Santander denies postponing conveyancing panel review

Santander has rejected a claim by Law Society chief executive Des Hudson that it agreed to pause or postpone its conveyancing panel review.

In a letter to solicitors this week, Hudson said the bank was using an “ongoing, probably quarterly review” to remove firms from the panel based on low activity levels.

“The Law Society views volume of activity as a criterion for panel management as a blunt instrument, particularly when a lender only looks at their own transactions rather than all the conveyancing work done by the firm,” he said.

Hudson described as “ill-informed and unacceptable” decisions to remove firms from panels based on incomplete activity information.

“This particular review was further worsened by the fact that the firms facing removal from Santander’s panel had paid the annual compliance fee of £99, (and in some cases an initial £199 application processing fee) only to be removed soon after.”

Hudson went on: “The Law Society was not consulted or informed in advance of this exercise, but in an effort to bring it to a halt, I contacted Santander’s CEO calling for an urgent meeting. The bank agreed and we have recently commenced discussions.

“Whilst that dialogue continues, the bank has agreed an immediate pause in this review process and the next quarterly review has been postponed.”

Hudson said that Santander had already “to a degree, recognised the limitations of its review methodology” and in its appeal process had sought out information about firms’ other activity.

He added: “If Santander recommence their review, firms appearing to be inactive or dormant will not be removed suddenly. Instead, Santander will take a more collaborative approach with firms in identifying their wider conveyancing activity beyond only Santander.”

However a spokesman for Santander said this morning that it had not, in its conversations with Hudson, “said anything about pausing or postponing the panel review”.

The spokesman added: “The conversations taking place between the Law Society and Santander are behind closed doors and we will not be commenting further on the nature of those conversations.”