BBC report on vendor conveyancer fraud for second time

Print This Post

14 July 2014


The BBC’s flagship early evening affairs show ‘The One Show’ highlighted the issue of vendor conveyancer fraud for its viewers recently.

The show was focused on the matter of a fraudulent barrister, however it stressed that this was not the only area of the law that consumers ought to be wary of.

Following their coverage of the issue on BBC consumer affairs programme Fake Britain, the BBC once again was keen to highlight to its viewers the seriousness of the rise in fraudulent crime involving the identity theft of law firm brands and lawyers themselves. In particular, the easy cash gains that can be had by the criminals through the infiltration of a conveyancing transaction.

Detailing the case of Nick Christoffi and his loss of over £700k, the journalist warned viewers to always ensure that they know where their long saved for funds were going.

This only serves to demonstrate how much the media now have a handle on this growing issue.

How do you ensure the protection of your client money in conveyancing transactions? Consumers are savvy and will be keen to ensure the protection of their property purchase funds; are you going to be able to demonstrate due diligence to them when they ask you if you have a method of ensuring the safety of their cash?

Don’t delay call Lawyer Checker.



Associate News is provided by Legal Futures Associates.
Find out about becoming an Associate



Legal Futures Blog

The skills shortage in law firms is the biggest threat to handling cybercrime

CLC Roundtable discussion at Malmaison Hotel, Charterhouse Square

The skills shortage in our businesses is the biggest threat to our industry when looking at cybercrime. Cybercriminals are not just after money but are looking for sensitive information too, so the legal services sector is an obvious target. In the last year we have had reports of around £7m of client money being lost to such crime. This is not an IT issue and it should not be left to the IT teams to sort out. It is a high-level responsibility and a board-level issue that must be taken seriously. We suspect that we will look back on 2016 and ask why we didn’t respond quicker.

March 21st, 2017