Do I need a solicitor?

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

i71jskz5xu42pb

Baby4 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I'm pretty sure you can. IANAL but if you're selling a house the number of things that can go wrong a significantly less than if you are buying. Still given the amount of money involved you'd want to know what you are doing. For a UK reference see here for more details.

You can even do without the services of an estate agent e.g. something like http://www.privateseller.ie/ or http://www.usellit.ie/

antoinolachtnai

5 percent sounds like an awful lot for the combined fees for a sale.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

antoinolachtnai

3.5 percent (2.8 percent ex vat i assume) is too much for the solicitor unless there is something very complex.

I would get them to quote again or ask someone else.

Are you buying a house as well?

pajos55

Solicitors fees on a sale should not be any more than 1% (and even that would be high, 0.5% woudl be more the norm). Change solicitor.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

D'Peoples Voice

Baby4 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

check out this page

A person selling a property can draft his or her own deed but for insurance reasons, a person buying a property cannot.

http://www.oasis.gov.ie/housing/buying_a_house_or_flat/property_deeds.html
However I'm told a buyer's solicitor will not deal with a seller who does not have a solicitor, because it means they have to actually do work for their measily 1%. When both parties have a solictor, they minimise the work on both sides and both screw their respective clients. however that may just be hearsay, and solicitors may be lovely people who break their backs trying to get all the paperwork done for a sale to go through!
I personally believe that they are no more honest in charging for their time than second hand card salesmen! Although for those who charge a flat fee I've a lot of respect for.

mikemac

Can a solicitor represent the buyer and the seller?
This may be a stupid question but surely it has arisen where the buyer and seller both used the same solicitor in the past and wanted to use the same solicitor.

Does one of them have to use the services of a different solicitor?

antoinolachtnai

No, this is just not a flier. You cannot do this, the conflict of interest is too great. In fact, it used to be that you used to need three solicitors, one for buyer, one for seller, and one for the bank. Now the buyer's solicitor acts for the bank as well.

A lot depends on what you are selling too. If it is registered land, it is probably a lot easier for you to conveyance yourself than if it is unregistered land (although I have no experience of this myself).

i71jskz5xu42pb

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

However I'm told a buyer's solicitor will not deal with a seller who does not have a solicitor, because it means they have to actually do work for their measily 1%.

Maybe so, would not surprise me. However, assuming the flat is not a complete dive it's really a seller's market. If the buyer's solicitor is not going to play ball then there's little to stop the seller from moving on to the next willing buyer. At some stage something will give.

kmick

Depending on the value of your house but assuming its worth the average of around 400k you should be paying in the region of 1-2% to an estate agent. I would advise 1.5% but I have seen estate agents go as low as 0.75% when the houses are worth 1m+. Solicitors should be very bargainable. Dont give them a %age. Ask them to quote you a total package. Again on an average house this should be around EURO 3500-4000. Its all down to your skills at beating down these professionals. Dont be afraid its your Money.

ifah

or you could go to someone like Dermot Deane who works on a fixed price basis - i used him 2 years ago to buy a house and it cost 995 + vat + outlays.

pajos55

You will find it extremely hard to find a solicitor who will deal with you as opposed to a solicitor acting on your behalf. this is because from their point of view, dealing with a member of the public who has no experience and no knowledge of the terminology or procedures involved in this kind of transaction will almost certainly create a LOT of extra work (and not just make them to what they "should" be doing as has been suggested). in effect they will be doing both sides work as the lay person will simply not have the knowledge to complete certain aspects of the procedure (replying to enquiries and requisitions on title, approving deed of transfer, drawing up closing documentation etc).

I am not a solicitor but i am familiar with the procedures used in conveyancing and it is not always as straighforward as people make out. you could be asking for a lot more hassle than you had anticipated especially if you have no legal experience.

i agree that you are being quoted way too high but i would not advise trying to do this on your own, for your own sake if nothing else. you should be able to get a reasonable quote if you ring around a few places.

i know there is a huge amount of antipathy towards solicitors (which is not helped by the fact that there is overcharging going on in some quarters) however it would be unusual to find any profession where a lay person can just jump in and do the work - there is a reason why people employ a professional and a reason why the solicitor has studied this stuff!

grumpytrousers

micmclo wrote:

Can a solicitor represent the buyer and the seller?
This may be a stupid question but surely it has arisen where the buyer and seller both used the same solicitor in the past and wanted to use the same solicitor.

Does one of them have to use the services of a different solicitor?

No - they can use the same Solicitor; if Tom wants to sell a house to Dick, they can both have Harry as their solicitor IF THEY

a) are informed that they might prefer to have separate solicitors but decide not to and
b) put this in writing.

If Tom is a builder and he's selling a house to Dick, then Harry cannot act as solicitor for both, 'cos there's not the same level of parity...

ircoha

pajos55 wrote:

i know there is a huge amount of antipathy towards solicitors (which is not helped by the fact that there is overcharging going on in some quarters) however it would be unusual to find any profession where a lay person can just jump in and do the work - there is a reason why people employ a professional and a reason why the solicitor has studied this stuff!

