Legal / conveyancing business questions.
Discussion
Just after some advice really from folks that are from or familiar with this industry.
I want to acquire/setup/form a legal practice. Initially with a heavy focus on conveyancing, but also with potential to widen the focus in the future.
I don’t have any experience of running or operating an operation like this, but I have founded several successful businesses in unrelated industries.
Why you might ask? Well having spent several years buying and selling land and property after selling my business, I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
I’m not looking to involve myself in the legal process or even alter that (much), just change the way these guys do business, treat their customers and operate the front end of the shop.
What I don’t know is the easiest route to enter the business. Is it through acquisition, or perhaps starting from scratch with a newly qualified legal head or two who are not yet tainted by the industry and would be keen as mustard or perhaps an old hand who sees there is a better way and has the energy for it?
Any input would be gratefully accepted.
I want to acquire/setup/form a legal practice. Initially with a heavy focus on conveyancing, but also with potential to widen the focus in the future.
I don’t have any experience of running or operating an operation like this, but I have founded several successful businesses in unrelated industries.
Why you might ask? Well having spent several years buying and selling land and property after selling my business, I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
I’m not looking to involve myself in the legal process or even alter that (much), just change the way these guys do business, treat their customers and operate the front end of the shop.
What I don’t know is the easiest route to enter the business. Is it through acquisition, or perhaps starting from scratch with a newly qualified legal head or two who are not yet tainted by the industry and would be keen as mustard or perhaps an old hand who sees there is a better way and has the energy for it?
Any input would be gratefully accepted.
cashmax said:
Just after some advice really from folks that are from or familiar with this industry.
I want to acquire/setup/form a legal practice. Initially with a heavy focus on conveyancing, but also with potential to widen the focus in the future.
I don’t have any experience of running or operating an operation like this, but I have founded several successful businesses in unrelated industries.
Why you might ask? Well having spent several years buying and selling land and property after selling my business, I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
I’m not looking to involve myself in the legal process or even alter that (much), just change the way these guys do business, treat their customers and operate the front end of the shop.
What I don’t know is the easiest route to enter the business. Is it through acquisition, or perhaps starting from scratch with a newly qualified legal head or two who are not yet tainted by the industry and would be keen as mustard or perhaps an old hand who sees there is a better way and has the energy for it?
Any input would be gratefully accepted.
Do you want to set up a local show - or build something that will go national?I want to acquire/setup/form a legal practice. Initially with a heavy focus on conveyancing, but also with potential to widen the focus in the future.
I don’t have any experience of running or operating an operation like this, but I have founded several successful businesses in unrelated industries.
Why you might ask? Well having spent several years buying and selling land and property after selling my business, I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
I’m not looking to involve myself in the legal process or even alter that (much), just change the way these guys do business, treat their customers and operate the front end of the shop.
What I don’t know is the easiest route to enter the business. Is it through acquisition, or perhaps starting from scratch with a newly qualified legal head or two who are not yet tainted by the industry and would be keen as mustard or perhaps an old hand who sees there is a better way and has the energy for it?
Any input would be gratefully accepted.
What kind of investment can you put into it? - level / type, so money or time / and how much of each / either?
Do you know anyone in the sector, or do you know of a local firm you might buy?
Ask yourself, why does the current business run on the current model - by changing factors in how it is run, what else do you change in the model - esp. do you alter price points?
akirk said:
cashmax said:
Just after some advice really from folks that are from or familiar with this industry.
I want to acquire/setup/form a legal practice. Initially with a heavy focus on conveyancing, but also with potential to widen the focus in the future.
I don’t have any experience of running or operating an operation like this, but I have founded several successful businesses in unrelated industries.
Why you might ask? Well having spent several years buying and selling land and property after selling my business, I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
I’m not looking to involve myself in the legal process or even alter that (much), just change the way these guys do business, treat their customers and operate the front end of the shop.
What I don’t know is the easiest route to enter the business. Is it through acquisition, or perhaps starting from scratch with a newly qualified legal head or two who are not yet tainted by the industry and would be keen as mustard or perhaps an old hand who sees there is a better way and has the energy for it?
Any input would be gratefully accepted.
Do you want to set up a local show - or build something that will go national?I want to acquire/setup/form a legal practice. Initially with a heavy focus on conveyancing, but also with potential to widen the focus in the future.
I don’t have any experience of running or operating an operation like this, but I have founded several successful businesses in unrelated industries.
Why you might ask? Well having spent several years buying and selling land and property after selling my business, I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
I’m not looking to involve myself in the legal process or even alter that (much), just change the way these guys do business, treat their customers and operate the front end of the shop.
What I don’t know is the easiest route to enter the business. Is it through acquisition, or perhaps starting from scratch with a newly qualified legal head or two who are not yet tainted by the industry and would be keen as mustard or perhaps an old hand who sees there is a better way and has the energy for it?
Any input would be gratefully accepted.
What kind of investment can you put into it? - level / type, so money or time / and how much of each / either?
Do you know anyone in the sector, or do you know of a local firm you might buy?
Ask yourself, why does the current business run on the current model - by changing factors in how it is run, what else do you change in the model - esp. do you alter price points?
Investment wise, I can put whatever is required, money and time. I would need to run the show, so it would a full time endeavor at least until it was operating to the standard I wanted.
Don't know anyone in the sector.
As for the current model, it runs like that because folks have little or no choice but to use a specialist and the majority of those don't understand the importance of customer service (no different from any other business in the UK) they offer a lack luster, mediocre service, that at best gets the job done in the end with delays, at worse is pure incompetence.
In terms of what changes, the answer to that is everything, the industry gets shaken up, the old school ones die and the rest of the profession need to offer a decent service to compete.
The funny thing about this is, the model of providing good customer service is simplicity in itself, yet most businesses just don't understand how to do it and never will. I only choose legal because the fruit hangs so low and it's so easy to fix.
I’m not a solicitor but have audited solicitors firms in the distant past.
I’d suggest the reason for your perception is down to cost.
Having seen the profits that smallish high street firms of solicitors make was eye-opening.
Fees for conveyancing are low, staff costs and office costs are high. Staff need to cram as much chargeable work into the day therefore responding/making calls and being ‘proactive’ costs time as the work becomes very iterative and the time needs to be subsequently recorded on timesheets.
This adds up and tends to blow trhr fixed budget with, in most cases, no chance of recovery from the client.
Hence, they will tend to pick up a case on a periodic basis to allow enough time for several pieces of information to come through before acting on it in one go.
This is more efficient from a time perspective.
At least this is what I noted at firms whilst I was sat there doing the audit, and also from doing 4 property transactions a few years ago.
Oh, And I remember one of the partners in a 3 partner firm telling me that his indemnity insurance was 1/3 of the practice fee income.
That was 20 years ago bit can’t believe the legal profession has become less litigious.
I’m not saying don’t do it. Just do your research
I’d suggest the reason for your perception is down to cost.
Having seen the profits that smallish high street firms of solicitors make was eye-opening.
Fees for conveyancing are low, staff costs and office costs are high. Staff need to cram as much chargeable work into the day therefore responding/making calls and being ‘proactive’ costs time as the work becomes very iterative and the time needs to be subsequently recorded on timesheets.
This adds up and tends to blow trhr fixed budget with, in most cases, no chance of recovery from the client.
Hence, they will tend to pick up a case on a periodic basis to allow enough time for several pieces of information to come through before acting on it in one go.
This is more efficient from a time perspective.
At least this is what I noted at firms whilst I was sat there doing the audit, and also from doing 4 property transactions a few years ago.
Oh, And I remember one of the partners in a 3 partner firm telling me that his indemnity insurance was 1/3 of the practice fee income.
That was 20 years ago bit can’t believe the legal profession has become less litigious.
I’m not saying don’t do it. Just do your research
cashmax said:
I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
cashmax said:
As for the current model, it runs like that because folks have little or no choice but to use a specialist and the majority of those don't understand the importance of customer service (no different from any other business in the UK) they offer a lack luster, mediocre service, that at best gets the job done in the end with delays, at worse is pure incompetence.
In the past few years, I’ve spent quite a lot of time/money with property lawyers (mostly as a buyer) on transactions where the legal fees ranged from <£1k to north of £25k. At the top end you have partner/head of department level staff working with their peers in the firms engaged by the counterparts. Generally client responsive and really know their onions. I’d go as far as to say that I enjoy working with such people. When necessary, the guy I use has been available evenings/weekends and have been pragmatic, commercial, and a truly useful advisor. In spite of the chunky fees, he also received a couple of very nice bottles after the last one. When you’re used to dealing with that sort of service I doubt many would go anywhere other than a well established firm for these sorts of transactions.
At the lower end, I agree there is a much lower level of service (even if you engage the same sorts of firms as for the larger transactions). It’s a much lower cost operating environment where the economics just don’t allow the same level of staffing or the level of time to be spent on the transaction.
Here’s the problem:
Most people buy or sell a property what, every 5+ years? Maybe 3-4 transactions in a lifetime? Makes it quite hard to make a well informed decision about who to use or why it’s worth paying more. The reality is that quality always costs and you don’t want to be perceived as simply being more expensive without offering anything in return.
Buyer/seller experience from their last transaction probably doesn’t impact their decision making much (unless it was awful) as most won’t even remember which firm/staff they dealt with (if indeed they’re still there)
Proving, and credibly communicating, that you offer a better service is therefore key.
The transactional costs are something buyers/sellers see as an inconvenience, either increasing their costs when they’re already stretching to buy or diminishing their proceeds when they come to sell.
Proving that the extra cost in your model (which will be significant in percentage terms) is worth paying is therefore also critical.
Many will take advice on who to use from the local agent. Good agents, the ones who bother to keep on top of progression, generally seem to prefer dealing with law firms they know and can easily contact.
Getting agents on board is clearly important, but there’s lots of inertia to overcome.
Don’t forget, no matter how professional and responsive your operation becomes, the counterparty still likely bought their legal service on price… from the people you don’t rate. You need to figure out how to make sure that their crappy service doesn’t adversely impact your perceived performance.
As for your proposed model of using newbies. Hard to say whether that’s feasible without knowing what exactly is needed for firm registration/compliance but that’d be something (along with, as someone else has mentioned, insurance) at an early stage.
If you can pull it off, and deliver a high quality service at minimal increased cost, then I think there’s demand out there. I’d certainly pay a bit extra on lower end transactions to have a better level of responsiveness.
Fat hippo said:
I’m not a solicitor but have audited solicitors firms in the distant past.
I’d suggest the reason for your perception is down to cost.
Having seen the profits that smallish high street firms of solicitors make was eye-opening.
Fees for conveyancing are low, staff costs and office costs are high. Staff need to cram as much chargeable work into the day therefore responding/making calls and being ‘proactive’ costs time as the work becomes very iterative and the time needs to be subsequently recorded on timesheets.
This adds up and tends to blow trhr fixed budget with, in most cases, no chance of recovery from the client.
Hence, they will tend to pick up a case on a periodic basis to allow enough time for several pieces of information to come through before acting on it in one go.
This is more efficient from a time perspective.
At least this is what I noted at firms whilst I was sat there doing the audit, and also from doing 4 property transactions a few years ago.
Oh, And I remember one of the partners in a 3 partner firm telling me that his indemnity insurance was 1/3 of the practice fee income.
That was 20 years ago bit can’t believe the legal profession has become less litigious.
I’m not saying don’t do it. Just do your research
Go info re the insurance, thanks.I’d suggest the reason for your perception is down to cost.
Having seen the profits that smallish high street firms of solicitors make was eye-opening.
Fees for conveyancing are low, staff costs and office costs are high. Staff need to cram as much chargeable work into the day therefore responding/making calls and being ‘proactive’ costs time as the work becomes very iterative and the time needs to be subsequently recorded on timesheets.
This adds up and tends to blow trhr fixed budget with, in most cases, no chance of recovery from the client.
Hence, they will tend to pick up a case on a periodic basis to allow enough time for several pieces of information to come through before acting on it in one go.
This is more efficient from a time perspective.
At least this is what I noted at firms whilst I was sat there doing the audit, and also from doing 4 property transactions a few years ago.
Oh, And I remember one of the partners in a 3 partner firm telling me that his indemnity insurance was 1/3 of the practice fee income.
That was 20 years ago bit can’t believe the legal profession has become less litigious.
I’m not saying don’t do it. Just do your research
LooneyTunes said:
cashmax said:
I’m shocked at just how low the bar is set in this industry and see a huge opportunity to improve on things. For example, if I was just to answer the phone and proactively respond in a timely fashion to my customers, that alone would create the best practice in the business.
cashmax said:
As for the current model, it runs like that because folks have little or no choice but to use a specialist and the majority of those don't understand the importance of customer service (no different from any other business in the UK) they offer a lack luster, mediocre service, that at best gets the job done in the end with delays, at worse is pure incompetence.
In the past few years, I’ve spent quite a lot of time/money with property lawyers (mostly as a buyer) on transactions where the legal fees ranged from <£1k to north of £25k. At the top end you have partner/head of department level staff working with their peers in the firms engaged by the counterparts. Generally client responsive and really know their onions. I’d go as far as to say that I enjoy working with such people. When necessary, the guy I use has been available evenings/weekends and have been pragmatic, commercial, and a truly useful advisor. In spite of the chunky fees, he also received a couple of very nice bottles after the last one. When you’re used to dealing with that sort of service I doubt many would go anywhere other than a well established firm for these sorts of transactions.
At the lower end, I agree there is a much lower level of service (even if you engage the same sorts of firms as for the larger transactions). It’s a much lower cost operating environment where the economics just don’t allow the same level of staffing or the level of time to be spent on the transaction.
Here’s the problem:
Most people buy or sell a property what, every 5+ years? Maybe 3-4 transactions in a lifetime? Makes it quite hard to make a well informed decision about who to use or why it’s worth paying more. The reality is that quality always costs and you don’t want to be perceived as simply being more expensive without offering anything in return.
Buyer/seller experience from their last transaction probably doesn’t impact their decision making much (unless it was awful) as most won’t even remember which firm/staff they dealt with (if indeed they’re still there)
Proving, and credibly communicating, that you offer a better service is therefore key.
The transactional costs are something buyers/sellers see as an inconvenience, either increasing their costs when they’re already stretching to buy or diminishing their proceeds when they come to sell.
Proving that the extra cost in your model (which will be significant in percentage terms) is worth paying is therefore also critical.
Many will take advice on who to use from the local agent. Good agents, the ones who bother to keep on top of progression, generally seem to prefer dealing with law firms they know and can easily contact.
Getting agents on board is clearly important, but there’s lots of inertia to overcome.
Don’t forget, no matter how professional and responsive your operation becomes, the counterparty still likely bought their legal service on price… from the people you don’t rate. You need to figure out how to make sure that their crappy service doesn’t adversely impact your perceived performance.
As for your proposed model of using newbies. Hard to say whether that’s feasible without knowing what exactly is needed for firm registration/compliance but that’d be something (along with, as someone else has mentioned, insurance) at an early stage.
If you can pull it off, and deliver a high quality service at minimal increased cost, then I think there’s demand out there. I’d certainly pay a bit extra on lower end transactions to have a better level of responsiveness.
I accept that many folks don't use a service like this very often, but as you get older things like wills, leases, charges etc are likely reasons why you would want an efficient, trustworthy solicitor on hand. Part of the idea is to leverage the goodwill from the first dealings to bag a strong customer list for life.
On top of that there are many people such as you and I who require these services on a much more regular basis, property developers, investors, BTL folks, in fact anyone who needs to buy/sell/lease property or land but doesn't have a corporate relationship. These are the true target of this service.
Re the counterpart argument - Completely get this. I would expect to create solicitor A first of all. I have spoken to a dozen agents that I have a good relationship with and have unanimous buy in for a decent Conveyancing service from all of them. (thats 12 separate agents, of which none of them rate the legal solution they currently have, surely that tells you something?) Once up to speed, the idea would be to create an unattached solicitor B to deal on the other end. That way you can really streamline a service and deliver real value.
