents and answers to queries, talked to me on the phone on 4 separate occasions about specific concerns, requested additional documents from the seller on 6 or more occasions and supplied incredible lists of every possible concern related to a land purchase. All this has been done without any addition to the standard fees agreed up front.

She works on Skye, let me know if you want contact details.

In reply to henwardian:

Thanks. I may be in touch!

 Becky E 01 Aug 2020
In reply to MG:

Not all solicitors are like this.

When we moved house our purchaser's solicitor was crap and slow, our solicitor was brilliant and totally on it, and the seller's solicitor was somewhere in the middle.

In reply to timjones:

I remember when doing accountancy exams that the pass mark was generally 50%. My thought about that was "so people can qualify and be 50% incompetent".

I suspect solicitors (and most other "professions") are similar 😁

Post edited at 08:39
 SouthernSteve 02 Aug 2020
In reply to Michael Hood:

> I suspect solicitors (and most other "professions") are similar 😁

No. In some, core competency and 1 year qualified competency are used. You must be able to achieve these things or fail. As well as this we likely need to consider more rigorous recertification for doctors, dentists vets and other professionals to ensure they are building upon and are up to date with the above and don't stay at that level. This latter part is more variable. I see a shift from general CPD to targeted (reflective) CPD i.e. I need to learn this because it has changed or I am not very good at it (rather than I must do 50 hours this year or be struck off) to an eventual inevitable retaking of some exams in the far future. People often complain about people collecting qualifications after their name, but really this is probably a good sign they are engaged in this process.

From an educational point of view allowing 95% of people to get 100% in exams would get most exam boards asking for a complete new set of harder questions.


This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.