A broker, who wished to remain anonymous, stressed it was each client's perogative to chose their solicitor and that lenders should stay out of the process. He said: “There are quite a few lenders that won’t accept sole practitioners. It might be that the lenders are worried that they might not exist, but the solicitors are all insured, so the lender won’t suffer a loss. Sole practitioners are usually the ones that know exactly what is going on and it puts me in a quandary because I can’t give best advice if the lender won’t accept the sole practitioner.”
He added: “Surely it is up to the borrower to decide which solicitor they use.”
Peter O’Donovan, mortgage manager at Bestinvest, said it was an area that should be looked at. He said: “People often have their own solicitor that they like using, but unless they are on a lenders accepted list then they are often discounted. I can understand the lenders view, but sole practitioners shouldn’t be immediately discounted.”
However, Alex Hammond, PR manager at Kensington, said: “It is not our policy to exclude one solicitor over another. However, I can tell you why some lenders may see advantages in using larger solicitor firms. For instance with a larger firm you are more likely to get specialist advice and expertise in conveyancing, rather than using a general practitioner who only does one or two cases. In addition, there is a benefit of resources when using a larger firm, so that if a solicitor dealing with a case is off work there is another solicitor on hand to take over any enquiries.”
