First Direct Conveyancing Panel Information

We are not aware of any intention on the part of the CML to develop such a register.

The requirements to join the First Direct conveyancing panel is likely to be fairly detailed and is unlikely to include signing up to LENDERmonitor alerts.

The Council of Mortgage Lender requirements of First Direct are silent on this. Most lenders deal with the question of file retention via their Terms and Conditions where they generally provide that for evidential purposes, the firm must keep the file for at least of 6 years from the date of the mortgage. Data imagining is normally suitable compliance with this requirement. Many lenders point out in that it is the practice of some fraudsters to demand the conveyancing file on completion in order to destroy evidence that may later be used against them. It is therefore important to retain these documents to protect First Direct’s interest. To be absolutely sure of First Direct requirements in this regard please check the Terms and Conditions of First Direct’s conveyancing panel membership.

In operating open conveyancing panels, lenders such as First Direct face a number of fraud and negligence risks. While there is no authoritative source of data on lender exposure to solicitor–led mortgage fraud, anecdotal evidence from lenders indicates exposure on individual cases are often in the millions of pounds. The National Fraud Authority estimates that £1bn per year is lost in mortgage -related frauds in total, which is seen as a conservative estimate.

These risks are exacerbated by the lack of a comprehensive set of data on all conveyancing firms (which, for the avoidance of doubt, would include solicitors and conveyancers across the UK) which is in a readily accessible format. Currently, lenders vet the suitability of their panel firms against a variety of disparate, incomplete and potentially inaccurate sets of information. One top 5 lender pointed out to us that it is almost impossible to track individual fraudsters who move from firm to firm, especially where they are no longer registered or no longer hold a valid practicing certificate.

First Direct and other lenders are in varying stages of reviewing their approach to vetting firms on their conveyancing panels, to ensure their ongoing exposure to unsuitable firms is reduced. There is also regulatory impetus on lenders to ensure that they have satisfactory oversight of their third party panels, including a due-diligence process.

Your insurance brokers are your best port of call to address this question. The chances are that on the basis that you have not been removed for fraud or negligence reasons that there will be little or no impact. The main reason why a firm would be removed off of a lender panel is due to low volume of conveyancing cases although there may be a number of criteria for First Direct solicitor panel membership. Please remember that it is always important that you complete your insurance forms accurately.

You would be advised to communicate with First Direct to obtain standard documents. The The Council of Mortgage Lenders Handbook has an express question for lenders to set out who to contact to obtain standard documents. First Direct in their Part 2’s state: It helps to quote the firm’s First Direct solicitors panel number.