conveyancing solicitor local to house or local to buyer?

[traviata]

A family member is relocating 5 hours away, within England. She doesn't want to use an online firm. Is she better using a solicitor with local knowledge of the area where she is moving to, or one whose office she can pop into for signing documents and so on?

Definitely local to house - there can be all kinds of quirky things that are more likely to be an issue in a particular area which a solicitor not familiar with an area just might not think of. It's a pain dealing through the long distance (though most things can be couriered) but you will get a better result.

For me it didn't matter, my solicitor was hundreds of miles away and they dealt with everything efficiently, obviously they weren't able to visit the house but it didn't seem to slow anything down.

thanks for replies, any other POVs?

I would go with local to me as the buyer. I think surveyor is more likely to pick up on local quirks than solicitors TBH, and other things will come up in local searches (i.e. a specific area might be known for unstable soil so there is risk of movement to houses).

That said, I only visited the office once to sign contract and mortgage papers so it doesn't have to be local to the buyer.

thanks msfreud.

I don't think it matters. It is the surveyor that needs to be local.

I did both my transactions with a solicitor 200 miles away. The high-street ones at both ends wanted stupid money, and turned out to be pig-slow and inefficient (the buyer/seller used them).

I agree about not using a super-cheap conveyancing shop, but my remote solicitor was excellent. Get quotes from reallymoving.com, or PM for a recommendation.

Last time I moved house, my solicitor was in the old town 350 miles away from the new one and it all went OK.

I always go with one local to me, because then I can drop stuff in rather than posting.