We want your views on how the property information form (TA6), which is designed for completion by the seller, can be improved for solicitors, buyers, sellers and lenders. Your views will help inform our work to improve the form.
Aims of consultation
The aim of the consultation is to obtain views to inform the production of a revised general enquiry form for residential conveyancing. This consultation does not extend to leasehold, new build or commonhold enquiries.
The consultation relates specifically to the content of the following forms:
- TA6 Property Information Form 2nd edition (Annex A)
- TA10 Fittings and Contents Form 2nd edition (Annex B)
Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) members are particularly encouraged to respond because member firms have a broadly mandatory obligation to use the Law Society's conveyancing protocol.
The consultation papers
Read the full consultation paper (PDF)
Download the annexes - please note these are specimen forms:
How to respond
The deadline for reponses is 17:00 on 19 April 2012.
If you prefer not to use our forms, simply detail your comments or concerns in an email or letter. Send your email to consultationresponse@lawsociety.org.uk, or post your letter to the address provided above.
Please ensure that, in your email or letter, you identify yourself and state on whose behalf you are responding (unless you are responding anonymously), and if you wish us to treat any part of your response as confidential.
Summary of questions
1. Do you think that changes need to be made to the Law Society Conveyancing Protocol in relation to enquiries?
2. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the principles on which standard preliminary enquiries should be based?
3. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Every effort should be made to frame preliminary enquiries so that they ask for information that requires a factual response and not an opinion.
4. If you agree to some or all of these principles being used to limit the scope of the enquiries, would you agree not to add additional enquiries that breached the principles you agree with (except where they arose directly from title documents, the property itself or the clients wishes/requirements)?
5. Should the Form TA6: a) be the shortest it can be while providing the requisite information, b) be the most comprehensive it can be (to include questions that many purchasers wish to know the answers to even if the information is available elsewhere), c) a compromise between a) and b) above.
6. Do you think the existing Form TA6 represents an effective balance between the competing interests of buyers and sellers?
7. Form TA6 aims to produce a balance between buyers and sellers, in the interests of balance, are there some questions that should be specifically raised by buyers that should not form part of a standard form?
8. Where the information requested is also available from public records that are capable of being searched should such information be excluded from the Form TA6?
9. Would it be useful to provide an explanation relating to the TA6 questions for: the buyers' solicitors, the sellers' solicitors, the lenders' solicitors, all solicitors?
10. Would it be useful to provide an explanation relating to the TA6 questions for sellers, buyers, or both?
11. In the light of the Court of Appeal decision in William Sindall plc v. Cambridgeshire CC should any of the questions be for the solicitor to answer?
12. Should the seller's solicitor be required to sign the main enquiry form to confirm that they have reviewed the seller's replies to enquiries?
13. Should the seller be invited to sign and date the responses?
14. Is there information that might more usefully be dealt with directly by the buyer and /or the estate agents?
15. If you were to be persuaded to give up your own additional enquiry form which question/s would you be most reluctant to let go?
16. Some firms add a series of specific additional enquiries in relation to the construction of conservatories. Are these necessary in addition to the existing question about conservatories?
17. Given the increased awareness of the risks of groundwater flooding in addition to surface water flooding, and the imminent changes to insurance cover for flood risk, should the existing question be expanded and strengthened?
18. Are you confident that you can explain the rationale for this to your seller client if their property is affected?
19. Following the changed requirements of Land Registry in relation to overriding interests some firms are using a separate 'overriding interest questionnaire'. Are additional questions necessary?
20. Even though this information might be available from the entries at LR, should questions be raised as to how long the seller has owned the property (to comply with CML Lenders Handbook and BSA Mortgage Instructions provisions)?
21. While there are difficulties in relation to situations where it may be better for buyers to buy without notice, should questions be asked in relation to insolvency matters?
22. What changes would you make to the Fittings and Contents Form?
23. Do your clients find the Fittings and Contents Form sufficiently easy to use?
24. Does the box system (of 'tick' for included, 'cross' for not included and 'insertion of a price' if can be included at an additional price) work without undue difficulty in practice?
25. Do you prefer the previous edition of the Fittings and Contents Form?
26. Should a question be included on the form that asks whether all of the items included are the unencumbered property of the seller?
27. The form currently gives a direction to the seller that he should make good any damage if items are being removed. Does this operate satisfactorily in practice?
28. In place of the direction referred to in Q27 would it be preferable in terms of practicality (reducing incidence of disputes or making it easier to resolve disputes) to include a question that asks that if items are being removed whether the seller will be 'reasonably careful' in doing so?
29. Are there any questions in TA11 not covered by TA6 Property Information Form 2nd edition, which should be incorporated in a new standard form?