Conveyancer or solicitor??

[ChrisA1]

I very well may cringe at asking this question but here goes.

Talking with a fellow investor recently, we were discussing the costs of legal services for purchases. I used a solicitor where he used a conveyancing firm. While I am not so concerned about the costs, knowing that he uses the conveyancing firm for purchasing development sites, it made me wonder what are the pros and cons of using a solicitor over a conveyancer or vice versa??

Talking with him, he was able to negotiate longer settlement dates, access prior to settlement and other various contract variations. All I have tried to negotiate is access prior to settlement (twice unsuccessfully), which made me think am I and/or the solicitor going about it the wrong way (possibly too softly ), am I not asking the solicitor the correct questions to get everything I could through the process, or is it worthwhile to just use a conveyancer?

(and yes, I realise that 99% of purchases roll along nicely, just for that last one to be a nightmare...)

 

[nhg]

I use a solicitor, purely because he himself is a developer/investor and gives me great advice.

He also doesn't charge me exhuberant amounts more than a conveyancer.

I suppose a conveyancer deals purely with property transactions so would be better.

FYI I too have tried for early access twice and being denied. Insurance reasons on part of the vendor. I dunno how everyone else seems to get away with it.

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

I've generally found that conveyancers handle property transfers all day every day and are thus much better and more experienced than solicitors.

You do want a conveyancer who has a close affiliation with a solicitor, often we work with conveyancers who work in a solicitors office. Gives us the best of both worlds.

 

[ChrisA1]

Many thanks nhg and PT

PT raises a good point. I am pretty sure my work is handled by a conveyancing clerk in the solicitor's office, which is then checked by the solicitor, so I don't think I am paying 100% solicitor rates.

Looking at the company's website my colleague uses, it looks as though this is a purely conveyancing company so I'm not sure what happens if things become sticky.... (and I suppose that's a question I'm posing here - what happens if the conveyancers suddenly say 'I don't have the expertise/qualifications to handle x/y/z'?? Would/could this happen?).

It interested me that he is comfortable enough using a conyancing company for a development project (not to say that's any harder/easier than a residential IP purchase).

 

[Terry_w]

Conveyancers transfer title and provide limited legal advice relating to this. They are not as fully trained in the law like solicitors and wouldn't understand other issues that a solicitor may. These may be side issues which pop up such as structure, bankruptcy issues, estate planning - tenants in common v joint tenancy, asset protection, contract disputes, drafting special conditions, GST, corporations act etc etc.

 

[n17]

Solicitor

Solicitor every time for me, when it goes wrong you need someone with a good knowledge of the law rather than someone who's licenced to fill in forms