For a fix of legal antipthy see Prime Time
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0529/primetime.html

Maximilian

As a solicitor, it constantly annoys me when I read idiotic ill-informed opinions by people who assume we just do nothing for a living other than print money.

To the OP, yes, in theory you could do your own legal work if you knew what to do however, even that being the case, no Bank would give you a loan unless you had a solicitor I'm afraid.

i71jskz5xu42pb

Maximilian wrote:

As a solicitor, it constantly annoys me when I read idiotic ill-informed opinions by people who assume we just do nothing for a living other than print money.

To the OP, yes, in theory you could do your own legal work if you knew what to do however, even that being the case, no Bank would give you a loan unless you had a solicitor I'm afraid.

He's selling the apartment - why would he need a Bank loan (except maybe to cover his solicitor's fees). As you are solicitor that's a detail I would have expected you'd notice.

If you can explain to us here what a solicitor does on the seller's side of a apartment sale that justifies the 2.8 percent + vat quoted below then maybe we'd reconsider our oh so idiotic ill informed opinions. Otherwise I'll stick to the money printing theory.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

Maximilian

PaschalNee wrote:

He's selling the apartment - why would he need a Bank loan (except maybe to cover his solicitor's fees). As you are solicitor that's a detail I would have expected you'd notice.

If you can explain to us here what a solicitor does on the seller's side of a apartment sale that justifies the 2.8 percent + vat quoted below then maybe we'd reconsider our oh so idiotic ill informed opinions. Otherwise I'll stick to the money printing theory.

I assume she is also buying, as that's what most people do when they sell. As I pointed out, in case you missed that particular detail, if you knew what you were doing, you could of course do the legal work yourself. Just like you can represent yourself in Court if you want. Just like you can perform brain surgery on yourself should you feel like it. There's nothing to stop you but common sense.

As for the second part of your post, its clear you simply haven't a clue what's involved, so I'll simply & smugly leave it at that. Do you expect me to condense conveyancing practice & law down to a bullet pointed digestable paragraph to justify an entire profession to some belligerent twit with a chip on his shoulder? Go into a bookshop sometime, go to the law section and take a flick through a land law book. Then tell me its straightforward and simple. I recommend reading up the Rule against Perpetuities for some fun and frolics. I was at work until 9pm last night, not unusual, what about you?

I've never seen any solicitor charge 2.8%, unless the sale price was particularly low and they had a minimum fee. There's plenty of competition so shop around, is the best advice I could give.

How about you direct your ire constructively. What do Auctioneers do for their 1-2%. Put an ad in the paper and show people around the house?

People seem to think we, as a profession, earn ridiculous amounts of money. You really have no idea. Perhaps once that was the case and yes, there are those few barristers who creamed it in the Tribunals but anyone getting into the law for money these days is severely misguided.

I know of one person who bought a piece of property with a Bank's money for approx €20million and sold it 6 months later for €30m, having done nothing at all to it. The person didn't even pay interest on the loan. Just sat on it.

If its uber-wealth that offends you, then direct your anger at those who make money without really earning it, not at people who actually work very hard for a living.

i71jskz5xu42pb

Maximilian wrote:

I assume she is also buying....

Without going through this point by point: I have nothing against solicitors/barristers as such (have a friend doing his barrister's training). If you're smart, done a few years college (+devilling) and are providing a good service then you're entitle to charge for it. I think the sell side conveyancing in general is a rip off (as are estate agents in my opinion). Your "you wouldn’t understand/I can't be bothered explaining" line strengthens this conviction on this.

If I came across as belligerent I'm sorry. Not my intent. That said, I'm not the one throwing around words like idiotic, ill informed and twit though.

Just to show there are no hard feelings I'll leave you with a joke (the old ones really are the best):

Q: What's the difference between a hedgehog and two solicitors in a Porsche?
A: The hedgehog has the pricks on the outside.

Maximilian

Fine. Hatchet buried.

Having said that however, I'm sorry - you are just plain wrong & I can't let your comments stand unopposed. I know there is a lot of work it because I do it for a living. You saying there's nothing to it based on what? knowledge? Experience? It is quite glaringly obvious that your uninformed opinion, for thats what it is, is based on nothing at all. You have plucked it out of thin air. I know this to be the case because if you did actually know what you talking about, you would not hold this particular opinion and if you did, you would simply be a liar.

The last contract I drafted had 6 pages of Special Conditions which were drafted over the course of a week. That was just one single aspect of the transaction. Yes, that was a bigger deal than your average house but the very same law and principles apply to your one bed apartment. Even in the case of a very straigforward tranaction, you have no conception of the time it takes, start to finish.

The joke was good though I prefer this one:

How many lawyers does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Fifty four. Eight to argue the bulb needs changing, one to get an interlocutory mandatory injunction compelling removal of said lightbulb, one to object, one to demur, two to research precedents, one to dictate a letter directing removal and replacement forthwith of the offending bulb, one to stipulate conditions precedent to the removal, five to turn in their time cards, one to depose, one to write interrogatories, two to settle, one to order a secretary to change the bulb, and twenty-eight to bill for professional services.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

Maximilian

Best of luck with everything. Shop around on auctioneers while your at it. That's going to be your biggest expense.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.