header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 February 2022 / Donna Spence
Issue: 7966 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Why it’s time to get with the programme & embrace the future

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
71853
Donna Spence on why automating the conveyancing process is good news for clients & practitioners
  • The aim of automating the conveyancing process is to make services faster and more efficient and to provide the consumer with excellent hands-on care and customer service.

The conveyancing sector has been moving slowly towards the concept of the paperless office with some firms progressing towards this faster than others. However, with many solicitors set in their ways, it was often an uphill struggle to get their support for an online digital system and do away with paper files. At a firm where I worked some five years ago, they had planned to digitise everything by 2035.

These plans sound almost comical today after COVID-19 forced most conveyancing firms to make the transition to online. In common with the legal sector, the practice of conveyancing had to adapt fast to the digital world and become more streamlined.

Prior to and during lockdown, it would appear that many firms

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
Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll