The Intermediary – August 2026 - Flipbook - Page 16
RESIDENTIAL
Opinion
CONVEYANCING
COULD BE A MAJ
G
o online, and you
will find there’s no
shortage of reviews
and ratings of almost
every conveyancing
or solicitor firm that
has completed a case in the past couple
of decades.
In that sense, I suppose some might
argue these reviews have become an
increasingly influential part of the
way both consumers and advisers
select legal partners. Whether they
come from panel providers, customer
review websites or platform-generated
scores, they appear to offer a quick and
simple way of identifying which firms
consistently deliver the best service.
The problem is that conveyancing is
rarely that simple.
In fact, I would argue reviews and
ratings can sometimes be a major
red herring. Not because they have
no value, but because they oen
encourage advisers, in particular,
to compare firms that are handling
entirely different types of work, under
very different circumstances and at
very different points in time.
Every transaction is unique
One of the biggest challenges with
comparing conveyancing firms is that
no two transactions are ever identical.
A straightforward freehold purchase
involving a first-time buyer with no
chain is a very different proposition
from a leasehold flat, a new-build
property, an auction purchase or
a transaction involving Building
Safety Act (BSA) requirements, gied
deposits or specialist lending.
Each scenario places different
demands on the conveyancer, and
naturally leads to different timescales
and communication requirements.
Some firms actively specialise in
complex work because they have
developed the expertise and resources
to deal with it. Others deliberately
14
The Intermediary | August 2026
focus on more straightforward
transactions because that suits their
operating model.
Neither approach is wrong
of course, but it does mean
comparing headline completion
times or customer ratings without
understanding the underlying work
can be misleading.
If one firm spends much of its time
dealing with complicated leasehold
maers while another handles
predominantly standard freehold
purchases, it should surprise nobody
that their average turnaround times
look very different. The figures alone
tell only part of the story.
Service levels change
Another factor that ratings struggle to
capture is that service is never static.
Every conveyancing firm experiences
periods where demand increases
or falls away. Recruitment, annual
leave, seasonal market conditions
and changes in lending activity all
influence workloads throughout
the year. Even the biggest firms can
experience temporary pressure when
instruction volumes rise sharply,
while quieter periods oen allow
Delays caused by
mortgage offers, chains,
survey issues or sellers can
all influence how clients
perceive the conveyancer,
even when the legal
work itself has been
carried out efficiently and
professionally”
HARPAL SINGH
is CEO at conveybuddy
firms to deliver exceptionally fast
turnaround times.
Also, many published ratings
are built upon transactions that
completed several months earlier.
These remain useful as an indication
of historical performance, but they
cannot accurately reflect what
is happening within a business
today. Advisers are not choosing a
conveyancer for a transaction that
completed three months ago. They are
choosing one for a client who needs
excellent service now.
Quality, not quantity
Communication is understandably
one of the most important
factors advisers consider when
recommending a conveyancer.
Clients expect regular updates and
advisers want confidence they can
answer questions without constantly
chasing for progress. However,
even communication review scores
deserve careful interpretation. Some
systems measure communication by
recording how oen firms manually
update portals. While that may
appear to be a sensible benchmark,
it does not necessarily reflect the
quality, accuracy or usefulness of the
information being shared.
