header-logo header-logo

26 March 2025
Issue: 8110 / Categories: Legal News , Conveyancing , Property
printer mail-detail

TA6 reassurance for conveyancers

The Law Society is introducing a ‘two-form’ system for property sales, following last year’s TA6 debacle.

The unpopular 5th edition TA6 will be replaced. Instead, a 6th edition TA6 becomes mandatory for Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) members from March 2026. This form gives buyers information once an offer has been accepted.

The second form is not mandatory for CQS members. It contains material information which sellers are recommended to give estate agents when marketing the property, and is designed for conveyancers to use if they are instructed before the property is listed.

A furious row erupted last March after the Law Society updated TA6 in line with National Trading Standards guidance to include ‘material information’ such as proximity of electric car charging points. Property lawyers said the ‘material information’ element increased their risk of liability.

The row escalated into a vote of no confidence against the Law Society’s then president Nick Emmerson and chief executive Ian Jeffery—they survived the vote, postponed mandatory use of the 5th edition and launched a consultation on the form.

Law Society vice president Mark Evans said this week they received 1,200 responses, mainly from solicitors.

Evans said: ‘We hope this new approach will make the TA6 process more straightforward and easier to understand and navigate for conveyancers and their clients.

‘We appreciate that this is a difficult month for our members who are under intense pressure with a stamp duty tax deadline looming and we can assure you that there will not be any overnight changes to the existing 4th and 5th edition forms.’

The Law Society intends to provide training on the forms and will test the forms in the summer on conveyancers, sellers and buyers to make sure they work and find out which areas require most support. 

Issue: 8110 / Categories: Legal News , Conveyancing , Property
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll