Jardine: Sector at a crossroads
Conveyancing fees vary by 150% or more for “essentially the same service”, according to new research, with just 5% of firms offering different service levels.
It also identified 57 different add-on fees charged by conveyancers, which are not questioned by many clients – but which 28% of firms do not charge for at all.
According to the survey of 60 firms by the Big Yellow Penguin consultancy, eight out of 10 were confident about setting their fees, but only 23% believed the sector as a whole shared this confidence.
Shaun Jardine, director of Big Yellow Penguin, said: “While individuals feel confident, they perceive the sector as uncertain or fragmented. This could be due to inconsistent pricing practices, lack of transparency, or pressure from online competitors.”
Mr Jardine said this “confidence paradox” – individuals trust their own judgement but doubt their colleagues’ approach – was not surprising given the pricing data.
“For a straightforward registered freehold purchase under £300,000, fees range from under £1,200 to over £3,000 – that’s a potential 150% variation for essentially the same service.”
For properties worth up to £500,000, the proportion of conveyancers charging under £1,200 fell from 25% to 12%, and for properties worth up to £750,000, to 5%.
Half of conveyancers charged between £1,751 and £2,250 for properties worth up to £750,000, falling to 24% for properties worth up to £500,000.
When asked whether they charged additional fees for add-ons, such as a lease extension or deed of variation or administrative items like funds transfers, 28% did not. There were 57 different add-ons listed and at various prices.
Mr Jardine said: “Now, if this is because you’ve properly scoped your services from the outset and are charging clients appropriately for the full value they receive, then I applaud you. You’ve moved beyond the piecemeal approach to something more sophisticated.
“But if – and I suspect this applies to many of you – it’s because you’re simply not prepared to ask for additional fees when extra work arises, then we have a serious problem.
“You’re not just undervaluing your expertise; you’re training clients to expect unlimited scope creep. This approach doesn’t make you client-friendly – it makes you commercially naive and ultimately unsustainable.”
The data showed that 63% of clients rarely or never queried additional charges. “This level of trust is extraordinary in any service sector, yet the profession seems oblivious to what this acceptance actually represents,” Mr Jardine said.
“When clients don’t challenge your extras, they’re telling you they recognise conveyancing’s inherent complexity and trust your expertise. This isn’t just good news – it’s a green light for more sophisticated commercial strategies.”
But only 5% offered different service levels, such as premium, standard or basic, with 8% considering it.
Describing this finding as “perplexing”, Mr Jardine said: “In an era where consumers expect choice in everything from coffee to cars, 86% of conveyancing firms offer a single, one-size-fits-all service.”
Despite being comfortable charging multiple add-on fees, law firms were not creating structured service options, he went on. “They’re offering complexity without choice – arguably the worst possible client experience.”
A majority of conveyancers (56%) said they considered competitor pricing “to a moderate extent”, while half discounted fees if clients said they could get a cheaper service elsewhere, with 30% saying they never did this.
Mr Jardine added: “The residential conveyancing sector stands at a crossroads. It can continue with the current patchwork of inconsistent pricing, bewildering add-ons, and no service options, or it can embrace a strategic approach that packages expertise clearly, communicates value confidently, and gives clients the choice they expect in every other aspect of their lives.”
Rob Hailstone, founder of the Bold Legal Group – which partnered with Big Yellow Penguin on the research – said the “large disparity” in conveyancing fees could erode client confidence.
“If two firms charge wildly different fees for what appears to be the same legal service, clients may feel the system is unfair or even exploitative. This disparity can create suspicion that some firms are ‘overcharging’ without justification.
“The legal profession depends heavily on trust and integrity. If clients see extreme inconsistencies in pricing, they may conclude that conveyancers prioritise profit over fairness. This could damage the reputation of conveyancers.”
Large fee variations made it difficult for clients to judge what represented a “reasonable” price, he went on, confusion which could lead to “anxiety, hesitation in engaging services, or even clients delaying important transactions”.
Clients might assume that higher fees meant higher quality, or lower fees that corners were being cut, even if the services were identical, undermining confidence. A wide disparity in fees could also suggest “inadequate regulation”, transparency or oversight.
“The inconsistency signals unreliability, undermines trust, and makes clients question both value and integrity, all of which are fundamental to confidence in professional services.”
Mr Hailstone added that, by not charging for add-ons, firms could build goodwill, strengthen client trust, and generate positive word-of-mouth referrals, while avoiding complaints about “hidden charges”.
However, the “flip side” of this was that transactions could vary greatly in complexity, staff needed to be paid and unexpected work could “take hours”, undermining profitability. If clients knew extras came at a cost, they might be less likely to “overburden the conveyancer” with additional tasks.
Leave a Comment