The first quarter of the year is always a pressure test for conveyancing teams.

Instructions from January are hitting their critical middle stage, client patience is thinning, and the industry’s average instruction-to-completion time of 123 days means the calendar is already working against you.

But in 2026, there’s a sharper edge to that pressure. It isn’t just workload – it’s the compounding effect of unreliable information. Missing details, inconsistent datasets, and errors that should never have made it through create a different kind of drag: one that’s harder to plan for and harder to explain to clients.

At the core of most preventable delays lies a single, underappreciated factor: data integrity.

Conveyancers are absorbing the cost of poor data.

Research shows conveyancers now spend 41% of their working day following up on updates, correcting inconsistencies, or chasing missing details – all consequences of inaccurate or incomplete data reaching them in the first place.

That’s not a workflow problem. It’s a data problem presenting as a workflow problem.

When so much time is consumed fixing issues that shouldn’t exist, the knock-on effects are predictable: slower progress, more enquiries, frustrated clients, and a rising risk of transactions falling through. And even a single misallocated or incorrect data point can derail what should be a straightforward case.

Why this matters more than most realise.

Across the sector, Landmark research has identified the data challenges that consistently create friction for conveyancing firms: poor system integration and interoperability (cited by 37% of firms), security and compliance concerns (37%), legacy systems and limited IT bandwidth (36%), and inconsistent formats that make data difficult to reconcile.

Each of these feeds the same outcome: fragmented files, unexpected queries, and delays that compound across complex chains.

The rise of digital tools has brought genuine efficiencies – 78% of firms now use AI to assist fee earners – but technology is only as reliable as the information feeding it. Better tools with unreliable data still produce unreliable outcomes.

What conveyancers actually need.

The conveyancers who handle high-pressure periods most effectively aren’t necessarily those with the fastest turnaround times. They’re the ones who aren’t constantly firefighting.

What makes the difference, consistently, is information that arrives complete, accurate, and early enough to act on. The evidence backs this up: 73% of conveyancers say early insights give buyers more confidence, 69% say it speeds up the transaction overall, and 61% say it reduces the number of enquiries raised.

Clear, early data doesn’t add friction at the start of a transaction – it removes it from everywhere else.

When data goes wrong, the ripple is wide.

The consequences of poor-quality data rarely stay contained. A minor discrepancy caught late can collapse a deal. Incorrect property attributes introduce risk for buyers. Outdated environmental data can expose clients to liabilities they weren’t warned about. Extra enquiries lengthen timelines and increase administrative load. And throughout, the conveyancer’s professional reputation absorbs the strain.

In a market where clients expect clarity and estate agents are monitoring progress closely, even small data failures carry outsized consequences.

What a good data partnership looks like in practice.

The strongest advantage a search provider can offer in 2026 isn’t speed alone – it’s accuracy you can rely on, delivered early enough to change outcomes rather than just document them.

That means verified, consistently reliable datasets. It means reducing the time spent on avoidable administrative work. It means insights that support better client conversations, not ones that generate more questions. And it means acting as a genuine extension of the conveyancing team – not a detached supplier that creates extra steps.

With caseloads under pressure and timelines stretching, the difference between a partner and a vendor is whether they make your workload lighter or heavier.

For conveyancers navigating a demanding market, data integrity isn’t a technical concern sitting somewhere in the background – it’s the foundation every smooth transaction is built on.

The property market is showing resilience but global pressures and affordability constraints are hampering home moving activity.

Supply and early activity are rising, but it remains a buyer’s market, with listing volumes not translating into completed transactions yet.

Our parent company Landmark’s latest Residential Property Trends Report is now available, featuring the most recent data on listings, SSTC/SSTM activity, search orders and completion volumes across England, Wales and Scotland.

Our Q1 2026 analysis shows that early‑stage activity strengthened as pent‑up supply returned to the market following the hesitation surrounding the Autumn Budget. However, progression remains slow, with affordability pressures and process friction continuing to weigh on overall transaction volumes.

England & Wales

• Listing volumes in Q1 2026 were up 3% compared to Q1 2025. 
• SSTC volumes in Q1 2026 were down 8% compared to Q1 2025. 
• Search order volumes were down 1% in Q1 2026 vs Q1 2025. 
• Completion volumes in Q1 2026 were down 18% vs Q1 2025.

View the report for the latest trends affecting the residential sector in Q1 2026.

Britain’s landscape is layered with history – and some of that history is legally protected in ways that have very direct consequences for property owners.

Scheduled Ancient Monuments represent some of the most significant archaeological and historic sites in the country, and the legal framework that protects them is strict. For buyers whose property sits on, near, or over a scheduled monument, understanding what that means is essential.

Lets start peeling those historical layers in our latest ‘Five Minutes On…’ focus.

What is a Scheduled Ancient Monument?

A Scheduled Ancient Monument – often abbreviated to SAM – is a site of national archaeological or historic importance that has been formally designated by the Secretary of State under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act. Scheduling is intended to preserve sites of exceptional significance for future generations, and the protection it confers is among the strongest in the heritage planning system.

The UK’s scheduled monuments range from prehistoric standing stones and Bronze Age burial mounds to medieval castles, Roman forts, industrial archaeology and Cold War infrastructure. There are currently over 19,000 scheduled monuments in England alone, managed by Historic England on behalf of the government.

What restrictions does scheduling impose?

Scheduling places significant restrictions on what can be done to or near a designated monument. Any works that would have the effect of demolishing, destroying, damaging, removing, repairing, altering, adding to, flooding or tipping on a scheduled monument require Scheduled Monument Consent – a form of permission granted by the Secretary of State, not by the local planning authority.

In practice this means that activities most homeowners take for granted – digging foundations, installing drainage, planting trees, landscaping a garden – may require formal consent if a scheduled monument is present. The threshold is deliberately low, because the significance of what lies beneath can be damaged by works that appear minor on the surface.

Crucially, planning permission and Scheduled Monument Consent are entirely separate processes. A local planning authority can grant planning permission for works on or near a scheduled monument – but that permission does not authorise works affecting the monument itself. Consent from Historic England is required in addition.

Does scheduling affect properties that aren’t on the monument?

Yes – and this is where buyers can be caught out. Scheduled monument designations don’t stop at the boundary of the monument itself. The scheduling often extends across a wider area than is immediately obvious, and the setting of a monument can be a material consideration in planning decisions even where the scheduled area ends some distance away.

A property that sits adjacent to a scheduled monument, or within its extended designation area, may find that planning applications for extensions, outbuildings, or landscaping attract detailed scrutiny from Historic England. This doesn’t mean permission won’t be granted – but it means the process is more complex, and the outcome less certain, than it would be for a comparable property elsewhere.

How is a scheduled monument designation identified?

The National Heritage List for England, maintained by Historic England, is the definitive record of all scheduled monuments in England. A CON29O optional enquiry can surface information about scheduled monument designations recorded by the local authority. The monument’s entry on the National Heritage List will describe the extent of the scheduling and the nature of the site.

Where a property sits in an area with a known archaeological character – a landscape with visible earthworks, a location near a known Roman road, a site with a name suggesting historic use – it’s worth raising the relevant optional enquiries even if scheduling isn’t immediately apparent.

What should buyers do if a scheduled monument is identified?

Where a scheduled monument is identified in connection with a property, the conveyancer should consider what the practical implications are for the buyer’s intended use. If the buyer plans to carry out any works – even relatively minor ones – specialist heritage advice may be warranted before exchange. Historic England’s regional teams can advise on what consent is likely to be required and what the prospects of success are.

An indemnity policy may be available in some circumstances where historic works have been carried out near or on a scheduled monument without the necessary consent, though the underwriting criteria for such policies can be demanding.

---

Scheduled Ancient Monument designation is one of the strongest forms of heritage protection in the English legal system. It doesn’t make a property impossible to own, develop or enjoy – but it does impose a framework of restrictions that buyers need to understand before they commit. A property with a scheduled monument on or near its land is still a property worth buying. It’s just one where the due diligence needs to go a layer deeper.

Every conveyancer knows the feeling. The file is progressing well, deadlines are manageable, and then something surfaces in the search data that doesn’t quite fit.

A conflicting record. A missing detail. A query that arrives too late to resolve cleanly. These moments rarely come from nowhere. More often they’re the predictable consequence of a gap in the data, something that was available but not caught, or available but not ordered.

Here are four of the risks that appear most consistently, and what good search data looks like in each case.

Planning history that doesn’t travel with the property

Planning records are among the most commonly misread elements in a local authority search – not because the data is wrong, but because it requires interpretation. A restriction that applied to a previous use, a consent that was granted but never implemented, a condition attached to an older permission that the current owner has quietly ignored – none of these are hidden. They’re in the data. But they require someone to look at the full picture rather than the headline.

The risk is greatest on properties with complex histories: former commercial uses, extensions built under permitted development, conversions from one use class to another. In conservation areas, the detail required is even more precise – not just whether works were approved, but whether they were approved under the correct consent route.

The search data should surface this. If it doesn’t, the problem isn’t the planning history – it’s the search.

Rights of way that aren’t visible on site

Public rights of way are a good example of a risk that feels theoretical until it isn’t. A right of way that crosses a garden or driveway doesn’t affect every transaction – but when it does affect one, and the buyer wasn’t told, the consequences are significant and the firm’s position is uncomfortable.

The challenge is that rights of way aren’t always visible on the ground. A path that hasn’t been walked in years is still legally protected. A route that’s been physically blocked by a previous owner remains on the definitive map. The seller may be entirely unaware.

A local authority search will include rights of way data, but the quality of that data varies considerably depending on the source and how recently it was verified. Knowing where your provider’s data comes from, and how current it is, matters more for this particular risk than almost any other.

Chancel repair liability on older rural stock

Chancel repair liability is one of those risks that experienced conveyancers are well aware of and occasionally encounter in practice. The liability, which can require a property owner to contribute to the cost of repairing the chancel of a local parish church, dates from medieval land law and is tied to the land rather than the owner’s beliefs or connection to the church.

Since 2013, unregistered chancel repair liability is no longer an overriding interest, meaning it must be registered to bind a purchaser. But for properties that changed hands before that date, registered liability can still exist and still bite.

The appropriate response is straightforward, a chancel search where the risk exists, and indemnity insurance where it’s warranted. The less straightforward part is identifying which properties warrant the extra step. Rural properties, older stock, and land near historic parish churches are the obvious candidates. The search data should prompt the question.

Flood risk that isn’t reflected in the asking price

Flooding is increasingly well understood as a property risk, but the gap between what a standard environmental search flags and what a property is genuinely exposed to has widened as climate patterns have shifted. A property that last flooded in 1987 may carry a lower risk rating than one that flooded in 2020 – but both carry risk, and neither is necessarily reflected in what the seller has disclosed.

The specific risk that catches firms out most often isn’t river or coastal flooding, which tends to be well mapped. It’s surface water flooding, the kind that results from drainage systems being overwhelmed during heavy rainfall, which is harder to model, less consistently reported, and increasingly common in areas that haven’t historically been considered at risk.

An environmental search that draws on current flood mapping, drainage records, and historical incident data gives a materially different picture from one that relies on older datasets. The difference matters when you’re advising a client on whether to proceed and on what terms.

What connects all four

None of these risks are obscure. Every conveyancer reading this will have encountered at least one of them in practice. What connects them is that they’re all data problems before they’re legal problems – and in each case, the quality and currency of the search data determines whether the issue surfaces at the right moment or the wrong one.

The search isn’t just a regulatory requirement. It’s the foundation on which advice is built. It’s worth knowing exactly what yours is built on.

---

For a closer look at how search data quality affects conveyancing outcomes – and what to look for when assessing your current provider – download our guide.

If you’re advising a buyer, the new TA6 is less about what’s asked, and more about what isn’t.

The newly released 6th edition reduces seller disclosure, but it doesn’t reduce buyer risk. Knowing which gaps now need to be filled elsewhere is key.

For our latest Five Minutes On… article, we tackle the much discussed TA6 form. Lets get into it.

What the new TA6 no longer asks… and why that matters

The 6th edition strips out nine sections that appeared in the 5th edition. Several of them are directly relevant to search-based due diligence.

• Coalfield or mining area – sellers are no longer asked to disclose whether a property sits in a former coalfield or mining area. That risk doesn’t go away. A CON29M or specialist mining search remains the appropriate way to surface it.
• Coastal erosion – removed from the TA6 entirely. For properties in at-risk coastal zones, an environmental or specialist coastal erosion search is the only reliable source of this information.
• Building safety – questions around cladding, remediation and the Building Safety Act have been taken out of the standard form. For leasehold properties in scope, the TA7 5th edition (updated alongside the TA6) picks up some of this – but the position on leaseholder deed of certificate, service charges and remediation funding still needs careful handling.
• Restrictive covenants – sellers are no longer prompted to disclose these. Title investigation and, where appropriate, indemnity insurance remain the tools to address gaps here.

What hasn’t changed

The seller’s legal obligations haven’t moved. Misrepresentation and caveat emptor still apply. The form being shorter doesn’t reduce the buyer’s exposure to undisclosed risks – it just means fewer of those risks are being asked about upfront.

The Law Society has confirmed that solicitors’ professional liability position is unchanged. A shorter form doesn’t reduce the duty of care.

---

A well-constructed search pack was always the right approach. The TA6 6th edition makes the case for it even more clearly, with less being captured at the seller disclosure stage, searches are increasingly where the picture gets completed.

With less being asked of sellers upfront, it falls to structured due diligence to carry the weight of those missing disclosures. The TA6 has been streamlined, not the risks that sit behind it, and that distinction matters when you’re building a search pack that genuinely protects your buyer.

The OneSearch team can help you identify which searches fill the gaps for any transaction. Explore the full Five Minutes On… library here.

Change is coming to the way firms handle SDLT submissions, and while the full impact will vary from team to team, it’s something every conveyancer should have on their radar before May.

For most practices, SDLT has long been a familiar, end‑of‑transaction step: reliable, predictable, and rarely the part that causes delays. But with new expectations on the horizon, firms may soon find that this once‑simple stage needs a closer look.

We’re not here to overwhelm you with detail. Instead, we’ve created a short downloadable guide, which highlights what’s shifting, why it matters for day‑to‑day workflows, and how conveyancers can stay ahead without adding pressure to an already busy post‑completion process.

If your day to day tasks include SDLT in any way, now’s a good moment to take stock. Grab our guide for all the details.