Skip to main content

CML Handbook Changes likely to be prompted by Green Deal

Hot on the heals of my earlier blog relating to the conveyancing implications of the Green Deal the CML has outlined a number of issues where it sees potential problems.

Predictably, and no doubt wishing to be politically correct, the CML declares that lenders welcome measures to reduce household energy expenses, however funded. The initiative itself, however, raises questions around, for example, the impact on the value of the property, affordability and future saleability....something of course very dear to a lender’s heart.

Lenders are concerned with any changes or improvements made to a property, since they may have an impact on its value. The CML says that different lenders will have different approaches as to what constitutes a major change to the property and how much of an effect it may have on its value. If history is anything to go buy each lender is likely to take a different approach bringing further confusion to the conveyancing process.

Borrowers are generally obliged to obtain their lender’s consent for improvements that are likely to have a large impact on the property, such as solid wall insulation or amendments which can change the outward appearance of the property. Works likely to have less of an impact, such as replacement windows and doors, may not require consent. Chances are that Green Deal works may require consent.

It is extremely likely that within the next 6 months the CML will amend the Lenders’ Handbook to enable conveyancers acting for lenders to obtain information about the Green Deal commitments on a property. property lawyers should take advantage of LENDERmonitor to keep abreast of any changes.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Argie Bargie over Home Information Packs

In response to a question from Conservative MP David Amess on what methodology would be used to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the Home Information Pack programme, Communities and Local Government Minister Ian Austin was involved in heated argument. The wording of the debate ( reported in Hansard ) makes interesting reading, so I thought I would share it with you : Mr. David Amess (Southend, West) (Con): What methodology his Department plans to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the home information pack programme; and if he will make a statement. Mr. Andrew Mackay (Bracknell) (Con): What methodology his Department plans to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the home information pack programme; and if he will make a statement. Mr. David Jones (Clwyd, West) (Con): What methodology his Department plans to use to evaluate the effectiveness of the home information pack programme; and if he will make a statement. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local...

Paperwork is not a shield: Why your SRA aml audit demands more than just a dusty manual

The Solicitors Regulation Authority continues its aggressive crackdown on financial crime with a recent fine issued against Whiteheads Solicitors (Staffordshire) Ltd . This decision serves as a stark reminder that the regulator is looking far beyond simple paperwork during an SRA aml audit . The firm was fined 2,584 GBP plus 600 GBP in costs following an investigation into its compliance with the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds Regulations 2017. While the firm had a firm-wide risk assessment and general policies in place, the SRA identified critical failures at the matter level. Key compliance failures included: Failure to conduct adequate client and matter risk assessments . The SRA found a consistent pattern where the firm failed to sufficiently assess client matter risk levels as required by Regulation 28. Inadequate scrutiny of source of funds . In one specific property transaction, the firm failed to properly investigate the origin of funds provided by ...

FCA AML Audit: The SRA Is Out, the FCA Is In

For years, law firms prepared for AML scrutiny with one regulator in mind: the SRA. That era is over. The UK Government has confirmed a fundamental shift in supervision. AML and counter-terrorist financing oversight is moving from the SRA to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). This is not a cosmetic change. It is a full regulatory reset. If your firm is still thinking in terms of an internal review, an FCA AML audit will feel very different, financially, operationally, and reputationally. What Makes an FCA AML Audit Different The SRA regulates professional standards. The FCA enforces financial crime controls. That distinction matters. An FCA AML audit is not designed to guide or educate. It is designed to assess risk to the financial system and determine whether enforcement action is required. This is precisely why firms can no longer rely on internal reviews alone. An FCA AML audit will expect to see independent challenge, most ...