header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Making tech at home in conveyancing

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
26 April 2024 / Peter Ambrose
Issue: 8068 / Categories: Features , Profession , Property , Conveyancing , Artificial intelligence , Technology , Career focus
printer mail-detail
169179
Residential property law isn’t exactly leading tech innovation. Why not, & how can it change? Peter Ambrose investigates
  • Why residential property lawyers should embrace AI and use it to their advantage.

When it comes to driving technology innovation, residential conveyancing tends to take a bit of a back seat—which is ironic, given that risk management is among the biggest benefit offered by technology, and conveyancing is the discipline that carries the most risk today.

As buying or selling a property is the most common reason for someone to instruct a lawyer, this makes competition fierce and margins slim. Law firm owners will acknowledge that residential property work is often at the back of the queue for investment, despite its ability to generate cash for the business quickly.

Unfortunately, investment in new technology for conveyancers remains sluggish. Moreover, the stamp duty land tax holiday experience still casts a long shadow, making retention and recruitment of experienced staff challenging.

A highly fragmented market

Bringing technology change

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll