The funder's solicitor wants it signed by Friday
A developer is refinancing a scheme your practice designed three years ago. Their solicitor emails asking for collateral warranties in favour of the new funder and two tenants, plus a letter of reliance on your ground report. The attached drafts are long. A director needs to know: what was agreed in the appointment, have we signed warranties on this job before and on what terms, what does our insurer need to see, and has this draft changed anything important?
Answering takes hours of searching through old emails and folders. Meanwhile the solicitor chases.
Why warranty requests are hard to manage
- Requests arrive at any time, often years after the project, to whoever is named in old correspondence.
- Appointment terms about warranties are in a document nobody has open.
- Drafts vary, and spotting differences from agreed terms takes careful reading.
- Signed copies are filed inconsistently, so the practice does not have a full list of what it has given.
- Insurers may ask what warranties the practice has provided, and the answer is hard to assemble.
Timing is awkward as well. Warranty requests often arrive around funding or sale deadlines that are not yours, with solicitors under pressure passing that pressure on. The temptation is to sign quickly to keep the developer happy, which is exactly when careful review matters most.
What the disorder costs
| Gap | Consequence |
|---|---|
| No central list of warranties given | Uncertainty about the practice's obligations |
| Drafts not compared with agreed terms | Unfamiliar terms signed without full review |
| Slow response to requests | Developer relationships strained, fees for warranties delayed |
| Signed copies lost | Hard to answer later questions |
Many appointments allow a fee for providing warranties. When requests are handled in a rush, that fee is often forgotten too.
How we build a warranty register
- Requests sent to a dedicated mailbox, or forwarded there, create a register entry with project, requester, beneficiary and type.
- The project's appointment is linked, with the warranty provisions highlighted for the director.
- Previous warranties on the same project are listed.
- The incoming draft is compared with your standard form or the agreed form, and differences are highlighted for your directors and legal adviser to review.
- Status is tracked from request to review, to agreed, to signed, with reminders when items stall.
- Any fee due under the appointment is prompted for invoicing.
- Signed copies are stored against the project, and a practice-wide list is available for insurers or directors.
Highlighting differences is a reading aid, not legal advice. Whether a term is acceptable is for your directors, your insurer and your solicitor.
We usually start by loading the warranties the practice can find, so directors see for the first time a list of what has been signed, on which projects and for whom. That list is often the most valuable part of the exercise, even before new requests start flowing through.
What directors see once the register runs
A request arrives and within minutes the director can see the appointment terms, past warranties on the job and a marked-up comparison. Review with the adviser starts from the differences, not from a blank read.
When the insurer asks what warranties the practice has provided, the list is already there.
Could this be your practice?
- Warranty requests arrive at individual directors' inboxes.
- Nobody holds a complete list of warranties signed.
- Comparing drafts with agreed terms is slow.
- Fees for providing warranties are often not invoiced.
- Signed copies are hard to find.