header-logo header-logo

15 August 2012
Issue: 7527 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Santander panel fury

Law Society fights bank’s conveyancing panel cull

Santander and the Law Society are in discussion over the bank’s decision to drop hundreds of solicitors from its conveyancing panel.

Last year, Santander introduced a one-off fee of £199 plus an annual £99 compliance fee for solicitors on the panel. In July, however, Santander sent letters to many firms informing them they could no longer remain on the panel because they had not carried out enough conveyancing transactions.

A Law Society spokesperson says the number of solicitors affected could be a few hundred, although neither the Law Society nor Santander would know the exact figures for some weeks as an appeals process is on-going.

Some firms have appealed successfully, while others have been told their removal from the panel was a mistake, he says. Solicitors have expressed annoyance at the fact they paid a renewal fee only to be told a few months later that they had been dropped.

The Law Society has urged all affected firms to appeal, and will meet with Santander representatives shortly to discuss a possible “sustainable solution”.

Law Society chief executive Desmond Hudson says: “We retain grave reservations about the methods they are using and are concerned about the effects both on firms and consumers.”

A spokesperson for Santander says: “We continue to manage our conveyancing panel in relation to both quality and activity. Firms which do not meet our expectations are removed from the panel but always have a right of appeal.”

In January, HSBC cut the number of solicitors and conveyancers borrowers could use from several thousand to just 48, but backed down four months later under pressure from the Law Society and other user groups. Customers of the bank complained the decision, which meant they had to pay additional legal fees for HSBC’s part of the transaction, caused delays and increased the risk of house sales falling through.

Issue: 7527 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Taylor Rose—Jessica Draganescu & Emily Hewlett

Taylor Rose—Jessica Draganescu & Emily Hewlett

Firm strengthens growth strategy and group litigation capability with senior hires

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
The legal profession’s claim to be a ‘guardian of fairness’ is under scrutiny after stark findings on gender imbalance and opaque progression. Writing in NLJ this week, Joshua Purser of No5 Barristers’ Chambers and Govindi Deerasinghe of Global 50/50 warn that leadership remains dominated by a narrow elite, with men holding 71% of top court roles
A legal challenge to police disclosure rules has failed, reinforcing a push for transparency in policing. In NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth examines a case where the Metropolitan Police required officers to declare membership of groups like the Freemasons
Bereavement leave is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves of York St John University explains how the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a day-one right to leave for a wider range of losses, alongside new provisions for pregnancy loss and bereaved partners
Courts are beginning to grapple with whether AI-generated material is legally privileged—and the answers are mixed. In this week's issue of NLJ, Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej of Burges Salmon examine US rulings showing how easily privilege can be lost
New guidance seeks to bring order to the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Minesh Tanna and David Bridge of Simmons & Simmons set out a framework stressing ‘transparency’, ‘explainability’ and ‘reliability’
back-to-top-scroll