Can Buyer and Seller Use Same Solicitor?

At Lillian Purge, we specialise in SEO for Solicitors and when people begin the process of buying or selling a home one of the first questions I often see on search result data is whether both parties can use the same solicitor. At first glance it seems like a simple and convenient idea. In my opinion many people like the thought of saving time, reducing paperwork and perhaps cutting down on legal fees. However the reality is more complex because the legal system is built on protecting both sides fairly which means the rules around shared representation are strict for good reason.

In this article I want to walk through the full picture of whether a buyer and seller can use the same solicitor, what the law firms themselves must consider and why the rules exist. I will share what I believe are the key risks, the rare scenarios where it might be possible and the reasons most solicitors will not allow it. My aim is to give a clear, honest and straightforward explanation so anyone involved in a property transaction can understand how the rules protect them.

Why People Think About Using the Same Solicitor

Before looking at the rules I think it helps to understand why the question comes up so often. Moving home is stressful. People want the process to go smoothly and anything that sounds simple can feel appealing.

From what I have seen people consider using the same solicitor because:

• they think it will speed up communication

• they hope it might reduce costs

• they believe it will make the process more relaxed

• they already trust the solicitor

• they assume both sides want the same outcome

I completely understand the appeal. When both sides want to complete quickly it feels logical that using one solicitor could streamline the journey. However the legal system requires solicitors to avoid conflicts of interest which is why the rules are strict.

Why a Conflict of Interest Exists

In my opinion the most important point is this. The buyer and seller have opposite needs. One side wants to protect themselves from hidden issues or unfair contract terms. The other side wants to complete the sale without being slowed down, questioned or exposed to unnecessary risk. Because their goals differ a solicitor cannot fairly represent both sides without compromising someone’s interests.

I believe it comes down to this simple truth. A solicitor owes a duty of loyalty to their client. If they have two clients with opposing interests they cannot meet that duty to each one. Even when both parties are friendly the solicitor still has a legal and ethical obligation to remain fully independent.

What the Solicitors Regulation Authority Says

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has strict rules around conflicts of interest. I am not quoting text here but the core principle is clear. A solicitor must not act for two clients whose interests conflict or may conflict. The only exception is when the situation meets specific criteria and both clients give informed consent.

In property transactions the SRA almost always views buyer and seller interests as conflicting. For this reason most law firms refuse the arrangement immediately.

Based on what I have seen the SRA rules mean:

• a solicitor must be independent

• they must not favour one client over another

• they must give advice that is in the client’s best interest

• if advice to one client harms the other they cannot act

Because these rules exist to protect both sides solicitors usually avoid taking on joint representation for property sales.

Why Conveyancing Creates Natural Conflicts

Conveyancing may appear simple but it involves many points where the buyer and seller need different advice. This is where conflict becomes unavoidable.

Here are some areas where separate legal support is critical.

Contract terms

The buyer wants clauses that protect them from risk. The seller wants clauses that protect them from liability. A solicitor cannot negotiate both sides fairly.

Property enquiries

The buyer needs full disclosure. The seller wants to limit the number of enquiries. One solicitor cannot push and limit at the same time.

Search results

If searches reveal issues, the buyer may want to renegotiate or pull out. The seller may want the solicitor to downplay the concern. One solicitor cannot do both.

Completion dates

The buyer might need flexibility for mortgage schedules. The seller might want a quick completion. A joint solicitor cannot advise both without bias.

Deposit handling

Advice about deposit protection and risks differs for both sides.

In my opinion these natural conflicts make joint representation impractical for almost every property transaction.

Are There Any Situations Where the Same Solicitor Can Act?

This is where things become more nuanced. Although rare there are a few scenarios where a solicitor might act for both parties but strict conditions apply. Based on what I have seen these situations are exceptions rather than the rule.

Scenario 1: Transfer of equity within a family

For example a parent transferring part of their property to an adult child. The solicitor must believe both parties are aligned and fully understand the implications.

Scenario 2: Remortgage with a transfer

Some mortgage lenders allow the same solicitor to act when a share of equity is transferred during refinancing.

Scenario 3: Sales between close family members with no negotiation

Even then many firms will insist each party receives independent advice because family pressure or financial imbalance can create risk.

Scenario 4: When a lender insists on separate representation

Sometimes lenders require both borrower and seller to have different solicitors.

In my opinion even these situations require careful evaluation because conflicts can arise easily.

Why Many Law Firms Refuse Even When It Seems Safe

Even when the SRA rules technically allow joint representation, many law firms still decline. I genuinely believe this is because the risks outweigh the benefits.