Re the costs to provide a decent level of service - I don't think this has to cost the earth, it's a case of having someone decent sitting between the legals and the customer, just to improve comms. Once example I can sight is that on a new instruction, each end will wait to be asked for the information they both know they are going to have to provide, because they provide it for every single transaction, if they don't receive a request for it it, it doesn't get provided. That alone accounts for the vast majority of the time each transaction takes. By proactively providing this info at inception, you are already ahead of the game. I do appreciate that this process has been run like this since the beginning of time and a new approach is going to be hard to grasp for many, but if someone doesn't reform it, they will continue to provide a s
te service to all and this is where I see the opportunity to change something for the better.I have spent a lot of time looking at the issues within conveyancing and how to solve them - in short, I think you will struggle:
- To make it work financially so it's actually worth doing (especially if you are not practicing yourself), you need volume. Volume = worse service.
- As someone else mentioned, a property purchase is so infrequent that most people (a) forget how painful the first experience was, (b) don't care because it will be over in a few months
- You are beholden to a counterparty being of any decent quality. In a chain of 8 solicitors, if 7 are world class and 1 is complete garbage, your customer is still going to have a poor experience (even if it's not your fault).
I was coming at it from a slightly different angle to you, but feel free to drop me a PM if you'd like to discuss more. It's an interesting space.
- To make it work financially so it's actually worth doing (especially if you are not practicing yourself), you need volume. Volume = worse service.
- As someone else mentioned, a property purchase is so infrequent that most people (a) forget how painful the first experience was, (b) don't care because it will be over in a few months
- You are beholden to a counterparty being of any decent quality. In a chain of 8 solicitors, if 7 are world class and 1 is complete garbage, your customer is still going to have a poor experience (even if it's not your fault).
I was coming at it from a slightly different angle to you, but feel free to drop me a PM if you'd like to discuss more. It's an interesting space.
22s said:
You are beholden to a counterparty being of any decent quality. In a chain of 8 solicitors, if 7 are world class and 1 is complete garbage, your customer is still going to have a poor experience (even if it's not your fault).
Precisely this.Unless your USP will be a daily email / call to all your customers explaining that it's not your service that's causing delays in the conveyancing process.
Ahhhhhhhhm ooooot.
I've had the same thoughts, but I think if it was going to work, someone would already of done it.
My first thought was that there was scope to streamline efficiency with technology - you say communication is bad and you'll improve it by answering the phone - but what if clients didn't need to call, what if they could see all the information you had for themselves?
What if something could keep track of "document X is outstanding and needs chasing" without you having to call them to ask what's going on and they "remember" they haven't heard back about X yet and "it's been a while"?
Well it turns out there are plenty of software solutions that offer this - they aren't cheap but they aren't that expensive - and they are really generic software for process driven workflows, customised for UK conveyancing.
But I never seen one actually using such a system, except...
The "conveyancing shops" have pushed the model quite far in terms of technology and de-skilling (i.e. it's more of a call centre than a para-legal / conveyancer) but yet all the talk about conveyancers says to ignore them, terrible experiences etc.
They make money, yes, but I don't think they've captured the whole market.
And I'm not sure how the fallout of the recent ransomware attack on the biggest one will affect things in future.
My first thought was that there was scope to streamline efficiency with technology - you say communication is bad and you'll improve it by answering the phone - but what if clients didn't need to call, what if they could see all the information you had for themselves?
What if something could keep track of "document X is outstanding and needs chasing" without you having to call them to ask what's going on and they "remember" they haven't heard back about X yet and "it's been a while"?
Well it turns out there are plenty of software solutions that offer this - they aren't cheap but they aren't that expensive - and they are really generic software for process driven workflows, customised for UK conveyancing.
But I never seen one actually using such a system, except...
The "conveyancing shops" have pushed the model quite far in terms of technology and de-skilling (i.e. it's more of a call centre than a para-legal / conveyancer) but yet all the talk about conveyancers says to ignore them, terrible experiences etc.
They make money, yes, but I don't think they've captured the whole market.
And I'm not sure how the fallout of the recent ransomware attack on the biggest one will affect things in future.
Jakg said:
I've had the same thoughts, but I think if it was going to work, someone would already of done it.
My first thought was that there was scope to streamline efficiency with technology - you say communication is bad and you'll improve it by answering the phone - but what if clients didn't need to call, what if they could see all the information you had for themselves?
