Lost Property Title Deeds -Going after Solicitors

[Elvisbarney]

They say, dear reader, lightning never strikes twice.
I beg to differ. Allow me to explain.
In 2016 I had two properties to sell, one being my own and the other my elderly father's by means of Power of Attorney.
Both properties were not registered.
1/ In August 2016 I sold my own, subject to contract. The next day I contacted the solicitors holding my Title Deeds. They no longer had them, eventually admitting they passed them to a conveyancing company some 12 years earlier, totally without my consent. Since then, confirmed lost or destroyed.
Delays followed, leading to the collapse of the sale. I eventually managed to complete a sale in April 2017 at a reduced price of £4 k less than the original agreed sale.

2/ In November 2016 I sold my father's house, again subject t contract. The next day I contacted the solicitors holding his Title Deeds. They denied having the deeds. Delays of six weeks until I found proof and effectively forced them to admit they once held the deeds. Deeds lost or destroyed but they refuse to admit liability.
This firm agreed to have the deeds reconstructed at their cost. I agreed, with a right to complain subsequently if I wished.
Their pace of application to the Land Registry is pedestrian, but the sale is still alive. Just.

Questions to the house please, though I do realise it may be uncomfortable for some legal minds here to advise in a situation they are being asked to turn from gamekeeper to poacher!

1. I am fuming with the total lack of care taken by two separate firms regarding the safekeeping of important legal documents. Is there a general view as to the most effective means of seeking financial redress? Legal Ombudsman, perhaps Professional Negligence or any other means?

2. In example 1 I actually submitted a formal complaint to the Ombudsman, almost immediately after which the firm offered first to pay my legal costs in reconstituting the deeds, and then raised this to what now seems approaching reasonable. I've rejected both at this stage. Any suggestions as to best course to pursue, or just settle?

3. In example 2 I await the outcome of the sale before taking action. I believe here there are more serious issues as there appears evidence indicating the firm may have deliberately or negligently tried to mislead initially my solicitor and then me as Attorney for my father by denying possession of the deeds. Again, any ideas as to how best to seek redress?

4. I was also informed that a legal firm cannot admit any liability whatsoever, as this will immediately invalidate any indemnity insurance policy they hold. Is this correct? If so, this may explain the actions of the solicitor in example 2, where "mea culpa" or "Duty of Care" does not feature in their list of legal doctrines!

Any help gratefully received.

[staffordian]

I'm not sure if it's entirely relevant, but I assume the incidents relate to two unrelated solicitors?

[chas49]

I'm not sure if it's entirely relevant, but I assume the incidents relate to two unrelated solicitors?

from the OP:

1. I am fuming with the total lack of care taken by two separate firms regarding the safekeeping of important legal documents.

[staffordian]

Ah, sorry, missed that, somehow

[didds]

IANAL.

What would you actually seek as redress? WRT sale 1 it appears that this may have been effectively offered - what might you be hoping for by holding out? (I'm not having a dig ~:-)

didds

[Elvisbarney]

Didds, haven't got a clue other than it cost considerable in relation to ongoing insurance on a vacant property,utilities etc etc.
Haven't experienced this incompetence previously so was just seeking advice.
Thanks.

[Elvisbarney]

Well, in the end I am not surprised.

Ask a question which involves the potential wrongdoing on the part of a solicitor, and the various legal minds who readily offer up their valued opinion on this board (and TMF prior to this) become conspicuous by their absence.
I accept I have no right to expect an answer, but the response here to what is a legitimate set of circumstances which I outlined, is underwhelming.
Draw your own conclusions, dear reader, but perish the thought that one legal offers impartial advice against another legal.Cosy indeed.

[Clitheroekid]

Ask a question which involves the potential wrongdoing on the part of a solicitor, and the various legal minds who readily offer up their valued opinion on this board (and TMF prior to this) become conspicuous by their absence.
I accept I have no right to expect an answer, but the response here to what is a legitimate set of circumstances which I outlined, is underwhelming.
Draw your own conclusions, dear reader, but perish the thought that one legal offers impartial advice against another legal.Cosy indeed.

I assume this is, at least in part, aimed at me.

Well my sincere apologies for not having jumped at the opportunity to provide an immediate response, but I do actually have a day job! I did see your query, but it was late at night (as it is now) I was tired and it was really too complicated a question to deal with at the time, since when I’d simply forgotten about it.

However, if you had looked at my history of posting both here and on TMF I have on many occasions advised people how to get redress against their solicitor.

In essence both solicitors have been negligent and also committed a breach of contract. You are therefore entitled to `damages' (financial compensation).

The amount of damages depends on what losses you've actually sustained and to what extent they were sustained as a result of the negligence and/or breach of contract.

1/ In August 2016 I sold my own, subject to contract. The next day I contacted the solicitors holding my Title Deeds. They no longer had them, eventually admitting they passed them to a conveyancing company some 12 years earlier, totally without my consent. Since then, confirmed lost or destroyed.
Delays followed, leading to the collapse of the sale. I eventually managed to complete a sale in April 2017 at a reduced price of £4 k less than the original agreed sale.