A solicitor could face:

• regulatory complaints

• professional negligence claims

• accusations of favouritism

• disputes if the relationship between parties breaks down

• pressure to act against the interest of one side

In my opinion it is always safer for both the solicitor and the clients when everyone has their own independent legal representative.

Why Independent Legal Advice Protects Everyone

Some people think using two solicitors causes unnecessary costs. I do not believe that is true. Often the issues that arise when both sides try to share a solicitor lead to far greater delays, confusion or legal risk.

Independent representation gives each party:

• their own advocate

• their own advice

• their own protection

• their own negotiation strength

The buyer can question issues without worrying about upsetting the seller. The seller can push for the outcome they want without feeling pressured to compromise unfairly.

This independence is what keeps the transaction fair, balanced and legally safe.

Why Lenders Almost Always Require Separate Solicitors

Mortgage lenders have their own requirements. From what I have seen most mortgage lenders insist that the borrower has their own solicitor. They want to ensure the buyer’s interests are fully protected because the lender is relying on the solicitor’s advice as well.

This means even if the buyer and seller wanted to share a solicitor the lender could prevent it.

What Happens If a Solicitor Agrees to Act for Both?

Although rare I think it helps to explain the strict process a solicitor must follow if they ever consider acting for both sides.

They must:

• assess whether the situation genuinely has no conflict

• obtain written consent from both parties

• fully explain the risks

• confirm that no negotiation is required

• keep both parties informed equally

• stop acting immediately if conflict develops

In reality once the solicitor begins reviewing documents a conflict almost always appears which forces them to withdraw. This can delay the entire transaction.

Why Using Separate Solicitors Speeds Up the Process

Some people think using one solicitor will speed things up. I actually believe the opposite is true. Two solicitors working independently usually progress faster because:

• all enquiries are handled clearly

• each side can negotiate freely

• conflicts are avoided

• documents can be corrected quickly

• communication is more direct

One solicitor trying to manage two opposing clients often becomes slower because they must remain cautious to avoid conflict.

What Buyers Should Know

If you are a buyer I believe the most important thing is having a solicitor who defends your interests fully. Your solicitor should:

• check the contract carefully

• raise necessary enquiries

• review search results in detail

• explain the risks clearly

• ensure the seller gives complete information

This is impossible if the same solicitor is trying to protect the seller as well.

What Sellers Should Know

If you are a seller your solicitor protects you by:

• reviewing enquiries

• limiting unnecessary requests

• ensuring you do not make unsafe promises

• managing the contract wording

• advising you on disclosure obligations

Again this cannot be done if the solicitor is trying to support the buyer at the same time.

Why Dual Representation Can Lead to Disputes

Based on what I have seen, shared representation often leads to misunderstandings such as:

• one party feeling the solicitor favoured the other

• delays because the solicitor cannot give clear advice

• pressure for one side to compromise

• confusion about what has been agreed

These disputes can become stressful and expensive which is why the law discourages the arrangement.

Why Ethical Rules Are Designed to Protect You

Sometimes clients feel frustrated when solicitors refuse to act for both buyer and seller but these rules exist to safeguard fairness.

I believe the ethical framework protects you by ensuring:

• you receive independent advice

• no pressure is placed on you

• you understand your rights

• you are not disadvantaged

• the solicitor is free to act fully on your behalf

This is important in any legal transaction but especially in property where mistakes can be costly.

What If Both Parties Insist on Using the Same Solicitor?

Even if both sides insist many law firms will simply refuse. In my opinion this is the safest approach.

If both sides still want a simplified process there are safer alternatives such as:

• choosing solicitors who communicate well

• ensuring both firms exchange documents quickly

• agreeing realistic timelines

• using digital signatures

• keeping communication friendly

These steps achieve the same feeling of ease without creating legal complications.

Why It Is Normal for Buyer and Seller to Have Separate Solicitors

Some people worry that using separate solicitors might create tension. In my experience this fear is unnecessary. It is standard practice in the UK and almost every transaction works this way.

Separate solicitors do not create conflict. They prevent it by keeping the process fair.

My Final Thoughts on Whether Buyer and Seller Can Use the Same Solicitor

When I look at everything involved in a property transaction I believe the safest and most sensible approach is for the buyer and seller to have separate solicitors. The rules exist for a reason. They protect both sides from conflict, confusion and unfair pressure. Even when both parties get on or want a quick sale the legal and ethical responsibilities make shared representation almost impossible.

In my opinion independent legal advice is always the best choice. It ensures both the buyer and seller can proceed confidently with clear guidance tailored to their own interests. This leads to a smoother, safer and more predictable experience for everyone involved.

We have also written articles on whether you can respond to a solicitor letter yourself and whether solicitors charge for emails. All articles are available in our solicitors hub.