An Open Letter to Lenders from Mason Thomas Law
Why the bridging loan sector must recognise CLC-regulated law firms to remove unnecessary delays in commercial property transactions
The UK bridging loan sector must modernise its approach to property law representation.
At a time when speed, specialist expertise and commercial agility are critical, many lenders continue to restrict legal representation to firms regulated solely by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), excluding firms regulated by the Council for Licensed Conveyancers (CLC).
Lenders should immediately review panel requirements that exclude specialist CLC-regulated firms and recognise the commercial reality of today’s property market: expertise, speed and sector knowledge matter far more than outdated assumptions about regulation.
Continuing to restrict borrower choice to SRA-regulated firms alone is no longer commercially justified. It creates delay, increases transaction risk and restricts access to some of the country’s most experienced specialist property lawyers.
The UK property market cannot afford unnecessary friction.
The CLC is not a secondary regulator. It is the specialist regulator for property law, conveyancing and secured lending. Unlike the SRA, which regulates the legal profession across multiple disciplines, the CLC exists specifically to oversee firms operating within complex property transactions. That specialism should give property lenders greater confidence, not less.
The UK commercial property sector is already operating under significant pressure. Higher borrowing and construction costs, post-pandemic shifts in occupier behaviour and the continued impact of hybrid working have all affected investment and development activity. Rising interest rates since 2022 have further damaged asset values, refinancing viability and investor confidence.
Although market sentiment has started to stabilise, recovery remains fragile. Commercial property continues to underpin business investment, employment, logistics, manufacturing and pension fund performance across the wider UK economy.
Against that backdrop, lenders should be removing friction from transactions, not creating it.
Modern property transactions are increasingly specialist in nature. Bridging finance, development finance, portfolio acquisitions, auction purchases and complex secured lending arrangements require lawyers with focused technical expertise, commercial awareness and the ability to move quickly under pressure.
Insisting on SRA-regulated firms, regardless of whether they possess genuine secured lending experience, creates avoidable delays, increases pressure on borrowers and brokers, and slows the movement of capital through the property market. Non-specialist firms can encounter issues outside their day-to-day experience, particularly in time-sensitive bridging and secured lending transactions where responsiveness and technical understanding are essential.
At Mason Thomas Law, secured lending and commercial property are not side departments. They are core specialisms.
Our team acts nationally on complex bridging finance and secured lending matters, combining technical legal expertise with commercial understanding and fast decision-making. That expertise has been recognised repeatedly by the Sheffield & District Law Society, which has named Mason Thomas Law the Best Commercial Property Law Firm for the last three consecutive years.
Our regulation under the CLC reflects that specialism.
The CLC operates under the same statutory framework established by the Legal Services Act 2007 and was created through the Administration of Justice Act 1985 specifically to modernise and improve access to specialist conveyancing services.
Importantly, the lower professional indemnity insurance premiums often associated with CLC-regulated firms are not evidence of lower standards. They reflect the lower risk profile of firms operating within tightly regulated specialist areas of law.
The legal sector has evolved. The property market has evolved. Lending practices must evolve too.
Lenders should assess firms on expertise, responsiveness, track record and regulatory compliance, not outdated assumptions about which regulator oversees them.
The bridging finance sector now faces a clear choice: continue operating under legacy assumptions that slow transactions and restrict specialist expertise or modernise panel requirements to reflect the realities of today’s property market.
The recovery of the commercial property sector depends on speed, confidence and the free movement of capital. That recovery will continue to be constrained while lenders fail to recognise the capability and credibility of specialist CLC-regulated firms.
It is time for the lending sector to move with the modern property market.
We are calling on the UK bridging finance sector to properly recognise the value of specialist property lawyers regulated by the CLC.
Mason Thomas Law