Additional conveyancing enquiries should resolve a real question about the property or transaction. A long list is not necessarily a thorough investigation. Equally, reducing the number of questions must not mean leaving a material issue unexplained.
For buyers and sellers, the distinction matters because enquiries can uncover a problem that changes the decision to proceed, or create avoidable correspondence that delays exchange. For conveyancers, the challenge is to identify what needs establishing, obtain the right evidence and explain the result.
The October 2026 draft Conveyancing Protocol proposes a more explicit framework for making that judgement.
What are additional conveyancing enquiries?
At Step 15, the draft describes additional enquiries as questions raised beyond those in the transaction forms and LPE1 leasehold enquiries.
They may be needed because a document is missing, two answers conflict, a search reveals something requiring investigation or the buyer has explained a particular intended use. Their purpose is to address the facts of the transaction, rather than repeat every question a firm has ever asked.
What does the proposed Protocol change?
The principle of avoiding indiscriminate standard enquiries is already established in the existing Protocol framework. The draft does not introduce a new ban on all additional questions.
Instead, Step 15 adds express considerations about the relevance of a question, the documents already supplied, information obtainable elsewhere and instructions from the buyer or lender.
The draft is a consultation proposal, not an adopted replacement Protocol. The discussion below separates its proposed wording from practical suggestions for handling a live file.
Four considerations before sending an enquiry
The draft asks the buyer’s conveyancer to consider:
- Specificity: is the question about this property or transaction, rather than a generic question?
- The issue requiring clarification: does it arise from the title, contract papers, replies or supporting documents?
- Other sources: is the information already available from searches, public records or another source?
- Express instructions: is the question being raised because the buyer or lender has specifically instructed it?
These are considerations, not four conditions that every enquiry must satisfy simultaneously. A necessary enquiry may arise from a title defect without an express client request. Conversely, a buyer’s particular plans may justify clarification that would not matter on another purchase.
Necessary enquiries: three practical examples
1. The TA6 and search results describe different building work
The seller’s answers refer to an extension, but the local search records approvals for work that appears to have a different description. The buyer also reports seeing a converted garage.
The useful enquiry identifies the specific works and asks the seller to clarify the history and relevant documents. Asking for every certificate again, without reviewing what is already available, may obscure the actual gap.
Our guide to missing Building Regulations certificates when selling or buying explains why a missing copy, missing approval and concerns about the standard of work require different responses.
2. The lease and management information show different ground rent
A receipt shows one amount, while the lease contains a review provision that may produce another. The relevant question is how the current rent was calculated, whether a review has occurred and what remains payable.
Repeating a question already answered in the pack will not resolve that discrepancy. The enquiry needs to identify the conflicting information and seek the evidence needed to reconcile it.
Our article on rising ground rent and the conveyancing review illustrates why the lease, variations, receipts and management information need to be considered together.
3. The buyer expects to drive over a route that is not clearly covered
The particulars describe rear vehicular access, but the documents supplied do not clearly establish the relevant right. That is a property-specific issue requiring investigation.
The enquiry should identify the route and intended use, then ask for the legal basis and supporting evidence. The fact that somebody has driven over the land for years does not, by itself, settle every question about entitlement or scope.
These examples are illustrative scenarios, not reports of particular client matters.
What about information available online?
The draft encourages consideration of public records and information already available from another source. At Step 13, it also addresses routine requests for planning and Building Regulations documents that are publicly available.
Finding a document is only part of the task. The conveyancer still needs to consider whether it relates to the relevant property and works, whether it answers the question and whether anything remains unclear.
If the record is unavailable, incomplete or inconsistent with other information, a focused enquiry may remain appropriate. The proposal should not be read as a blanket instruction to accept an online entry without considering its significance.
Can the seller refuse to answer?
The draft retains the position that indiscriminate standard enquiries may breach the Protocol and need not be dealt with. It also says the seller’s conveyancer need not obtain answers to questions seeking opinion rather than fact.
That does not make every inconvenient question inappropriate. A question about a specific discrepancy, missing right or material document requires assessment on its merits.
If the seller’s conveyancer considers a question unnecessary, a concise explanation identifying the existing answer or reason for objection can help resolve the disagreement. The buyer’s conveyancer should then assess whether the information is sufficient or an important issue remains outstanding.
An unanswered question does not always prevent exchange. But an unresolved material risk cannot simply be treated as answered because the other side objects to the enquiry.
Questions about the property’s physical condition
Step 15 distinguishes general questions about condition from questions arising from searches, the buyer’s enquiries, their inspection or a surveyor’s report.
A seller’s opinion that a roof is sound is not a substitute for a survey. However, a survey referring to alterations may prompt factual enquiries about when the work was done, available approvals or guarantees.
The conveyancer should recognise where legal investigation ends and technical advice is needed. Requests for documents should not be presented as a professional assessment of structural safety.
What if the buyer or lender specifically asks?
The draft expressly recognises enquiries arising from the buyer’s or lender’s instructions. It also proposes that raising an enquiry on that basis confirms that the instruction has actually been received.
For buyers, this makes early communication important. Tell your conveyancer about plans such as letting, alterations, parking arrangements or business use, so they can assess the relevant documents and explain any limitations.
For conveyancers, record the instruction and frame the enquiry around what needs establishing. Avoid attributing a question to the lender without a genuine basis in its instructions.
The answer must lead to advice
Receiving a reply is not the end of the investigation. The answer may require a document, further clarification, specialist input or a report to the lender.
The Report on Title should explain the material findings and any unresolved uncertainty relevant to the buyer’s decision. A general caveat about enquiries cannot replace investigation or clear advice about an identified problem.
Lexsure’s Limitation of Enquiries Report on Title resource and Pre-Contract Enquiries: Additional Advice provide related wording for consideration and adaptation. These existing resources are not presented as updates implementing the proposed 2026 Protocol.
What should conveyancing firms review?
Review standard enquiry banks, supervision arrangements and file-review criteria. A precedent can provide useful prompts, but the questions sent should reflect the documents and circumstances of the particular purchase.
That review belongs alongside the firm’s wider policy maintenance, including the separate AML controls supported by services such as Lexsure’s AML Policy Update Service. Updating an AML policy does not replace reviewing conveyancing enquiry procedures.
File reviews should ask whether material issues were identified, appropriately investigated and explained. Counting enquiries alone will not establish that the work was adequate.
This article concerns residential conveyancing in England and Wales and discusses consultation proposals. The Protocol is not designed for new-build purchases. The applicable law, professional duties, client instructions and lender requirements must be considered for each transaction.
