About Conveyancing

Author: Simon Seaton

Simon Seaton Avatar
Simon Seaton is a former UK solicitor and a director of Lexsure. He has assisted hundreds of law firms, from small practices to firms ranked in the top 500, with compliance needs spanning SRA requirements, mortgage lender instructions, CQS and anti-money laundering. His AML experience includes developing policies, procedures and systems, and conducting independent audits of firms’ policies, controls and procedures. He has also delivered hundreds of webinars and seminars for lawyers and mortgage lenders on compliance, conveyancing risk and AML. Over the years, Simon has liaised on AML and risk management matters with organisations including UK Finance, the Bank of England, the Metropolitan Police, the National Crime Agency and the Financial Conduct Authority, as well as major mortgage lenders and professional indemnity insurers.

  • Coventry Part 2 Update: Help to Buy Charges on Remortgages

    Coventry Building Society’s updated Part 2 wording expressly addresses existing equitable charges relating to affordable housing on remortgage properties, including Help to Buy Equity Loan schemes.

    For conveyancers, the practical point is to identify the arrangement behind the charge and establish whether it will remain after completion. A remortgage should not progress on the assumption that an existing equity loan is acceptable merely because another lender previously lent on the property.

    What does the updated wording say?

    Section 5.19.1a asks:

    If different from 1.11, contact point for lending on affordable housing, shared equity and shared ownership and where relevant your requirements

    The updated wording supplied for the 20 October 2026 change reads:

    CBS does not lend in any of these circumstances. To include any existing equitable charge relating to affordable housing on a re-mortgage property for example but not exclusive to Help to Buy Equity Loan Schemes

    The reference to Help to Buy is an example, rather than an exhaustive list. The wording also concerns other existing equitable charges relating to affordable housing.

    The remortgage needs more than a first-mortgage redemption figure

    A borrower may describe the transaction simply as moving their mortgage to Coventry. The title and funding arrangements may reveal a separate equity loan or other affordable-housing interest that needs investigation.

    The conveyancer should establish:

    • what affordable-housing or equity-loan arrangement exists;
    • the identity of the party holding the relevant interest;
    • the documents creating and securing that interest;
    • whether the borrower proposes to retain it or repay it;
    • whether repayment would be complete or partial;
    • what consent, repayment and discharge arrangements are required; and
    • whether the proposed transaction complies with Coventry’s instructions and mortgage offer.

    The investigation should consider the underlying documents and borrower’s information alongside the register. A familiar scheme name is not a substitute for establishing the legal and financial arrangements.

    Retaining the equity loan and repaying it are different proposals

    A remortgage that leaves an affordable-housing charge in place raises a different question from a transaction intended to repay the equity loan in full.

    However, the quoted wording should not be treated as automatic approval for the second arrangement. If repayment and discharge are proposed, obtain confirmation of Coventry’s requirements for that particular transaction before proceeding on an assumption.

    Where instructions or the mortgage offer appear inconsistent with the facts, identify the issue precisely and seek clarification through the appropriate reporting route.

    A mortgage offer should not be treated as proof that every title arrangement has already been considered. Equally, reporting an issue does not itself provide authority to proceed.

    Our article on why a lender portal acknowledgement is not approval explains the importance of distinguishing receipt of a report from the decision the firm needs.

    Help to Buy repayment has its own process

    For an English Help to Buy: Equity Loan, repayment involves more than paying the original amount borrowed. Homes England’s process includes valuation, repayment documentation and completion requirements.

    The government’s guidance on repaying an equity loan when remortgaging explains the steps for full or partial repayment. That guidance concerns the English scheme; other schemes require their own investigation.

    The scheme administrator’s requirements and Coventry’s lending instructions answer different questions. Satisfying one does not establish compliance with the other.

    Conveyancers should therefore establish the proposed repayment route early, including the funds available, the documents required and any dependencies affecting completion.

    Shared ownership and shared equity should not be confused

    The Handbook question covers affordable housing, shared equity and shared ownership. These labels should not be used interchangeably.

    A borrower with an equity loan may own the whole property subject to the scheme arrangements. A shared-ownership transaction has a different ownership and lease structure. The conveyancer needs to identify the actual arrangement before deciding which instructions and enquiries apply.

