Handelsbanken Conveyancing Panel Information

The Scottish Law Society has suggested that solicitors should check their panel status with lenders prior to accepting client instructions to act. The advice is lender-agnostic as it does not relate specifically to solicitors on the Handelsbanken conveyancing panel. The recommendation arises from the practice of a number of mortgage lenders who remove solicitors from their panels without prior notice as part of their panel management system, which can lead to some solicitors discovering this only once instructed. This is sensible advice as a client finding out midway through a transaction that their lawyer is not on the approved lender panel is very frustrating and can lead to complaints. Many online consumer forums contain posts where someone is complaining about finding that their lawyer is not on a lender conveyancing panel. Such forums include mumsnet.com

Criteria differ from lender to lender. We do not hold specific requirements relating to the questions raised as part of the application to be on the Handelsbanken conveyancing panel. Typically lenders need to have full knowledge of a firm including (but not limited to):

Number of partners per branch of the firm

Full disciplinary history for each conveyancing solicitor

Whether any lender has ever made a claim against the firm’s PII cover

List of all those staff who work within the conveyancing team

Full disciplinary history for each licensed conveyancer

and Conveyancing Quality Scheme

List of all solicitors within firm

Whether the firm has ever knowingly accepted instructions on transactions involving Sale and Rent Back, Back to Back, Exchange and Delayed Completion and Lease Option, Below Market Value.

Automated alerting to inform lenders when there is a fundamental change to the firm (e.g. new disciplinary action)

Full complaints history for each licensed conveyancer

The answer to this question really depends on the reason that your firm has been removed off the Handelsbanken conveyancing panel. The top 3 reasons are as follows:

1. lack of transactions
2. the lawyer is a sole practitioner
3. as part of the HSBC panel reduction.

In these three circumstances it is unlikely that you would expected to take any action. Disclosure and other compliance considerations are more likely to be relevant if the reason for removal is due to breaches of lender requirements or allegations of fraud or negligence. Whether the reasoning should trigger a disclosable 'material' breach will depend on the firm and the circumstances around possible failures to comply with the SRA Authorisation Rules, and the SRA will judge each case on its own merits. Factors such as the detriment or risk of detriment to clients, the scale of the issue and overall impact on the firm will need to be considered in deciding whether a failure is 'material'. As the compliance officer you will need systems to identify patterns of breaches. Even if you don't consider there to be regulatory implications the firms COFA should give some thought to whether she/he needs to take any action as result of being removed from the Handelsbanken conveyancing panel.

With lenders and conveyancing firms working so closely with one another it is surprising that there has not been greater demand for the introduction of a bit of transparency regarding not just the figures for the Handelsbanken conveyancing panel but for all mortgage panels

It would be advisable to provide details of the date of removal, information on the reason for removal, date of appeal and any reason given for reinstatement. This should not adversely impact your application but gives the CQS team a complete picture of what has occured.

You need to communicate with Handelsbanken to obtain standard documents. The The Council of Mortgage Lenders Handbook has an express question for banks to enumerate who to contact to obtain standard documents. Handelsbanken in their Part 2’s state: It helps to quote your Handelsbanken conveyancing panel reference.