Conveyancing Necessary? Recommendation?

Hi all, I'm new in property purchase.

Just wonder if you all would suggest me to seek help from conveyancer to interpret section 32, and the subsequent buying process? Any recommendation for me, staying in eastern surburb of Melbourne.

If I'm buying the property at auction, from legal view do I have to necessarily pay 10% deposit in cheque on the site in the same day? I'm thinking if it's possible to have it settled on another day or thru other means.

 

Of course. I am a lawyer yet don't do my own conveyancing.

Re the deposit that needs negotiating before the auction

 

If you haven't bought it before, you should probably have a conveyancer to guide you through the process. I have had a friend who bought a copy of "Conveyancing for Dummies" and DIYed himself, it seemed work as well, but that's not something I would do.
No you don't need to pay 10% deposit, this is just the norm. If you can managed to negotiate a 1,000 deposit with the vendor and the REA then good on you.

 

Seek legal advice well in advance of the auction date, your solicitor will guide you - give a call-out to @KateAshmor

 

Thanks all, appreciated the tips.

 

I personally would see a solicitor for conveyancing services, i found that solicitors are more thorough, comprehensive and consider your needs more than a conveyancer would.

On the downside, it may be a tad more expensive.

Hope this helps.

 

Could be more expensive if you dont use one

Glass half empty v half full

 

I have used a solicitor and a conveyancer in Melbourne. The solicitor was useless and expensive and their incompetence delayed settlement and I had to pay penalty interest. The conveyancer was half the price and I had absolutely no issues. The conveyancer has a solicitor attached if there are issues. This is a must in my opinion.

If you are going to hire a solicitor then make sure they are good and remember a high fee does not guarantee good service.

 

In my experience a dedicated conveyancer does a much more competent job than a solicitor. In general solicitors are highly qualified generalists whilst conveyancers are more specifically qualified specialists.

That said, the ideal conveyancer is best backed by a solicitor to ensure that all the legal needs are being considered, and to be able to make the appropriate arguments when warranted.

There are also solicitors that specialise in property transactions that I'd approve of. Again, these people are specialists, not generalists.

 

But some solicitors are also conveyance focussed. Some appalling. Its like saying all brokers are only focussed on high levels of lending.

Buyer beware. Find the balance

When it goes pear shaped only the solicitor can really help and not refer.

 

Does this mean the solicitor can wash their hands of any "issues" until they are consulted about "issues"? Sounds like a great business model.

 

Not at all. It means the conveyancers do their work and only call in the solicitor when the solicitor is required. In my experience, most conveyancing is straightforward and does not require a solicitor involved. However, if any legal advice is required then a solicitor must give the legal advice. A conveyancer is not qualified to give legal advice.

 

The trick is finding one that is not appalling.

 

I guess a better hypothetical is. If something has gone wrong (on your side) and the conveyancer hasn't called in the solicitor before it going wrong. Who is accountable?

 

I wouldn't hire an incompetent conveyancer, so I would not know. If you hire a conveyancer and something goes wrong then the conveyancer is responsible I guess.

My first transaction in Melbourne was with a specialist property solicitor. The solicitor did their work wrong then would not take responsibility for it. I had to pay extra for documents to be redrafted and also penalty interest for a late settlement.

That's why I chose a conveyancer next time and I had no issues.

That does not mean all property solicitors are incompetent and all conveyancers are good. There are great property solicitors and great conveyancers. There are appalling property solicitors and incompetent conveyancers.

What you need to do is find a professional who will do a good job.

 

Sorry to hear.

With any profession i suppose you get your competent and incompetent members of the community.

 

My personal conveyancing transactions have always been quite good so I've never personally had an issue.

I've dealt with thousands of property transactions and met a lot of conveyancers that I'd happily work with again, but I've had a few encounters where I never want to work with them again. The bad ones usually fall into one of three categories:

1. A solicitor who's doing a little conveyancing on the side, or doing a job for a friend. Problems are more likely to arise but I've found solicitors are more likely to try to avoid liability, rather than acknowledge a problem an move on. The people who are great to work with simply solve the problem rather than try to deflect responsibility. Everyone makes mistakes, it's how you solve them that really counts.

2. A conveyancer that's been recommended by a developer. They're usually handling half the land transactions in a large subdivision. They're working for the developer but supposed to be representing the purchaser.

3. The budget conveyancers. There's a few out there than only charge about $500, but have additional fees for anything outside the norm. I've seen one cheap conveyancer go out of their way to create drama and then charge extra to fix it.