    Although the updated answer names Help to Buy Equity Loan schemes, the opening statement addresses the wider circumstances covered by the question.

    Review live Coventry remortgage files

    Firms handling Coventry matters should consider whether the updated wording affects any live files, particularly those involving an existing equity loan or affordable-housing charge.

    A focused review should identify:

    • cases where an equity loan is intended to remain;
    • cases where repayment is proposed but the arrangements are incomplete;
    • files awaiting a lender response;
    • matters approaching certification of title or completion; and
    • borrowers who need an explanation of an issue affecting their proposed remortgage.

    Record the wording checked, the date of the check, any report made and the lender’s substantive response. Follow the applicable instructions when deciding whether the matter can progress.

    Why the historical Coventry wording also matters

    This update has a separate relevance to earlier transactions.

    When reviewing an older remortgage, complaint or alleged failure to follow lender instructions, the relevant question is what Coventry required at that time. Today’s wording should not be applied retrospectively without checking the earlier record.

    The Lexsure Lender Archive Coventry Building Society page provides a route to historical lender-specific records. Confirm that the relevant date and requirement are covered, then examine the record alongside the mortgage offer, specific instructions and conveyancing file.

    Our existing guide to Coventry Building Society’s historical mortgage instructions explains why the lender identity and transaction date matter.

    Historical wording can help establish the instruction framework. It does not, by itself, establish what happened on the file or determine negligence, causation or loss.

    Which Coventry instructions applied to the transaction?

    Investigating an earlier purchase or remortgage? Check Coventry Building Society’s recorded historical requirements for the relevant date.

    Check Coventry’s historical instructions →

    Keep changes visible to the team handling the matter

    A lender update needs to reach the people reviewing titles, reporting issues and preparing certificates of title. Awareness should lead to an assessment of affected files and any necessary action.

    LENDERmonitor Notifications helps conveyancing firms monitor changes to lender-specific instructions. Notifications support the firm’s checking process; they do not replace examination of the applicable Handbook wording, mortgage offer and individual instructions.

    Our article on managing conveyancing risk through completion considers why outstanding conditions and changed circumstances need clear ownership.

    This article discusses the Coventry Building Society wording supplied for the 20 October 2026 update. Check the current instructions, applicable jurisdiction and mortgage offer before relying on it for a live matter. It is general information, not advice on an individual mortgage or transaction.

  • Cladding Remediation Is Complete, but I Still Can’t Sell My Flat

    The cladding has been replaced. The remediation was funded. The contractors have finished. Yet you are told that a buyer cannot obtain a mortgage because the building’s updated EWS1 is still outstanding.

    For a leaseholder hoping to move, that can feel like reaching the end of a long process only to discover another obstacle.

    Completed works, confirmation of funding and evidence acceptable to a mortgage lender answer different questions. Establishing which question remains unresolved is the first step towards progressing the sale.

    The works were finished, but the paperwork was not

    In a public question received, a flat owner reported that cladding remediation had been completed and paid for in full through the Building Safety Fund.

    They wanted to sell, but said an EWS1 would not be issued for some time. They had been told the property was not mortgageable without it and wanted to know how to reassure a prospective buyer or lender about future costs.

    The published account does not identify a particular lender’s decision, establish the scope of the completed works or confirm whether the owner subsequently sold. It is an unverified personal account, but it illustrates the uncertainty an owner can face after remediation.

    Three questions need separate answers

    When somebody says the cladding problem has been resolved, ask what that statement establishes.

    • Funding: which works were funded, what expenditure was covered and whether anything remains unresolved?
    • Completion: what evidence confirms the work undertaken and the professional assessment of the completed external wall system?
    • Mortgage acceptance: what information does the particular lender or valuer require before proceeding?

    A funding confirmation does not necessarily answer a valuer’s question about the completed building. Equally, the absence of an updated EWS1 does not establish that every lender will reject the property.

    Our broader guide to cladding, EWS1 and problems selling or remortgaging explains why valuation evidence, building safety and responsibility for costs need to be distinguished.

    What does “remediation complete” mean for this building?

    The seller’s conveyancer needs the available evidence, rather than a general assurance that the builders have left.

