29.01.2013 Views

OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND - The Journal Online

OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND - The Journal Online

OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND - The Journal Online

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Write to:<br />

<strong>The</strong> Editor,<br />

<strong>The</strong> <strong>Journal</strong>,<br />

Studio 2001, Mile End, Paisley PA1 1JS<br />

Fax on: 0141 561 0400<br />

E-mail: journal@connectcommunications.co.uk<br />

CML should<br />

embrace IT<br />

<strong>Journal</strong><br />

LETTERS LETTERS LETTERS LETTERS LETTERS LETTERS LETTERS LETTERS LET-<br />

INNIS: Retirement Housing Advice Service<br />

I<br />

AM writing to tell members of the Law Society about the work that INNIS does and to raise awareness of some of the difficulties which<br />

owners of retirement housing experience. Solicitors play a vital role in advising their clients when the purchase of a retirement flat is being<br />

considered. Retirement housing, sometimes known as owner occupied sheltered housing, has become a small but significant part of the property<br />

market. Older people who decide to buy this type of housing hope that it will be a home for the rest of their lives. <strong>The</strong>ir expectations are<br />

that it will offer a level of security and improved quality of life in retirement. Unfortunately for some, their experiences have not<br />

matched their expectations leading to disillusionment, frustration, anger and in some cases lengthy legal proceedings.<br />

INNIS is an advice service run by Age Concern<br />

Scotland providing information and advice to<br />

owners and prospective owners of retirement<br />

housing. It is not intended to replace legal advice<br />

given by solicitors. <strong>The</strong> service has been running<br />

for two years and deals with a wide range of<br />

issues from general enquiries made by potential<br />

purchasers about the location of developments<br />

to very complex problems relating to deed of<br />

conditions. Our work includes building good<br />

working relationships with the other professional<br />

bodies who are involved with retirement housing,<br />

including solicitors, estate agents, managing agents<br />

and the Scottish Executive. Our aim is to ensure<br />

that older people who choose retirement<br />

properties are given sound, impartial advice and<br />

COULD not the Council of<br />

Mortgage Lenders, rather than<br />

mess around making inane<br />

pronouncements on Property<br />

Enquiry Certificates, do<br />

something useful for Agents<br />

representing its members and<br />

produce a website or CR-ROM<br />

containing styles of all the known<br />

Standard Securities, Assignations<br />

and other documents used by<br />

lenders? This could be updated<br />

from the Internet on a monthly<br />

basis and would prove of great<br />

use to hard-pressed legal<br />

secretaries having to leave their<br />

state-of-the-art termini to revert<br />

to cranky old typewriters several<br />

times a week.<br />

Magnus K Moodie<br />

Magnus K Moodie WS, Edinburgh<br />

information before they buy and that they<br />

receive acceptable standards of service from the<br />

managing agent in their new home.<br />

It is clear that, for many of the owners who<br />

contact us, the source of the problem can be<br />

traced to the purchase of their property and a<br />

lack of understanding about the terms and<br />

conditions attached. Part of the work that INNIS<br />

does is to encourage potential purchasers to<br />

consider these issues and to ask the relevant<br />

questions before they make their final decision.<br />

For example, how are major repairs and<br />

replacements for which each owner has joint<br />

responsibility paid for? Is there a sinking fund?<br />

Will the sinking fund cover the cost of planned<br />

and unplanned maintenance or will owners have<br />

Fees frozen for access requests<br />

IN September’s <strong>Journal</strong><br />

you published a short article by<br />

Derek Hamilton under the heading<br />

“Access to Health Records - an<br />

update” in which Mr Hamilton was<br />

making the point that as from 24th<br />

October, in terms of the Data<br />

Protection (Subject Access) (Fees<br />

and Miscellaneous Provisions)<br />

Regulations 2000, the maximum fee<br />

chargeable for all access requests<br />

would be £10 whether the records<br />

were manual, automated or a mixture<br />

of both.<br />

<strong>The</strong> article, however, was slightly<br />

premature in that the Lord<br />

Chancellor`s Department which<br />

since June has been responsible for<br />

data protection and freedom of<br />

information matters within<br />

Government, issued the following<br />

Press Notice on 27 September -<br />

“<strong>The</strong> Government has announced<br />

that the charges levied by the NHS<br />

for providing individuals with access<br />

to their health records will continue<br />

at current levels for the time being.<br />

This means that the maximum fee<br />

that can be levied is £10 for records<br />

held on computer and £50 for<br />

paper records or other media.<br />

“Over the past year the<br />

Government has been working with<br />

key groups, including representatives<br />

from the NHS and patient interests,<br />

to evaluate the charges that are<br />

levied under the Data Protection<br />

Act 1998 for providing individuals<br />

with copies of their health records.<br />

“<strong>The</strong> issue has been to strike a balance<br />

between ensuring that cost is<br />

not a barrier to individuals requesting<br />

access to their health records<br />

and allowing the NHS to recoup<br />

costs incurred in servicing requests,<br />

so that essential resources are not<br />

diverted from providing direct<br />

patient care.<br />

“This is a difficult balance to strike<br />

but a Department of Health led<br />

review of the current charges<br />

established that the present<br />

to be prepared to make additional payments to<br />

cover the cost? We believe that in most cases<br />

owners are willing to accept this additional<br />

financial liability much more readily if they know<br />

about it before they buy.<br />

We would like all members of the Society to be<br />

aware of these issues so that they can advise their<br />

clients accordingly. We have leaflets and other<br />

information which can be sent to members and<br />

their clients. We are happy to discuss any aspect<br />

of our work and can be contacted at INNIS<br />

Retirement Housing Advice Service, 113 Rose<br />

Street, Edinburgh EH2 3DT. Tel 0131 220 6347<br />

Fax 0131 220 2779.<br />

Euphan Todd<br />

arrangement provides an<br />

acceptable compromise given current<br />

technology and record keeping<br />

practice.<br />

“<strong>The</strong> Government is committed to<br />

continuing discussions with key<br />

interest groups and to working<br />

closely with the Information<br />

Commissioner with the aim of<br />

achieving a long term solution.”<br />

<strong>The</strong> £50 maximum fee under the<br />

Regulations, therefore, remains for<br />

the time being.<br />

Mr Hamilton also refers to the qualification<br />

in s.8 of the Act - I would suggest<br />

that given the volume and nature<br />

of many types of medical records it<br />

should be relatively straightforward<br />

for a Medical Records Officer to<br />

show, in appropriate cases, that<br />

supplying copies requires “disproportionate<br />

effort.”<br />

Alan Sharp,<br />

Scottish Health Service CLO

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!