header-logo header-logo

05 April 2020
Issue: 7882 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Commercial , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

COVID-19: Rules modified for equity release

The Equity Release Council modified its advice on safeguards for customers this week, in light of ongoing restrictions on social distancing
The Council’s Standards Board said legal advice can be provided remotely without a physical face-to-face meeting, but solicitors must follow a set approach, combining written advice with documented video or telephone calls, which increase the total number of interactions between customers and legal advisers.

The council said the revised approach would enable legal advisers to ensure the client’s identity is established and the client has mental capacity, is not under duress or coercion, and where more than one party is involved, both agree to enter into the equity release contract.

It said the mandatory physical witnessing of a client’s signature on the mortgage deed can be carried out by an independent adult witness of the client’s choosing, who will also be subject to identity checks and due diligence.

David Burrowes, chairman of the council, said: ‘The new measures have been designed with input from expert solicitors who provide legal advice on equity release transaction across the UK.

‘It is designed to support large and small solicitors to advise safely on equity release at this time. This unique and temporary solution is the result of collaboration and sharing of legal expertise among Council members in challenging circumstances, to ensure consumers’ interests remain protected. The Council will keep this modification under close review until it ceases, when the Government ends its “stay at home” requirement.’

Issue: 7882 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Commercial , Covid-19
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll