Being at the helm of a business that has quickly found itself as a leader in its sector, I am often forced to reflect on what got us to where we are and more importantly, what do we have to do to improve our position in the years ahead.
The Capital Bridging model has at the core of its model - partnerships. As a small business we have to remember that despite the attractiveness of our proposition our success hinges on the strength of our relationship with our distributors, our brokers, our valuers and very much our lawyers.
The results of our second annual broker survey indicated that for the second time it was the slow service delivery from the lawyers that was the number one area of concern. 73% of respondents were dissatisfied with the service.
With the urgency factor that is inherent in the bridging process it is very disconcerting that any improvement in this vital part of the process seems slow in coming. Historically conveyancing has been the slowest and least efficient link in the process but if the sector is to grow and volumes are to be consistently increased over the £2bn plus forecast for 2014 then improvements have to be seen in the relationships between lawyers and all the other stakeholders in the process.
Several initiatives have been undertaken by lenders to improve the situation. Some are comfortable with the idea of joint representation where the lawyer represents both parties. It should certainly speed up the process but there are issues of transparency and conflicts of interest that may not be so important in the traditional home buyer sector but in the short term market these are serious matters to consider when appointing a lawyer to act for both parties.
At Capital Bridging we have made considerable progress with our legal panel. We formed a small number of liked minded firms who are specialists in the sector and who know each other. They are encouraged, through our strong relationships with our distributors and brokers, to talk rather than email, when that is the more appropriate method of decreasing the time it takes to get the case to completion. It is not a case of taking short cuts. It is just a common sense approach. It is good to TALK
Too many lawyers choose not to communicate in this easiest of ways. Is it that they are too precious and believe that all the other stakeholders have to wait on them as the intricacies of the legal process cannot be rushed? I do not think that is the case but it has to be admitted that more has to be done by both lenders and brokers to improve the performance of our legal partners.
Jonathan Newman senior partner at bridging specialist firm Brightstone Law and partners of Capital Bridging has this to say:
“Speed of service is what the bridging lender, the bridging introducer and the bridging solicitor aim to deliver, it is what the customer is buying into. All know and understand that bridging comes at a price, which puts an even greater burden on the players to deliver value. The specialist understands that and offers a service which is expert, practical and responsive.
"Sadly, many borrowers’ solicitors often fail to identify and prioritise. Bridging is not their bread and butter. They might not be familiar with the nuances; they may not even be totally in tune with their own clients’ expectations. It is a sad indictment on some of my fellow professionals, but nevertheless true from time to time, that when faced with non run of-the-mill matters, bridging files and their sometimes unusual requirements and requisitions get pushed to that part of the desk where “I will deal with it at later date when I’ve got more time to think”.
"Part of our retainer which we take very seriously is managing the process including the borrowers’ solicitors. We create solutions not obstacles.”
As Jonathan infers, how we and our broker partners select our legal representatives has to be the start of the process. It should go without saying that choices should be influenced by the accreditations a firm has and the reputation it has as a specialist. They are the basics but I believe more importantly we need to be confident that our chosen firms can quickly become established partners in the true sense of the word (working together for mutual benefit) and have an appetite to learn quickly about what the lender/broker wants.
It is at this point that the lawyers can show they are not precious and are flexible enough to work with a variety of partners all of whom will have a different approach, a different culture and a different set of priority demands.
If the client experience is to improve and all the stakeholders in the short term market are to be the beneficiaries of repeat and referral business then it is no good pointing the finger. We all have a responsibility to improve the performance of the overall process.
Partnerships benefit from talking; talking should be the preferred way of communicating. If we all get better at communicating and develop relationships that are proactive and two way then we will all get better at what we do and the reputation of our legal friends will improve.
Education remains a priority need in the sector and before lenders or anybody else can go out and make demands of the other stakeholders we have to get it right internally. Much still remains to be done to educate our own people of the demands our partners have of us. The lenders who will prosper will be those who work out from the inside and get the message across to all their stakeholder partners.
Easy but only if the lawyers, valuers, brokers, distributors, and lenders work closer together in understanding each other’s role.
