Robbie Gallagher (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. I have a background in property. Indeed, I attribute many of my grey hairs to the conveyancing process, which I found extremely frustrating. I commend Mr. Davitt and his colleagues in IPAV on the work they have been doing to try to design a more streamlined process. I acknowledge the huge work Deputy MacSharry has put into drafting this Bill and bringing it forward as a genuine attempt to address a problem that clearly exists. I have taken from both presentations that everyone acknowledges there is a problem, although we might differ on how to go about tackling it.

I heard Mr. Davitt say in an interview on local radio this morning that 32% of properties currently on the market should not be on the market. That is a waste of everybody's time, including the vendor and all the people who take the time to view a property on the understanding it is sellable when, in fact, it is not. Those people incur costs, as does everybody involved in the process, with a nil return at the end of the day. The conveyancing legislation dates back to 1881 or thereabouts. We all agree there is a problem. It is just a matter of how we should streamline the process. I acknowledge the work that has gone into addressing the issues.

Mr. Davitt mentioned the UK but I did not catch what he said. Will he elaborate on that? What can we learn from the system there or elsewhere in terms of what works well? In my experience, public auction was always a very satisfactory process to be involved in because it is very transparent. Anybody genuinely looking to purchase a particular property has clarity from the get-go. People knew what they were getting. Unfortunately, that is not the situation when it comes to private treaty sales. It is very frustrating. Costs are incurred by individuals, whether for surveyors, valuers or whatever. Those costs would not need to be incurred if the vendor had done the homework before placing the property on the market. All of that is making a lot of additional work for IPAV's members. I fully accept that the delays they are experiencing are not solely down to their offices. Auctioneers depend on many other plays to provide the information for distribution to those who request it. Will Mr. Davitt outline areas we can look at from which we can learn? Are those learnings incorporated within the document before us?

My next question is for Mr. Garrett. I fully appreciate that solicitors are not in total control of the process. They are depending on perhaps six individuals to do their work in order that they can be efficient in doing theirs. However, they may be giving themselves more work to do by not having a process in play that they can lean on to ensure, at least, that they know the client they are working for will get to the finishing line. I hear from colleagues in the legal profession that they often end up doing a lot of work for somebody who has expressed an interest in a property but who does not ultimately get to the finishing line. There is then an issue as to how much to charge that individual at the end of the process. That can end up in situations that are less than harmonious, to which I am sure Mr. Garrett can testify. He indicated that, by and large, the Law Society is in broad agreement with a lot of what is in the Bill. Will he home in on exactly where he sees the issues and flaws and what he would like to see stitched into the Bill to alleviate his concerns?