Charged €7k for a house sale - too much?

Thanks for the advice so far.

I was checking what type of fees are currently charged for a property sale.
Its evident that I should have checked with the solicitor before agreement on engaging his services.
I also know him for years, so I was expecting a fair deal, with the prospect of doing further business.
Caveat emptor.
 
Last edited:
Once upon a time, it was pretty standard for solicitors to charge 1% of the transaction value, plus £100. Those days are long gone.

If the outlay didn’t include stamp duty, then it’s certainly a bit on the high side.
 
Sarenco said:
If the outlay didn’t include stamp duty, then it’s certainly a bit on the high side.
Click to expand...
We still don't really know much.

This request for info:
Is not really addressed by this:
fistophobia said:
Hold on people...I have a life offline also.
They charged 1% plus VAT, other search, folio fees.
I got no S68 form in advance.
I should have checked before giving them business, as now its too late.
Click to expand...
 
Blackrock1 said:
Again I’ll ask what does the value of the property sold have to do with it ?
Click to expand...

Because that is the law. By law, legal charges must by calculated and explained by reference to ten criteria (not all of which will apply to any given legal service).

Those criteria are listed below. See item 7.

Some (many) solicitors offer a flat\fixed fee structure, but even so very few of them would charge the same flat fee for a €100k sale as they would charge for a €1m sale.

Auctioneers, Insurance Brokers, Stockbrokers and many others have a charging structure in which their charges are almost always explicitly linked to the value of the transaction. I cannot imagine that it is more difficult for a largely-automated trading process to put through a €1m share sale than, say, a €10k share sale.

I really don't understand why this bothers people so much more in the case of legal services than it does in the case of other services. Perhaps it doesn't - and it is just that I am unduly sensitive to criticism of solicitors. Perhaps there is a stockbroker out there with the same poorly-articulated sense of grievance.

CRITERIA BY REFERENCE TO WHICH LEGAL CHARGES MUST BE CALCULATED
  1. The complexity and novelty of the issues involved
  2. The skill or specialised knowledge applied
  3. The amount of time and labour reasonably spent
  4. The urgency attached by the client to the matter
  5. The place and circumstances in which the matter was transacted
  6. The number, importance and complexity of documents
  7. The amounts or values of money, property or an interest in property
  8. Whether or not there is an agreement to limit the liability of the solicitor
  9. Any research or investigative work undertaken and the time spent on it
  10. The use and costs of expert witnesses or other expertise.
https://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/lpt-exemption.229255/

Based on previous posts by OP, maybe this was a file where the solicitor took the attitude that a relatively hefty fee was merited. But - friend or not - the solicitor should of course have issued the S.150 guidance.

When I have such a transaction ( as I sometimes do) my conversation with the client tends to be along the lines of "we have all suffered; I want some jam on my toast too". When a bit of jam is truly deserved, people mostly tend to agree that it is deserved.
 
Last edited:
MOB,

But it's the law! No one has said it's illegal to charge this way.......it's just an approach that I really dislike. FWIW, I don't like the % approach for any professional fees. I think, for example, paying financial advisers a % based fees is also a terrible idea.......for the CONSUMER!
 
You joined AAM a few months ago. Stick around a bit longer, watch what people are saying as various questions come up, and you'll soon learn that @MOB's perspectives and contributions very much deserve to be taken seriously.
 
Thanks for giving your perspective.

Regardless comparing a fee for conveyancing to a commission charged by a stockbroker makes little sense to me and plenty of solicitors will charge the same professional fee whether it is the sale of a 100k house or a 1m house, you may not and that's your prerogative, but just because there are large sums of money at play that doesn't mean someone providing a service (and in most cases a relatively straightforward one) deserves a percentage of that.
 
They usually give you a schedule of charges before the sale. You don't have to proceed if you don't agree with it.
I paid around 7k for a home that cost 305 but that did include stamp duty, LPT, VAT and 450 euro for a previous purchase which fell through.
 
lff12 said:
They usually give you a schedule of charges before the sale. You don't have to proceed if you don't agree with it.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, the original poster did not receive a section 68 letter of engagement providing any sort of outline of the charges at the outset, or since. Such a letter doesn't necessarily, and often does not, give a "schedule of charges".
 
ClubMan said:
As far as I can tell, the original poster did not receive a section 68 letter of engagement providing any sort of outline of the charges at the outset, or since. Such a letter doesn't necessarily, and often does not, give a "schedule of charges".
Click to expand...
To be fair, if there is a transaction when a schedule of charges is likely to be furnished by way of compliance with the S.150 obligation, it will be a conveyancing transaction.

Every reasonably efficient solicitor has a closing statement template for a residential sale.

The most efficient way to meet the S.150 obligation is to populate that template at the outset (with estimates) and then update it post-completion (with the actual figures).

The alternative - a letter which describes what the closing statement will later contain - is a needless duplication of effort.
 
I don't understand. Isn't it mandatory for a section 68 letter to be furnished to the client at the earliest opportunity?
 
ClubMan said:
I don't understand. Isn't it mandatory for a section 68 letter to be furnished to the client at the earliest opportunity?
Click to expand...
Sorry - should have explained a little more. By 'schedule of charges' I take it you meant a list of actual numbers.

S.150 (formerly section 68) letter for a litigation matter: "Here is a long and convoluted explanation of the factors taken into account in calculating the bill which we will send you when this case is over. We don't yet know how much work we will have to do, which is why this letter is necessarily lengthy and imprecise as to the actual amount you will have to pay"

S.150 letter for a conveyancing matter "To give you a handle on likely costs, and by way of compliance with our S.150 statutory obligations, here is a draft of the closing statement which you will be getting on completion, which includes our estimated fee. These figures are estimates"
 
MOB said:
Sorry - should have explained a little more. By 'schedule of charges' I take it you meant a list of actual numbers.
Click to expand...
I didn't use the phrase originally, but that's what I understood it to be. And that's why I pointed out that a section 68/150 letter would, most likely, NOT contain such detail. But, rather, a rough and conditional outline of the charges at best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register