What if something could keep track of "document X is outstanding and needs chasing" without you having to call them to ask what's going on and they "remember" they haven't heard back about X yet and "it's been a while"?
Well it turns out there are plenty of software solutions that offer this - they aren't cheap but they aren't that expensive - and they are really generic software for process driven workflows, customised for UK conveyancing.
But I never seen one actually using such a system, except...
The "conveyancing shops" have pushed the model quite far in terms of technology and de-skilling (i.e. it's more of a call centre than a para-legal / conveyancer) but yet all the talk about conveyancers says to ignore them, terrible experiences etc.
They make money, yes, but I don't think they've captured the whole market.
And I'm not sure how the fallout of the recent ransomware attack on the biggest one will affect things in future.
I'm sure if this is easy it would have been done.My first thought was that there was scope to streamline efficiency with technology - you say communication is bad and you'll improve it by answering the phone - but what if clients didn't need to call, what if they could see all the information you had for themselves?
What if something could keep track of "document X is outstanding and needs chasing" without you having to call them to ask what's going on and they "remember" they haven't heard back about X yet and "it's been a while"?
Well it turns out there are plenty of software solutions that offer this - they aren't cheap but they aren't that expensive - and they are really generic software for process driven workflows, customised for UK conveyancing.
But I never seen one actually using such a system, except...
The "conveyancing shops" have pushed the model quite far in terms of technology and de-skilling (i.e. it's more of a call centre than a para-legal / conveyancer) but yet all the talk about conveyancers says to ignore them, terrible experiences etc.
They make money, yes, but I don't think they've captured the whole market.
And I'm not sure how the fallout of the recent ransomware attack on the biggest one will affect things in future.
I've also come across one of the conveyancing houses that were querying my plan. In short, as I can't be bothered to tell the whole story I was right and what they wanted me to do would have put their purchaser client at risk. The worker bee had clearly been told to order me to change the plan, and not listen to my response. It was not until I was bluntly clear that what they were proposing was wrong and putting their client at risk, and that I was not going to do it, that she decided to go back to the supervising solicitor. Never heard anything more which is a shame - I would have liked to know the outcome!
rfisher said:
22s said:
You are beholden to a counterparty being of any decent quality. In a chain of 8 solicitors, if 7 are world class and 1 is complete garbage, your customer is still going to have a poor experience (even if it's not your fault).
Precisely this.Unless your USP will be a daily email / call to all your customers explaining that it's not your service that's causing delays in the conveyancing process.
Ahhhhhhhhm ooooot.
Estate agents usually earn a multiple of what the conveyancer charges for the average resi transaction but have pretty much zero responsibility and liability insurance costs, no regulatory bodies oversight or membership, no training requirements etc etc so as a pure property transaction investment choice I'd be aiming at them.
Any chain, no matter how good one parties conveyancer is, is only as good as the worst conveyancer/agent/seller.
My experience have transacted over 100 individual houses on behalf of a client in last 24 months as a acquisition surveyor.
Also, was under the impression the profits are low and small local firms are quickly being swallowed up by larger firms. Prop tech could be the game changer needed in the conveyancing industry, perhaps look for a horse to back that area.
My experience have transacted over 100 individual houses on behalf of a client in last 24 months as a acquisition surveyor.
Also, was under the impression the profits are low and small local firms are quickly being swallowed up by larger firms. Prop tech could be the game changer needed in the conveyancing industry, perhaps look for a horse to back that area.
Edited by Freshprince on Tuesday 8th February 15:56
rfisher said:
22s said:
You are beholden to a counterparty being of any decent quality. In a chain of 8 solicitors, if 7 are world class and 1 is complete garbage, your customer is still going to have a poor experience (even if it's not your fault).
Precisely this.Unless your USP will be a daily email / call to all your customers explaining that it's not your service that's causing delays in the conveyancing process.
Ahhhhhhhhm ooooot.
surveyor said:
I'm sure if this is easy it would have been done.
That's the beauty of stuff like this, it REALLY IS that simple, but it's just too simple for most people to get their head around. Company offers good product with amazing customer service.
Consumers have an amazing experience and do your marketing for you.