OK, so your title was obviously reinstated, and I assume that the costs were borne by the solicitors. If not you can claim any costs incurred in doing so.

If you're asking can you also claim the loss of £4,000 it's a far more complicated question, and not one that is capable of a yes or no answer. It would depend very much on a number of different factors, but you would have to prove that the sale had fallen through solely as a result of the loss of the deeds.

In practice, the loss of deeds is usually a nuisance rather than a disaster, and a sale can normally be facilitated without them, simply by using insurance.

2/ In November 2016 I sold my father's house, again subject t contract. The next day I contacted the solicitors holding his Title Deeds. They denied having the deeds. Delays of six weeks until I found proof and effectively forced them to admit they once held the deeds. Deeds lost or destroyed but they refuse to admit liability.
This firm agreed to have the deeds reconstructed at their cost. I agreed, with a right to complain subsequently if I wished.
Their pace of application to the Land Registry is pedestrian, but the sale is still alive. Just.

So far you don't appear to have suffered any actual loss other than hassle and inconvenience.

1. I am fuming with the total lack of care taken by two separate firms regarding the safekeeping of important legal documents. Is there a general view as to the most effective means of seeking financial redress? Legal Ombudsman, perhaps Professional Negligence or any other means?

The Legal Ombudsman won't take on a case unless you've exhausted the firm’s complaints procedure, so you first have to go through that. The firm is bound to supply you with a copy on request.

If you can't resolve it directly then yes, the LeO is the best route, partly because it's free. You obviously have a good case in principle, though as stated above the actual financial losses that are legally recoverable may be modest.

The existence of LeO and a threat to utilise them is a powerful incentive to the firm to settle as they would have to pay £400 just as an investigation fee, and they will obviously want to avoid both that and the subsequent hassle of an investigation and the naming and shaming if they are found to be at fault (which in this case they clearly are).

2. In example 1 I actually submitted a formal complaint to the Ombudsman, almost immediately after which the firm offered first to pay my legal costs in reconstituting the deeds, and then raised this to what now seems approaching reasonable. I've rejected both at this stage. Any suggestions as to best course to pursue, or just settle?

It's impossible to answer without knowing the details and the sums involved, but if it's a reasonable offer there’s no logical reason not to take it.

3. In example 2 I await the outcome of the sale before taking action. I believe here there are more serious issues as there appears evidence indicating the firm may have deliberately or negligently tried to mislead initially my solicitor and then me as Attorney for my father by denying possession of the deeds. Again, any ideas as to how best to seek redress?

As 1 above.

4. I was also informed that a legal firm cannot admit any liability whatsoever, as this will immediately invalidate any indemnity insurance policy they hold. Is this correct? If so, this may explain the actions of the solicitor in example 2, where "mea culpa" or "Duty of Care" does not feature in their list of legal doctrines!

No, I don't know who `informed' you but it's rubbish. Admitting liability in this type of situation is normal procedure. The solicitor will have informed their insurers anyway, so all negotiations would be carried out with their insurers' guidance.

I trust your image of the legal profession has now been at least marginally improved!

[JMN2]

Wouldn't it be a good idea, if technically possible, to have the physical deeds converted into electronic form at the land registry?

[Clitheroekid]

Wouldn't it be a good idea, if technically possible, to have the physical deeds converted into electronic form at the land registry?

Yes, in that it would prevent situations like this arising. And yes, it's certainly possible - in fact voluntary registration of title is actively encouraged by the Land Registry by offering discounted fees.

The reason it very rarely happens is cost. Although the LR fee itself is only a couple of hundred pounds a first registration of title is not something the average layman would be comfortable dealing with. However, employing a solicitor to deal with it would cost more than the LR fee, so the overall cost becomes prohibitive if the only benefit is to provide insurance against losing the deeds.

The only times I've had a client willing to pay for voluntary registration is when they are planning to sell the land off in several lots, so that the cost of registration is outweighed by the saved costs when selling.

It's therefore easier - and a lot cheaper - just to ensure the deeds are stored somewhere safe, like a solicitor's office - oops!

[Dod1010]

Reading through this thread, the Op's comments re the lack of a response were rather uncalled for I would have thought. He now has free advice from a very patient CK but for goodness sake people are responding in their own time if they feel like it, not as a duty.

Dod

[Elvisbarney]

First of all apologies to any reader feeling offended.
The comments made was the general impression I felt and not intended against any individual. I was beginning to believe some secret bond of silence existed between legal practitioners, similar to the rolled-up trouser brigade. I was clearly mistaken!

Many thanks to CK once again for his perceptive legal eye.
I agree that the threat of the LeO seemed to work wonders in the first case: after a delay of 13 weeks without any investigation from the solicitor concerned (the LeO advises 8 weeks as an adequate time-frame to resolve disputes), I submitted the complaint, followed in quick succession by two return financial offers to settle the dispute.

In the second case of my father's deeds, I recently met with the senior partner overseeing the reconstituting of the deeds. He was of the view that meeting my legal fees and carrying out the work was all the recompense I needed.
Are these people really so unaware that keeping an unoccupied house, which would otherwise by now have long been sold,costs money?
I slipped in a mention of my considering the LeO option once his legal work was complete. This concentrated his mind instantly, to the extent he even bizarrely demanded to know what sum I was seeking.
Strange world this legal beagle community.....

[didds]

so how much did you ask him for?

didds

[Dod1010]

I have over the years had the occasionally complaint against a lawyer. If you apply common sense and persistence, particularly armed with the professional comments of CK, that should see you through. If you genuinely believe you have right on your side and are not seen as the equivalent of an ambulance chaser, most legal firms in my experience will behave reasonably, unless of course they are crooked.

So you make your case and seek recompense, the aim being to at least put you in the same financial position as you would have been if the deeds had been produced in a timely fashion. Compensation for pain and anguish hardly comes into this sort of situation. I would say therefore that if you have incurred additional expenses because you could not attempt to sell (you might not have sold anyway) as the deeds were not available, then itemise the claim and present it. Give him the chance to react and only then if you still feel strongly about it go to the Ombudsman and be prepared to be knocked back!

Set aside your cynicism and play with a straight bat.

Dod

[Elvisbarney]

Didds - modesty forbids, but if I was to say the second offer increased 800% on the first, then this is perhaps the best indication of culpability: the bottom line is if you agree to be entrusted to hold a sensitive legal document, then maintain your duty of care and keep it safe.

Dod1010. -thanks for the advice. I have broadly speaking followed your plan, especially in itemising all the costs I have incurred. However, as the solicitor failed to respond by week 13 I felt the LeO was the only option left. It had the desired effect of treating my complaint seriously.

As for the second solicitor's performance to date, the less said the better. Suffice to say my file of evidence is growing by the day. Everyone is allowed to make a mistake, but please don't deal with me like a half-wit!

[JMN2]

Wouldn't it be a good idea, if technically possible, to have the physical deeds converted into electronic form at the land registry?

Yes, in that it would prevent situations like this arising. And yes, it's certainly possible - in fact voluntary registration of title is actively encouraged by the Land Registry by offering discounted fees.

The reason it very rarely happens is cost. Although the LR fee itself is only a couple of hundred pounds a first registration of title is not something the average layman would be comfortable dealing with. However, employing a solicitor to deal with it would cost more than the LR fee, so the overall cost becomes prohibitive if the only benefit is to provide insurance against losing the deeds.

The only times I've had a client willing to pay for voluntary registration is when they are planning to sell the land off in several lots, so that the cost of registration is outweighed by the saved costs when selling.

It's therefore easier - and a lot cheaper - just to ensure the deeds are stored somewhere safe, like a solicitor's office - oops!

Apparently the house I'm looking into at the moment, late 60's early 70's up north, 2 owners ever, the deeds are held electronically at the land registry - no-one paid to get them converted. They just are in electronic form. Also the HMRC Land Registry website gave me the impression these are being converted fast and paper ones are becoming rare.

[Clitheroekid]

Apparently the house I'm looking into at the moment, late 60's early 70's up north, 2 owners ever, the deeds are held electronically at the land registry - no-one paid to get them converted. They just are in electronic form.

Well somebody definitely paid to register the title - the Land Registry don't do it for free.

If you mean the house was actually built in the late 60's / early 70's it may well have been registered at the time it was built.

Also the HMRC Land Registry website gave me the impression these are being converted fast and paper ones are becoming rare.

That's quite correct, but only because it's compulsory to register the title whenever an unregistered title changes hands or is mortgaged.

[JMN2]

You are correct of course.

(sorry, post edited, did not realise and was not intentional until Lootman mentioned it, so sorry)

[Lootman]

C, you are correct of course.

Do you know for a fact that Clitheroekid is OK with being addressed by that particular familiarity?

He's a decent cove, but that's not an abbreviation I would use presumptively . . .

Moderator Message:
Slight alteration undertaken to remove inadvertent reference to a body part! - Chris

[Elvisbarney]

Footnote:-
Following further negotiation with the offending legal firm in Example 1, I have reached a settlement, at a near-1,000% increase from their initial derisory offer.
I am of the firm view that what swayed it in my favour was the submission of the formal complaint to the Legal Ombudsman. Prior to that the legal firm denied responsibility, and delayed any consideration well beyond the specific guidelines of the Ombudsman. Once I had pressed the 'send' button however, the transformation was amazing.

The satisfaction I have gained from this sometimes traumatic experience was that even solicitors have a duty of care to the little people they represent, and if you remain determined and resolute and have right on your side, then the truth will out.

Thanks to all here who offered advice along the way, esp.of course the ever-reliable C.K.

Oh, and solicitor in Example 2, standby....