    Depending on the project, useful questions for the landlord or managing agent may include:

    • What was the agreed scope of remediation?
    • Which works have been completed?
    • Are there outstanding items, further investigations or separate defects?
    • What completion, inspection or professional reports are available?
    • Has the external wall assessment been updated?
    • Who is responsible for preparing any further assessment or EWS1?
    • What is preventing its issue, and what timetable has been provided?

    A delay may have several explanations. Do not assume it is purely administrative, or that it necessarily indicates a safety concern, without establishing the facts.

    Does the buyer’s lender actually require a new EWS1?

    Start by identifying who has requested the document and why. Is the request from the buyer’s conveyancer, the mortgage lender or the lender’s valuer?

    Ask for the outstanding requirement to be recorded precisely. A statement that “no lender will accept it” is not a substitute for checking the proposed lender’s position.

    The industry statement on cladding recognises that lenders may consider alternative evidence in relevant circumstances, subject to individual lender policy and risk appetite. It does not require every lender to accept every remediated building.

    The practical question is whether the documents available for this building can be considered by this lender and its valuer.

    The seller’s conveyancer can provide the available evidence to the buyer’s solicitor. The buyer’s advisers can then establish what remains necessary and make any required referral. That process does not guarantee approval.

    What about the November 2026 valuation standard?

    RICS’ updated professional standard for secured-lending valuations of residential buildings with cladding takes effect on 1 November 2026.

    It emphasises that an EWS1 request needs a clear rationale. In specified circumstances, an appropriate summary of a PAS 9980 Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls may be relied upon instead.

    The RICS announcement explains the updated approach. Owners should ask their advisers whether it affects the evidence needed for their transaction, rather than assume that it removes the obstacle.

    Paid-for cladding works do not answer every future-cost question

    A prospective buyer may want reassurance about money as well as mortgage availability.

    The relevant documents should establish what funding covered and whether other works, charges or unresolved liabilities need consideration. A statement that one programme of cladding remediation was fully funded should not be expanded into an unsupported promise that the owner will never face another building-safety cost.

    Where statutory leaseholder protections are relevant, the conveyancer should examine their application and the supporting evidence. An EWS1 does not itself determine who must pay.

    Similarly, a solicitor’s letter cannot replace a technical assessment or guarantee a lender’s decision. A proposed retention, contractual promise or insurance policy would require its own assessment of availability, enforceability and suitability.

    Assemble the evidence before the next buyer asks

    If you are preparing to sell after remediation, ask your conveyancer to identify what is available and what remains outstanding.

    The file may need material covering:

    • the remediation scope and completion position;
    • funding and any unresolved financial matters;
    • existing and updated external-wall assessments;
    • any EWS1 and the status of further assessment work;
    • relevant statutory certificates, where applicable;
    • landlord or managing-agent explanations of outstanding documents; and
    • the proposed lender’s response to the evidence supplied.

    These documents serve different purposes. Obtaining them early allows the advisers to identify the real obstacle before the transaction is advanced.

    What were you told when you originally bought?

    The present sale raises a separate historical question: what was known about the building when you purchased?

    The answer depends on the date, the information available and the circumstances. Remediation undertaken after purchase does not, by itself, establish a failure by the original conveyancer.

    However, if concerns, investigations or proposed works were already known, the original file may help establish:

    • what the management pack disclosed;
    • whether external-wall information was requested;
    • what was known about remediation and funding;
    • whether outstanding documents or unanswered enquiries were explained;
    • what was reported to the original mortgage lender; and
    • what you were told about costs, uncertainty and a future sale.

    Obtaining a mortgage at the time does not, by itself, answer what advice you received or establish how other lenders would have treated the property.

    Today’s valuation guidance should not be applied retrospectively as though it governed the original purchase. Any investigation needs the contemporary documents and instructions alongside the actual advice.

    The works are finished, but your sale is still stuck?

    If the building-safety position has raised questions about what happened when you bought, When I Bought explains which purchase records may matter.

    You do not need to decide whether anyone was at fault. Tell us what happened and arrange an initial conversation.

    Visit When I Bought and tell us what happened

    This article provides general information about selling property in England and Wales. The Building Safety Fund and statutory leaseholder protections referenced concern England. Mortgage acceptance, technical assessments and responsibility for costs depend on the individual circumstances. Obtain appropriate legal and professional advice. Time limits may apply to legal claims.