I know for a fact and through experience that almost no one really understands the power of that.
With many professions a kind of hierarchy is evident. The best medical students become brain surgeons whilst the ones that struggled remove ingrowing toenails, the best engineers design the international space station whilst the back of the class end up in quality assurance for a company that makes manhole covers.
I’m being facetious but if you’re on top of your game as a lawyer, do you want to be prosecuting high profile cases at the old Bailey of being moaned at by Mr Joseph Public about party wall agreements…
I’m being facetious but if you’re on top of your game as a lawyer, do you want to be prosecuting high profile cases at the old Bailey of being moaned at by Mr Joseph Public about party wall agreements…
rfisher said:
Precisely this.
Unless your USP will be a daily email / call to all your customers explaining that it's not your service that's causing delays in the conveyancing process.
Ahhhhhhhhm ooooot.
Unless your USP will be a daily email / call to all your customers explaining that it's not your service that's causing delays in the conveyancing process.
Ahhhhhhhhm ooooot.
Freshprince said:
Any chain, no matter how good one parties conveyancer is, is only as good as the worst conveyancer/agent/seller.
My experience have transacted over 100 individual houses on behalf of a client in last 24 months as a acquisition surveyor.
Also, was under the impression the profits are low and small local firms are quickly being swallowed up by larger firms. Prop tech could be the game changer needed in the conveyancing industry, perhaps look for a horse to back that area.
I don't think this is hard to solve at all with reference to my self-help portal earlier.My experience have transacted over 100 individual houses on behalf of a client in last 24 months as a acquisition surveyor.
Also, was under the impression the profits are low and small local firms are quickly being swallowed up by larger firms. Prop tech could be the game changer needed in the conveyancing industry, perhaps look for a horse to back that area.
Edited by Freshprince on Tuesday 8th February 15:56
When you buy something online and you get sent the tracking link and it shows its been held up, most people will go online and complain about Hermes (or whoever). Not the retailer.
If you can show whats outstanding, and who's that with, and estimated timescales - information presumably you need anyway - I think most people would probably sympathise.
cashmax said:
One of the first things I would do it exactly that, ask them how they want to be contacted and what frequency of updates they want, daily, weekly, only when something significant happens - if the daily update is only to say that no progress has been made and to explain what's holding things up, it doesn't matter, lots of people appreciate that you are keeping in touch and they simply haven't been forgotten or ignored.
I don't think realistically that's going to work.Google says the average conveyancer has 120 cases a year (that seems low to me) and an average sale is 8-16 weeks.
I make that roughly 30 cases open at once - by the time you've open the file, read the status, called the customer, spoken on the phone for a couple of minutes and then done the same in the afternoon for those who didn't answer the phone the first time, you've spend most of the day on the phone.
Obviously not every customer wants updates that frequently, but I just don't think that's scalable.
Edited by Jakg on Tuesday 8th February 20:22
Edited by Jakg on Tuesday 8th February 20:23
Jakg said:
I don't think realistically that's going to work.
Google says the average conveyancer has 120 cases a year (that seems low to me) and an average sale is 8-16 weeks.
I make that roughly 30 cases open at once - by the time you've open the file, read the status, called the customer, spoken on the phone for a couple of minutes and then done the same in the afternoon for those who didn't answer the phone the first time, you've spend most of the day on the phone.
Obviously not every customer wants updates that frequently, but I just don't think that's scalable.
I wasn't suggesting the lawyer did any of this. I don't expect them to ever provide customer service, I am talking about them being managed by someone with those skills and the paperwork moves online, pushing automated info as required, those customers who request updates by phone call will speak with someone who has communication skills. Google says the average conveyancer has 120 cases a year (that seems low to me) and an average sale is 8-16 weeks.
I make that roughly 30 cases open at once - by the time you've open the file, read the status, called the customer, spoken on the phone for a couple of minutes and then done the same in the afternoon for those who didn't answer the phone the first time, you've spend most of the day on the phone.
Obviously not every customer wants updates that frequently, but I just don't think that's scalable.
Edited by Jakg on Tuesday 8th February 20:22
Edited by Jakg on Tuesday 8th February 20:23
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff