Kirstie Allsopp you should be ashamed of yourself

The 'C' rated TV celebrity, Kirstie Allsopp, and the Yorkshire Wheeltapper and Shunters would be front man MP Eric Pickles could not resist the opportunity last week to gloat at the massive job loss, financial ruin and general misery inflicted by the government’s decision to suspend the HIP regulations.

A cheap PR stunt and one which Grant Shapps the Minister of Housing had held in the run up to the election. The only difference this time was that we were looking at the announcement of government policy.

Why wheel out Kirstie Allsopp? What has she achieved in her short TV life time to improve our ailing home buying process? Did I miss something; was she recently elected as an MP? She should be ashamed of herself getting involved in party style celebrations surrounding the wholly unnecessary demise of a well established industry employing over 3000 people.

What makes this even more difficult is the fact that it was not too long ago that Miss Allsopp was proclaiming the very same benefits that were actually being delivered by the HIP. She professes to be a housing expert but when it comes down to it she is nothing other than a hired gun. Let's wheel out Kirstie she will make the delivery of a decision which we know will destroy people’s life more palatable to the public. Sorry Kirstie you have been used and your integrity must as a result be damaged.

I wonder if Mr pickles, who was clearly out to make a name for himself (as up to then he has was always the drummer if the band), told Kirstie when she was hired the real truth. Did he tell her that his colleague Grant Shapps had made a written commitment to the HIP industry that he would consult before taking any action to suspend? A promise which he has broken.

The word of a MP is never a reliable one, but in a government which purports to be based on the principle of fairness one just has to wonder what lies ahead for us all.

So what now? Not much really other than trying to pick up the pieces and getting on with life. Yes there will be a consideration of legal options, but at the end of the day one has to begin to accept that the industry was the victim of political spite and goal scoring. Not sure why anyone in the future will feel safe in investing time and money in any new government led venture.

One final message - let's get our party hats ready as I am sure future policy implementation for government will not be this easy! What goes around comes around!

For those interested in joining the legal action group please contact David Jones at davidjones@m-j-p.co.uk.

Lib Dems proposals on HIPs and EPCs lack independent thought

Dare I say it, is there a possibility of the Country waking up on Friday of next week to a Lib Dem Government? Unlikely but there is no escape from the probability that the Lib Dens will feature in some shape or from within the next administration. So where does that leave the HIP industry and how do the Lib Dems view the HIP and EPC?

Up until the publication of the Party’s manifesto, it was understood at quiet high levels that the Party had not formed a view either way on whether the HIP should be retained. The inclusion of a pledge to scrap the HIP within the manifesto therefore emerged as a surprise to many of us, including it is interesting to note, a high number of Lib Dem candidates.

The question of whether this unexpected pledge is down to well thought through and generally supported policy, or an over jealous central office official, has yet to be answered. What we do know however is that the future of the HIP is likely to be well down the list of priorities if as likely, we are left with a ‘balanced’ parliament.

In a letter passed to me recently written by a Lib Dem candidate we do find some further clues on the Lib Dem way of thinking on energy. Unfortunately the author of the letter in the opening passage makes only a passing mention to HIPs commenting that they ‘play no useful role in the housing market…’ Not much there to assist but the letter does provide a quite useful insight into the Lib Dems plans for the EPC.

The good news, though given the European requirement it should come as no surprise, is the Lib Dems will retain the EPC and will require it to be produced ‘during the conveyancing process’. Not quiet sure what this means, though I suspect the requirement will be for the EPC to be produced prior to exchange of contracts.

Other measures mentioned in the letter which uncannily mirror some of the Tory proposals include the availability of low cost loans to bring empty and run down property back into the social housing arena, a national programme to insulate more homes, as well as a loan scheme similar to the Conservatives’ Refit proposal providing house owners with loans repayable over 25 years.

There are other measures mentioned though there is little on substance as regard compliance. Moreover, there is bad news for the Home Inspector with the Lib Dems apparently having no plans to reintroduce the Home Condition Report. The author does not ‘…believe that they would be viewed as a credible source of information by homebuyers particularly given the confused way in which HIPs were introduced by the Government’.

This all in my views smacks of plagiarism, as much of what is contained within this letter seems to reflect Conservative policy. It’s a shame a party that prides itself on independent thinking has had to rely on the thoughts of others, mainly it would seem at the expense of job loss and disruption within an industry that has over the past 6 months finally found its footing.

The letter in full

‘Thank you for contacting me about Home Information Packs (HIPs) and Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs). We do not believe that HIPs play a useful role in the housing market with the exception of Energy Performance Certificates. We will therefore retain EPCs which we believe to be useful, simple and essential in helping reduce the 27% of the UK’s carbon emissions, which come from our homes. We will require an EPC to be produced during the conveyancing process and we believe that this requirement will ensure full compliance with the requirement to produce an EPC. As well as our own committment to EPCs, the requirement to produce an EPC every time a house is bought, rented or sold is also mandated under EU law. You should therefore feel confident that the market for EPCs will continue.

Liberal Democrats have a number of proposals to improve the energy efficiency of UK homes:

• We will bring 250,000 empty homes back into use with cheap loans and grants through a £1bn Social Homes Fund that will provide grants for properties brought back into use as social housing and a £200 million Private Housing Fund that will provide low-cost loans to bring empty properties back into use in the the private sector.
• We will begin a national programme to insulate more homes paid for by the savings from lower energy bills and make sure every new home is fully energy efficient by improving building regulations.
• We will support homeowners to create warm and environmentally-friendly homes by setting up a privately funded scheme which will enable the costs of energy efficiency measures to be repaid over a period of up to 25 years. Eligible homes could be retro-fitted with home improvements costing up to £10,000 per home such as loft, wall and floor insulation, as well as energy efficient lighting, heating, windows, and doors.
• We will also launch an ‘eco-cashback’ scheme during our first year in government to give people £400 towards energy efficient home improvements and small energy generation projects. People will be able to apply for the cash to help pay for double glazing, boiler upgrades and micro generation such as solar panels, and domestic wind turbines.
• We will reduce the cost of repairs and improvements by equalising the rate of VAT on new build and repair on an overall revenue-neutral basis.

With respect to improving compliance with EPRs, I understand that non-compliance principally arises in the commercial sector. I support efforts to ensure greater awareness of the requirements and also encourage Trading Standards to ensure that appropriate enforcement action is taken. The law requiring EPCs for commercial properties has been in place since April 2008 and it is unacceptable that compliance falls well short of universal levels, two years after implementation.

On your final point with respect to Home Condition Survey, I do not support the mandatory introduction of these as I do not believe that they would be viewed as a credible source of information by homebuyers particularly given the confused way in whcih HIPs were introduced by the Government.

I hope that you fine the information above useful and that you are reassured of the Liberal Democrats' commitment to EPCs.

Letter gives clue to Conservative thinking on HIPs and EPCs

The Conservative Party is still determined to abolish the Home Information Pack but according to a recent letter received from a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate it will be the Party’s intention to ‘....introduce innovative ways to help home buyers, including speeding up the introduction of e-conveyancing and facilitating more competition in the local authority search market’.

In the same letter sent by an energy assessor in response to concern expressed about the Party’s policy on the HIP and EPC, the PPC advised that the EPC would no longer be required before marketing, with the only condition being that the EPC has to be commissioned before that stage. The PPC put this possible Party decision as following: ‘Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) would be retained, but they would last up to ten years and a home could be put on the market provided an EPC had been commissioned (rather than requiring an EPC to already be in place)’.

No cheer but at least we have a hint of the Party’s future steer on the HIP and the EPC. It’s a shame however that in the run up the election we still do not know for certain when the HIP would go if the Conservatives gain power and whether they would look to keep the HIP in place until the ‘innovative ways to help home buyers’ are put into place. It would also be good to hear whether there are plans to avoid the domestic EPC market turning into the same mess with compliance as witnessed in the commercial sector.

The truth is nobody can make any serious business plans until the election is over, and a clearer picture of the governing party or parties’ policy on matters affecting our industry emerges.

Full Letter:

We will abolish Home Information Packs. However, we will seek to introduce innovative ways to help home buyers, including speeding up the introduction of e-conveyancing and facilitating more competition in the local authority search market). Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) would be retained, but they would last up to ten years and a home could be put on the market provided an EPC had been commissioned (rather than requiring an EPC to already be in place).

EPCs would also support our Green Deal. This will give every household in Britain the right to have home energy efficiency improvements worth up to £6,500. The upfront costs will be privately financed by banks and investment funds; and repaid over a period of up to 25 years through the savings on energy bills. A typical home could see around £20 a month knocked off its bill.

In business, I believe change brings opportunity. You are already well position in the EPC market, and I would hope that the other policies in this field could be areas of expansion for your business.

Property Experts overwhelmingly come out in support of the HIP

It has been so easy for Grant Shapps and the other opponents( who seem to be diminishing in numbers) of Home Information Packs to use ‘self interest’ as a weapon whenever a supporter dares to step forward with evidence and intellectual argument on why the HIP should be retained. Indeed this week saw the continuation of an argument started last week when Mr Shapps took it upon himself to challenge, on this very basis, the integrity of a poll commissioned by AHIPP and carried out by IPSOS MORI.

Mr Shapps seems however, based on news emerging yesterday, to be boxing him into a corner with this policy. In a vote of around 100 industry leaders, at The Land Data Great Housing Debate held in Westminster, only four members of the audience voted to scrap HIPs while the majority supported the motion to adapt but not scrap them.

One of those experts, David Newnes, managing director of leading estate agency chain, Your Move, said HIPs had helped stem transaction fall-throughs this year and last, with the rate of exchanges significantly improving from around 33% each month to around 42%.

This is good news for those like the Hip Reform Group who have been tirelessly campaigning over the past 12 months for the HIP to be retained and for discussion to take place on how the HIP can be improved for the benefit of the consumer.

Hopefully the strength of support shown by such a large body of property professionals will at long last begin to register on Mr Shapps’ radar.

Conservative HIP replacement, HIP opponent 'U' turn and the Lib Dems - what a week!

A crazy week when we saw the LibDems produce their manifesto with unexpected news of their desire to end the HIP and then soar to second place in the polls. Clearly no connection between the two, though it is a shame they saw fit to jump onto a so called populist policy when it was clear from the performance of their under rated leader, Nick Clegg, that there was no need to resort to such desperate measures.

The fact the LibDems offer something new with some independent thinking, well at least on the surface, is what makes their party an attractive option to the two main forces which are still clearly tainted by expense abuse and accusations of being too much alike. They clearly did not need to throw into a well presented manifesto a pledge that countered all signals previously given, and which was clearly not representative of the views of their membership as a whole.

It was quite ironic in one sense as the news came at the same time as an announcement within an article within the Daily Mail ( 16th April ) that contained two items of reporting that disclosed some hope for the HIP industry.

The first was news that the Conservative Party has apparently appointed property guru Kirstie Allsopp to investigate and report on a possible replacement for the HIP. The other and perhaps more significant development is news that one of the most vocal of opponents to HIPs, estate agents Douglas and Gordon, has come out and said it has changed its view now saying the HIP should remain in place as it is, surprise, surprise, helping to speed up the selling process.

Should we trust politicians who twitter and jump on populist bandwagons

I read today a record of an interview between Channel 4 and Grant Shapps conducted on Twitter. It was rather bizarre to see a senior politician responding to questions in what often appeared as ‘text speech’.

I suppose Mr. Shapps who carries odds of 40/1 to become the next leader of the Conservative Party, considers this to be a cool method of communicating that demonstrates his connection with modern lines of communication and which he hopes will make him more attractive to the younger generation.

The fact that his Welwyn Hatfield constituency is heavily populated with students may also have a bearing on his obsession with social networking tools of this type.

Unfortunately looking at his answers its seems Mr. Shapps was more interested in demonstrating his twitter shorthand than providing meaningful responses. In one response, which was of particular interest to me, he talked about making the stamp duty concession recently introduced by Government permanent, and about abolishing the HIP, surprisingly adding that by doing this it is his hope it will help to kick start the property market.

I can only imagine that Mr. Shapps has been so wrapped up in election campaigning, and no doubt practicing his twitter skills, that he has not seen any of the recent articles in which there have been reports from various independent sources on how market activity has returned to levels last seen before the introduction of the HIP.

Even the most ardent opponent of the HIP would find it difficult to argue otherwise; it’s a shame that a politician who could be our next housing minister is so out of touch.

Should I be surprised? Clearly not, particularly in a week when we see the LibDems jumping on the populist bandwagon by adding to its manifesto the statement of intent to abolish the HIP. Where did that come from? There was no discussion about this at their last party conference and I know for a fact that a large number of their own members were equally surprised.

No wonder there are so many of us who are, despite efforts to understand politics and a desire to place trust, left feeling deflated and very confused. So much so, it is easy to see why a large proportion of the electorate will simply not vote.

Politicians are driven by the desire for power and will do and say whatever they consider necessary to ensure they get their way. As demonstrated by Mr. Shapps obsession with Twitter, this election seems to be more about presentation and sound bites, and less about listening and responding to the concerns of the electorate. Perhaps the time has come for us to make a stand and to engineer through tactical voting a hung parliament. This may be the only means of getting the political parties to listen to what we have to say.

Fall in polls relights Grant Shapps love for HIPs

A fall in the polls was bound to be the trigger for Grant Shapps to renew his attack on the beleaguered HIP. This time we have him picking up on the results of an IPSOS MORI poll commissioned by AHIPP. In his attack which can be found HERE he picks up on the methodology and accuses AHIPP of manipulating the result by contacting people who had been engaged in the home selling process and ignoring those who had not! Not sure how he can expect a poll on home selling can be carried out without consulting with those who had not had recent experience in the process.

The statement is also misleading as it says 15% of those polled said they were deterred from selling their home. Clearly Mr Shapps (or as is more likely his researchers) have not studied the results closely as although they show that 15% were put off by the cost of the HIP, the fact is that 15% still went ahead and marketed their property!

This nonsense also comes at a time when many property professionals including estate agents Douglas and Gordon, known past contributors to the Conservative Party, have come out to say they now see the HIP in a different light and as a stage in the process which is actually helping to speed up the sale of property. The rebuttal also has no support when one looks at the latest market statistics showing property listings are now back to where they were before the HIP was introduced.

This all suggests Grant Shapps is struggling to keep up with the views of those very people he could find himself working with in the future, as well as current market trends. This does not bode well when he and his Party are asking us to vote Conservative and in so doing elevate him to the post of Housing Minister.

This outburst also smacks of hypocrisy. It was not too long ago that Grant Shapps was spearheading a campaign to find ways to improve the sale process and was actually instrumental in commissioning what was labelled as the ‘Home Buyers Review’ SEE HERE . Concerned about the time it was taking to sell property Grant Shapps put together a group of experts to examine and report back on how the process could be improved. Surprise, surprise the survey was carried out but the results have never been released. Why? Well I am sure I can leave you to draw your own conclusions.

We should all be calling upon Mr Shapps to publish the results of his report rather than attack the results of a report that was commissioned by an independent and well respected survey body. We should also respond to Grant Shapps on Twitter as this was how he launched his recent attack on the HIP. Find him HERE:

What would a hung parliament mean for the future of the HIP industry?

Opinion polls are producing further evidence that more people would prefer a hung parliament to an outright victory for either Labour or the Conservatives. Perhaps not surprising when one considers the uproar in response to the expense scandal and the lack of clarity on how the main parties intend to address the deficit problem. For many of us a hung parliament is very much an unknown entity and for those working in the HIP industry it is unclear what a hung parliament will mean when one looks at the future of the HIP.

So what is a hung parliament? In short this is the description for the situation when after an election no political party has an overall majority in the UK House of Commons. The most recent elected hung parliament in the United Kingdom was that which followed the February 1974 general election, which lasted until the October election that year. Before that the last had been following the election of 1929. Hung parliaments can also arise when slim government majorities are eroded by by-election defeats and defection of Members of Parliament to opposition parties. This happened in 1996 to the Conservative government of John Major (1990–97) and in 1978 to the Labour government of James Callaghan (1976–79).

What does this mean for the HIP industry? ‘Not sure’ is perhaps the best response as it all depends on what would happen if as is likely the Conservative Party fails to secure a sufficient swing in the vote to secure a ‘working’ majority. It is most unlikely in my opinion given the diverse political ideologies that exist. for there to be a coalition between the Conservatives and the LibDems. It is more likely to involve Labour and if this were to happen given the neutral stance (despite the surprising manefesto pledge to 'scrap') adopted by the LibDems on HIPs, it would probably mean the HIP would be safe. Even in the unlikely event of a Conservative/LibDems pact I do not see the HIP ranking high enough in the list of issues to be an immediate target for action.

So in conclusion a hung parliament would not present a bad result for the HIP industry and on the contrary it may be what is needed to ensure those who have hitherto refused point blank to listen to reason and begin engaging in constructive discussion on how best to reform our out-dated home buying process.

As for the Country as a whole, looking at the last hung parliament that of Jim Callaghan, from 1976 to 1979, a period of very difficult global circumstances – high oil prices and domestic economic chaos – it wasn't in general terms a bad government.

Conservative Party's Policy on home information packs poses threat to first time buyers

Great news about the stamp duty, and though there will always be those who are never pleased, surely the industry as a whole must take time to acknowledge this move as a welcomed measure and one that will clearly benefit the first time buyer.


Leaving to one side the politics of the decision, it is clear the Government is keen to do all it can to maintain the improvement seen within the property market.


Now help has been given to the first time buyer, and as this will make it cheaper for the first time buyer to move, we must all do all we can to ensure Grant Shapps is not allowed to undo all of this good work by proceeding with his illogical policy of scrapping home information packs.


By doing so the money the first time buyer saves on stamp duty would clearly be lost or at least diminished by the added cost the first time buyer would face in having to pay for property searches. As we know the first time buyer saves on this cost, as the searches are included in the HIP.


The removal of the HIP would also see an immediate rise in the legal cost of moving home with certain personal search companies itching to put prices up the moment the HIP goes. Buyers including first time buyers could see legal cost increasing by at least £100 in some areas.


Now the first time buyer has an actual and tangible incentive to proceed let us not allow the political misguidance of the Conservative Party to cause damage to a fragile but fast improving property market.

Upturn in property market questions validity of Grant Shapps' policy on HIPs

For the past year or so Grant Shapps and the other anti-HIP lobbyists have continually banged on about how the home information pack should go because it is deterring homeowners from placing their property on the market. Grant Shapps claims the £199 pr so presently charged by many for a HIP is causing homeowners to think twice and has as a consequence caused the housing market to stall.


Indeed, it was only a couple of days ago that the National Association of Estate Agents was calling for a suspension of the HIP because it was not helping first time buyers. All very bizarre when the first time buyer pays nothing for the benefits of the HIP.


Those who support the HIP have never understood the logic behind this argument and have for sometime now looked upon this rhetoric as nothing other than unfounded and often inexplicable political sound bites.


Claims that the property market was being brought to its knees by the humble HIP have always been viewed by rational property professionals as ridiculous in the extreme, and with news breaking this week of the property market returning to normal, it is hard to see where this will leave the credibility of those who have consistently voiced such nonsense.


According to housing intelligence group Hometrack, Estate agents in England and Wales reported a 5.6% jump in the number of properties they had on their books during March,


The group said the supply of homes on the market had already jumped by 10.2% during the first two months of the year, compared with a rise of only 7% during the whole of 2009.


Richard Donnell, Hometrack's director of research, said: "Talk of improved market conditions and prices returning to near peak levels in some markets is encouraging a growing number of households to sell their properties. Many registered buyers are also sellers, and as they gain the confidence to move, so they need to put their homes on the market. Overall, it seems that we are moving from a sellers' market back towards something more akin to normal market conditions."


Hopefully evidence of this that is devoid of self interest bias will mark an immediate end to the calls for the HIP to be ‘scrapped’ and will serve to vindicate a beleaguered industry of well intentioned property professionals.

Does the National Association of Esate Agents truly care about the first time buyer?

The National Association of Estate Agents (NAEA) called upon the Government today to take measures in tomorrow’s budget to help first time buyers get a step onto the housing ladder. On the face of it a good call as we would all like to see help given to the first time buyer. However the measures suggested highlight an alarming lack of understanding of the basic and fundamental mechanics of home buying. The statement issued also raises the question of whether the view of the NAEA is fully representative of that of the majority of its members.


Reduction in the stamp duty threshold, and the introduction of a home buyer credit scheme similar to the one introduced in the US, are as one would expect the headline statements of this annual and very predictable press release. Peter Bolton King, chief executive of the National Association of Estate Agents, enlightens us with the statement:


“First-time buyers are central to a properly functioning housing market so it makes good economic, social and political for Mr Darling to consider a one-off stimulus for first-time buyers, similar to the incentive scheme in the United States'


Nothing startling here, though the statement goes on and calls for home information packs to be suspended? Why I ask, when the HIP, as Mr Bolton King knows full well, or should know given his position, actually benefits the first time buyer, and better still, costs the first time buyer absolutely nothing! In fact the first time buyer by reason of the HIP pays less for the legal work involved in buying the property!


I also question whether those running the NAEA posses a clear mandate from their members on the issue of the HIP. There is a growing swell of support amongst agents for retaining the HIP, and as the NAEA has yet to poll its members on the HIP, the credibility of a policy statement of this type must be seriously questioned.


Moreover, it seems there is little communication between the so called ‘wise men’ heading the NAEA as it was not too long ago that the chairman of the NAEA was publically writing how good the HIP regulations were because they provide well needed consumer protection!!


It is clear from this inconsistency in approach, the lack of clear mandate, and the recklessness of not recognising the benefit of the HIP to the first time buyer, that the call by the NAEA to suspend HIPS can only be viewed with great suspicion. Perhaps this can only lead one to conclude that the statement asking for the HIP to be suspended is politically motivated.

Home Information Pack knocker changes strategy

The anti-hip brigade argues and has argued for sometime that the home information pack acts a bar that restricts the flow of property available for marketing.


I have never understood this argument. Nor have I ever seen any independent evidence to support this contention. In fact all anecdotal evidence would suggest otherwise. The majority of agents with whom I speak are happy with market conditions and are even happier that the customers marketing their property are serious about selling. This has saved cost on marketing and has generally I am told led to a far better return on marketing expenditure.


Deep down I consider most agents do not believe in this argument, and as previously reported believe the time has come to acknowledge the HIP is here to stay and to see what can be done to improve the HIP.


Indeed it was only yesterday that one of the most vocal of opponents Nick Salmon wrote that he is now looking for the reinstatement of first day marketing as he beginning to believe the HIP will be around in the future.


He is calling on agents to hedge their bets on the possible result of the general election by signing up to his campaign’s petition on the Number 10 Downing Street website. The petition seeks the restoration of ‘First Day Marketing’ and has already attracted over 1,400 signatures.


Knowing some agents view the HIP as an established and welcomed stream of revenue and I believe this will be shown to the case if as I understand the case to be, NAEA proceeds with a survey of its members.


I personally do not consider Grant Shapps and the Conservative Party can continue to rely on the support of the majority of estate agents, and as I have questioned before, surely the time has now come for the Conservative Party not to make the same mistake it has with its planning policy, and to take immediate steps to begin listening to stakeholders and to modify its HIP policy accordingly.

The Negotiator reports - HIP standards satisfactory, claims Trading Standards

An article in the Negotiator reports that HIP standards are satisfactory, according to Trading Standards.

The article can be read below:

The majority of Home Information Packs are satisfactory in standard, according to a new survey by Trading Standards.

Some 70% (26) of the packs surveyed were rated satisfactory or reasonably satisfactory when measured against the HIP regulations in Birmingham City, where the survey was conducted. Across the 30% (11) of packs rated unsatisfactory, one of the the biggest criticisms was that buyers were left with no idea of who to contact if they have any cause for complaint over the content of the HIP.

The survey was conducted by Trading Standards in conjunction with the Property Codes Compliance Board, and aimed to identify if estate agents had HIPs in place for the properties they were marketing; were making packs available at the appropriate time; were ensuring packs contained all the required documents and were being provided in the format prescribed by the regulations; and whether the contents were accurate.

Some 40 HIPs were requested from as many agents across the city, and forwarded to the PCCB for inspection and checking. The most common faults included:



• no information on complaint / redress procedure



• no consumer information



• no company contact details



• technical Issues with the search



• HIP Index related issues



Chris Neville, head of Trading Standards at Birmingham City Council, says: “The exercise shows that the market is generally compliant, but buyers should be aware that not all HIPs can be taken at face value as being accurate.

"We will keep a watchful eye on the estate agent and HIP provider market, and we urge buyers to contact us if HIPs are not made available by estate agents at the time of marketing. To avoid any confusion over the accuracy of information provided in a HIP, we recommend that both buyers and estate agents should choose a HIP Code registered firm, as our survey has found these to be the most trustworthy”.

Link to article: http://www.negotiator-magazine.co.uk/article/hip-standards-satisfactory--claims-trading-standards-1214

Invite to Grant Shapps to 'think outside of the box' on HIP policy

One of the main flaws in the Conservative Party policy on home information packs is the complete absence of ‘forward thinking’ and a reluctance to engage in the art of ‘thinking outside of the box’.


Persistently highlighting the perceived negativity of the HIP is easy and perhaps explains the frequency of the anti-HIP sound bites. However the reluctance to back this up with credible explanation as to why it would not be better to retain and evolve, rather than to ‘scrap’, only serves in my mind to expose and highlight an underlying problem with Conservative Party policy generally.


Nobody likes change and the safe course for a party in opposition to navigate in the run up to a general election is to say as little as possible, and to focus instead on knocking and highlighting perceived flaws in Government policy. Is this however a convention that still applies and more importantly works when with the scandals surrounding MP expenses has led to a major and unprecedented change in the electorates’ expectations. They are fed up about hearing how bad the Government is doing and are far more interested in hearing detail of the policy the Conservative and other political parties propose to introduce in the hope of making things better. In not recognising and tuning into this vein of public feeling the Conservative Party after a good start is beginning to suffer the consequences. The polls are narrowing and the Conservative Party is struggling to recover the lead it enjoyed this time last year.


I am sure further policy detail will follow once the party manifesto is released but will this prove too late in the day to save the slide that is currently in progress.


The Conservative’s Party policy on the HIP is a good example of this lack of foresight. Grant Shapps has constantly proclaimed the HIP as representative of what is bad with this Country, namely that we have too much regulation, and that there is a need for this bureaucracy to be reduced. Strangely enough I agree, though to use the HIP as a ‘flag ship’ without considering and judging the HIP on its own merits and potential is on an intellectual plane inexplicable and is hardly consistent with a political party that prides itself in formulating ‘progressive policy’.


As with most areas of life people are less interested, and indeed turned off, as to why some area of the home selling and buying process is not working, and are far more stimulated in hearing about constructive thoughts and views on what can be done to bring about long overdue improvement. The reason for this is simple – it demonstrates knowledge and insight and more importantly inspires confidence. We are all desperate to have a Government that is progressive, that is looking to make positive changes for the good and is driven by creative thinking people.


So here are some friendly pointers for Grant Shapps in the hope he has the necessary courage the break the mould and to take a lead in demonstrating that not all Conservative MPs are insular in their thinking and vision for the future.


How about embracing the compulsion element of the HIP delivery and make positive use of the opportunity this provides, not only for speeding up the home buying and selling process, but for the distribution of consumer related public information.


At present the majority of sellers and buyers will encounter the HIP so why not make more use of the opportunity it presents for the targeted delivery of public information sheets on for example:


• Flood plains, on what services and grants are available to assist with plan prevention, and on available insurance schemes.


• Energy Improvement - how can a seller and buyer use the recommendation report tied in with the EPC to bring about carbon emission reducing improvements? What public funded schemes are available and how can these be accessed.


• The Conservative ‘Energy Refit’ Scheme – what better way of getting this policy delivered to its targeted audience than to include information and contact details within the HIP?


• Re-possession - Housing Minister John Healey said the government is putting an extra £2.5 million into support and advice services in 86 repossession ‘hot spot’ areas. Grant Shapps comments that the number of re-possessions for the year is up by 15 on 2009. Irrespective who is right here the fact is that most people would agree the more information that can be delivered up front on this issue the less stressful this whole experience could be for the many unfortunate householders.


Thinking outside the box is not difficult and by turning something that is perceived by some as ‘bad’ into a ‘good’ and consumer friendly product, takes far more skill and foresight and must without doubt court a far positive response to the quickly fading message of being a party ‘for change’.

Kirstie Allsopp, Grant Shapps advisor,expresses concern about long transaction time on property sales

How interesting it was to read in the latest edition of John Lewis’s ‘Edition’ that Kirstie Allsopp apparently advises Grant Shapps on housing issues. Even more revealing was the concern she has about the time it takes for a transaction to reach the stage of exchange of contacts, and how she feels that the process is need for reform.


In the article she says:


‘I am working with him [Grant Shapps] on how to make buying and selling a house easier. The time from offer to exchange has doubled in the last 20 years, which is ridiculous, given that we’ve got email, e-banking – everything that should make the process faster. The fact that it has become more difficult and time consuming makes me very angry’


Hopefully in her capacity as Grant Shapps advisor the property industry will be able to rely on Kirstie to support the moves being made by supporters of the home information pack to take the HIP and to evolve it into an ‘exchange ready’ product. Independent evidence has already shown that by including more legal information and documents within the HIP will help to reduce transaction time even further and more importantly take the stress out of moving home.


Having refused to listen to the proponents of exchange ready HIPs perhaps Grant Shapps will be influenced more by the concern and words of wisdom spoken by his very own advisor. To do otherwise must throw doubt on a well founded opinion expressed by this well respected television spokeswoman.

Why the Home Information Pack will survive

At the beginning of its life the HIP was a bit of a joke, a constant target for derision and a football for political parties to kick around with whenever housing issues arose and goals needed to be scored. It was easy then as the property market was in decline and property experts found it convenient to apportion blame in the direction of the HIP.


One of the big problems then was the lack of knowledge of the product and the tendency we have in this country to resist and reject ‘change’. Added to this was a far larger problem and one that I believe may deter future government from making any further attempt to reform the home buying and selling process. I am taking here of the vested interest that runs throughout the property industry and which is so strong and cancerous in its application.


The current Government is often criticised for the poor way in which it implemented the HIP legislation. There is no denying that the Government did little to endear the public to the HIP by launching the HIP in such a shambolic way, however give credit where credit is due, this was a government looking to make change to the home buying and selling process that was last changed back in 1925!


Implementation and the way this unfolded should also be viewed against a backdrop of stakeholder discontent that was best illustrated by the unprecedented, and perhaps politically motivated, legal action taken by RICS. Unhappy about the introduction of energy assessors and of how this was going to impact on the residential faculty within their membership, RICS decided to challenge Government and the will of the legislative by claiming Government has not consulted adequately on the ‘gold plating’ of the Energy Directive. Though the action was probably from a technical point of view justified it was clear that RICS by not having exclusive control over the delivery of the home condition report (which incidentally they do in Scotland) was determined to derail the HIP.


A classic and destructive example of the way in which vested interest can work to challenge well intentioned reform and reform that was aimed at making the home buying and selling process more transparent for the benefit of the consumer.


So what has changed and why will the HIP survive?


To begin with market conditions have changed. More property is coming to the market, which has made it more difficult for the HIP to be used by anti-HIP proponents to point at it as a credible cause. More importantly however is that the benefits of the HIP are beginning, with increased volumes to be noticed, by both consumer and property professionals. The HIP has never really had a chance to prove itself until now. More and more estate agents are beginning to see the true worth of the HIP with faster transaction times and a reduction in aborted sale transactions. In the ‘bad times’ agents cried out for the return of the speculative seller. There was no logic, just desperation given the grim picture most agents faced. But now they are busy, properties are selling and with the added benefit they are making extra revenue on the back of the HIP. A ‘win, win’ situation.


This had a knock on effect as agents seeing the importance of the role of the HIP within their businesses are beginning to take the time to explain the purpose of the HIP to their customers and this in turn is helping the HIP gain a better image with consumers.


The shift in the way the HIP is viewed is not just my view. In recent months we have had the OFT releasing the results of a survey of consumers and concluding when looking at the HIP that on balance the view was that it should be retained. This was then followed by an open letter from the National Association of Estate Agents who stated that they saw the HIP regulations as providing protection to the consumer.


There is still sometime to go before other stakeholders climb off the fence and declare their views. This is understandable as many do not wish to blot their copybook with Grant Shapps given the possibility he may be the next housing minister.


I am sure however that if we do have a Conservative Government that these stakeholders will during consultation view the HIP in a different light given improved market conditions and the undoubted fact that the HIP is now fast becoming an accepted part of the home selling and buying process. Many stakeholders, whether they are estate agents, lawyers, energy assessors, surveyors are all beginning to see the benefits of the HIP and are acknowledging that it would be a backward step to scrap. The importance now is for these professionals to get this message through to those who run their trade associations and to make sure their voice is heard over and above the political will that often moulds policy.


Talk of adding cost to the process and of the HIP presenting a barrier to selling is no longer credible and with the consumer becoming increasingly aware that sale costs will rise if the HIP goes, it will take a brave (or misguided) political party to continue to view the HIP as a ‘vote winner’.

Independent survey highlights how well home information packs are working

It’s reassuring to know that despite the image some hold of home information pack providers, and the constant question marks raised about the professionalism of the HIP industry, a survey carried out by Trading Standards at Birmingham City Council has revealed that there were no major problems found with over two thirds of home information packs when these were checked during a recent survey.


More significantly was the finding that 87% of HIPs produced by HIP Code subscribers were found to satisfactory or reasonably satisfactory with personal searches being found to be on a par with those sourced from local authorities.


The survey was very thorough and measured, rightly so, HIPs against a strict criteria.


One third of the HIPs examined revealed problems such as no information on complaint, no redress procedure, no consumer information, no company contact details, technical Issues with the search, HIP Index related issues. Though this is by no means satisfactory, generally speaking these are problems that do not largely obscure the objective and benefits of the HIP, and are ones some would expect to see when examining the workings of a new industry that has had over the past year or so quite a few obstacles thrown in its way.


The main message emerging from the Survey is the importance to the consumer of always choosing a pack provider who subscribes to the HIP Code when it comes to ordering a HIP. This point was echoed by Chris Neville, Head of Trading Standards at Birmingham City Council:


“The exercise shows that the market is generally compliant, but buyers should be aware that not all HIPs can be taken at face value as being accurate. Birmingham Trading Standards will keep a watchful eye on the estate agent and HIP provider market, and we urge buyers to contact us if HIPs are not made available by estate agents at the time of marketing. To avoid any confusion over the accuracy of information provided in a HIP, we recommend that both buyers and estate agents should choose a HIP Code registered firm, as our survey has found these to be the most trustworthy”.


The fact that over 95% of agents surveyed were complying with the HIP regulations is also significant and again shows there is little credibility in the claims by Grant Shapps and other Conservative MPs that the HIP is of no use to anybody.


Richard Footitt, Chairman of the Property Codes Compliance Board, commenting on the survey findings says:


“This exercise gives a timely and reliable insight into the current level of compliance within the industry, and should serve as a warning to both estate agents and HIP providers that they must comply with the law and regulations. That said, it was encouraging to note that 95% of agents were complying with the requirement to have a HIP available when marketing a property and also that 90% of HIPs from PCCB registered HIP Code subscribers met or exceeded levels of good practice. We urge other Trading Standards offices to follow Birmingham’s lead to ensure high standards of compliance and consumer protection are maintained”.


No we know compliance is not a major problem, and as self regulation within the industry seems to working, surely now is the time for Grant Shapps to begin to recognize the worth of the HIP and of how this has become three years after its introduction an established part of the home selling and buying process. The home owner, as was recently acknowledged by the Chairman of the National Association of Estate Agents, receives protection from the HIP regulations, and as the market is picking up there is a growing and widespread recognition of the benefits conferred by the HIP.


For full report and links to the Survey please click HERE

Do the Conservative Party have a new spokesman on HIPs?

Ex-banker James Duddridge, Member of Parliament for Rochford and Southend East, in questions to the Secretary of State for Communities, asked the Minister if will make it his policy to suspend or abolish home information packs.


Hardly a novel question and one which Mr Duddridge has clearly stolen from Grant Shapps top 5 questions to ask Government.


In answering ‘No’ Ian Austin, (Minister of State (the West Midlands), Regional Affairs; Dudley North, Labour) responding on behalf of the Government told Mr Duddridge:


‘Despite the difficulties in the housing market, HIPs are helping to speed up the process. A survey of 37,000 transactions showed that when a HIP is available, exchanges were completed more quickly. I accept that HIPs were criticised following their introduction in 2007, but we listened to those criticisms and have made major changes to improve the system, introducing the new property information questionnaire containing basic information that buyers said that they wanted; improving the quality of searches; binding in the practice of using insurance; and providing that HIPs must be available when marketing starts’.


Not happy with this Mr Duddridge commented:


‘Home Information Packs have been a total failure and yet the Government refuses to listen to the industry professionals and home-buyers and sellers who believe that they restrict the supply of houses to the market and slow down the process of buying or selling a property.


It is unfortunate that the Minister has not looked at the case of Northern Ireland, which has shown that Energy Performance Certificates can be introduced without the need for a Home Information Pack. If elected to government we would scrap the Home Information Pack to remove this costly and damaging barrier to the housing market.’


Mr Duddridge as being a newcomer to the issue of HIPs, and who was clearly doing his best to help the besieged and overworked Grant Shapps, clearly had not undertaken his homework before commenting. If he had taken the trouble so to do he would have found that there is a major problem with compliance within Northern Ireland where one out of every two properties is marketed without a HIP. Research would have also disclosed to him that the HIP has not caused extra cost and is not, as is now recognised by the NAEA, a ‘damaging’ barrier to the housing market.


Perhaps Mr Duddridge should stick to banking and commenting on environment, food and rural affair issues ( he is a member of the EFRA's Committee ) unless of course David Cameron is lining him up to replace Grant Shapps as the next housing minister?

The practicable benefits of the home information pack

I am in the process of moving home. I am now therefore experiencing the joys of entering the home selling and buying fray.


Marketing for sale was reasonably painless with the HIP emerging before the ink was dry on the terms and conditions of the selling agent. Yes, I know I am in a privileged position as regard the production of the HIP, however speaking with the agent and other agents the delivery of the HIP is not I am told a delaying factor. The real problem I am told is ‘doing the deal’ with the seller as most sellers are using the suppressed market conditions to negotiate favourable commission rates.


It is fair to say those looking at my property did not ask for sight of the HIP, but on asking when viewings took place I was told that the agent had not mentioned the HIP, or more importantly explained the benefits of the HIP.


I know it is claimed nobody asks for the HIP and I acknowledge this is to a large extent true, however the fact is that this should not cause surprise as I know from my experience as a solicitor that there was little interest shown, even before the HIP came in, by either the seller or buyer about the legal process. No one would ask to see the searches or legal documents. All I was ever asked was ‘when will I be able to move in’. This was the one and only request.


There may be little consumer interest in the HIP and in absence of the selling agent taking the time to explain the purpose of the HIP and the benefits it confers this is likely to continue. This should not however distract from the fact that as soon as an offer is received, as in my case, the HIP begins to take on greater significance as it is at this point that the seller’s solicitor is crying out for it to be sent through.


The seller’s solicitor knows the HIP has documents that will help the client to move to exchange much quicker. Before the HIP the seller solicitor would have to get hold of the title documents, order the searches and get the client into obtain the information to get the transaction up and running.


The only delay I could see was at my end, that is as a seller, having to complete the Fixture and Fitting and SIF forms. It is clear the removal of these forms from the HIP was a mistake. By getting these forms completed at the point of marketing would help to save so much time.


My legal firm relying on the HIP and the forms which I returned was able to draft a contract very swiftly and to then put pressure on the buyer’s solicitor for an early exchange.


As for the process of buying, I have been forced by my partner to approach this exercise in a similar fashion to a shopping expedition. I am told I must look at as many properties Rightmove is able to throw our way! I know what will happen. I know the very first property viewed will be the one I am told 200 property viewings later we must buy!


I am pleased to say that out of the 15 or so agents I have engaged with all of the properties in which I have had interest have had HIPs produced. This is reassuring from a compliance perspective and just shows that the requirement for a HIP has now become a well established part of the home buying process.


More worrying however is the fact that all of the agents did not volunteer the HIP. In each case I had to ask for the link to the HIP to be sent through. No wonder Grant Shapps and the other HIP knockers say the HIP is an unwanted product. There really needs to be an obligation placed on the seller or agent to offer the HIP when someone inquires about a property, and to explain the benefits the HIP serves.


It is crying shame that the HIP is not offered as it contains a lot of information that is invaluable to a prospective buyer. For example I can see from the HIP how long the property has been on the market. This has helped when formulating an offer. It tells me about the boundaries that are often the bone of contention. I can also see the rights of way that tell me about shared drives and gardens. The PIQ has details about council tax and improvements and other useful information that is often not included in the sale particulars. Then there is the EPC. Homes always seem warm when viewing and it is difficult without a full survey to assess on viewing energy efficiency. The EPC helps here and I have found that the homes that seem the warmest are often the ones that are leaking the most energy.


Buyers should always ask for the HIP and to read the HIP before viewing so as to be prepared with questions and to use the information when it comes to formulating an offer. It should be looked at as an aid, and not as a burden. A buyer should also refer to the HIP when putting pressure on his or solicitor to exchange quicker. There should be no excuse for long and stressful transactions.


I have also found that those selling are on speaking with them serious about selling. I have come across no time wasters, none of those speculative sellers that were responsible for collapsed transactions and wasted costs. There may be fewer properties on the market and this may be a source for some contention with certain agents. Most of the agents I have spoken with agree however that this has led to more certainty in the process and has meant a greater return on the time and money spent on marketing.


Don’t get me wrong, it’s by no means perfect and there is plenty that can be done to improve the system. It’s a great start and should stay and not as the Conservative Party argues be ‘scrapped’.

Grant Shapps out-dated policy on HIPs could cost votes in marginal constituencies

Is the home information pack beginning to lose its stigma? At one time, not too long ago the HIP found itself on the end of much derision and it was not unusual to pick a paper up or turn on the TV only to find some so called expert making mention of it in the same breath as commenting on the downfall of the economy.


Grant Shapps, the Shadow Housing Minister, often saw the need when speaking to declare the HIP as being solely responsible for the slowdown in the property market, as well as creating an unnecessary cost burden for the home owner. The National Association of Estate Agents was also making similar declarations. Added to this were the alarmist headlines in papers such as the Daily Mail pronouncing the HIP as a great example of consumer exploitation. In fact there was so much anti-hip propaganda it is of no surprise that home owner began to see and believe that the HIP had no place within the home selling and buying process.


So what has changed? What has led to an apparent shift towards retaining rather than ‘scrapping’ the HIP? There are in addition to the undoubted fact people have now nearly three years after their introduction become accustomed to the practice of obtaining a HIP, a few recent developments that have led to a significant shift in perception.


Not too long ago we saw the publication of the OFT survey on home buying in which the HIP received coverage and the concluding view expressed was that, on balance, the HIP was worthy of retention. This was then followed by a major change in the way in which the NAEA sees the HIP, with an open admission from the NAEA that the HIP regulations were playing an important part in providing consumer protection!


The other major change has been the clear improvement in market conditions. There is no doubt property is beginning to come to market and transactions are going through quicker. Now there is volume in the market the agents and the sellers and buyers are starting to see and reap the benefits of the HIP. There are less speculative sellers meaning that transactions are not collapsing. The buyers lawyer is getting his or hands on the legal documents and information that much earlier, leading to quicker and less stressful transactions.


There is also a growing sense of concern as to what will be left if the HIP goes. Grant Shapps has said he will scrap the HIP but has failed to come up with any proposal for replacement. At the time when the Conservative Party was enjoying a larger lead in the polls there was no need to do anything other than to continually knock the HIP. Now with all indications pointing to a hung parliament or even a Labour Government surely the time must be right for Shapps to re-think his policy on HIPs and to begin engaging with the HIP industry and other stakeholders.


The HIP may, generally speaking, be a minor issue and one that may not influence the electorate a great deal, however this may not prove to be the case when one looks towards the slim margins that exist in some of the key seats around the Country. Higher selling costs, more stressful transactions and undoubted unemployment may influence enough people to vote against Shapps’ misguided policy.

'You Tube' parody strengthens the resolve of the Home Information Pack industry

It is a mixed up and rather bizarre world and one that never ceases to amaze.


On the one hand we have the Conservative Party treating property professionals within the home information pack industry like naughty school boys for having in their eyes the audacity to participate in some political lobbying, and on the other hand we have a certain international public affairs company who seem more interested in saving political face than honouring client confidentiality. Mixed in with this, and perhaps in some way connected, we have someone out there hiding behind a secret identity constructing and publishing a You Tube parody that on close scrutiny would in any other environment be seen as a vehicle delivering defamatory content.


On a personal level I find the lack of respect and professionalism disappointing though perhaps not surprising given an ever increasing hunger for power and wealth. This I suppose is what many call ‘real life’.


So where in this ‘real life’ does this leave the home information pack industry? Some would like to think the industry has been damaged by recent events and is now on the verge of imploding. Nice thought for those who continue to ignore rational and intellectual argument and push for the abolition of the HIP. However events of this type often have the reverse effect. They often galvanise thoughts and make those affected more united in their aims and objectives.


Statements included within the You Tube parody throwing doubt on the effectiveness of the HIP and claiming the industry has failed to produce any objective evidence to support its case can only serve to fuel a greater and more focused effort on the part of the pro-HIP supporters to ensure the voting public is educated about the aim of the HIP and to make it clear that life without the HIP will be far more costly and stressful.


The industry is full of hard working businessmen who conduct themselves in a dignified and professional manner and who despite the efforts of some will continue to act in this way as they do all they can to preserve a product they believe in, as well as protecting established and well run businesses, jobs and livelihoods. At the end of the day as Grant Shapps has said himself it will be down to the electorate to show through voting whether his policy on HIPs is one they agree with or not. With the closing of the parties within the polls this effort will surely now focus on those marginal seats.


The lesson to be learned is that the HIP industry should not allow itself to be dragged down to the same pitiful level that seems to be norm for those who continue to use backhanded tactics in an effort to derail a proper and democratic lobbying campaign.

Home Sellers and Buyers set to pay more if the home information pack is abolished

The Hip Reform Group has today warned home owners that they are likely to face increased cost and delayed transactions if the Conservative Party proceeds with its intention to ‘scrap’ home information Packs;

HRG’s spokesman, Solicitor, David Pett explains:

‘The Conservative Party’ policy is focused solely on the removal of the HIP, with little, if any, detail on what this will leave behind, and, more importantly mean for the home owner. Grant Shapps would like the electorate to think this will make the cost of moving home cheaper. This is simply not the case – on the contrary the seller and buyer will see an immediate increase in the cost of property searches and will be left having to pay much more when moving home. The irony is that without the HIP the consumer will be a lot worse off’

The main reason for the increase is the rise in the cost of personal property searches, as according to Alan Thorogood, Chief Executive of STL Group plc, the average cost of the property searches has come down by 42% since the introduction of home information packs. These figures have been obtained by analyzing audits undertaken by the industry trade bodies COPSO and AHIPP and in discussion with a number of local authorities.

He explains the reason for this:

“The c 40% price reduction since HIPs is largely due to lower fees charged by personal search companies due to a smaller amount of specialist HIP providers commanding high market share. Lately, competition due to lower transaction volumes and the effect of the April 2009 Charging Regulations have played a significant factor re pricing. The Charging Regulations introduced the concept of ‘cost recovery’ of local authority data. This has reduced the cost of many council searches and, whilst the cost of local authority data for personal searches has actually increased, personal search prices have not increased significantly due to increased competition pressures’

In addition to added cost, the consumer will also, according to Mr Pett, be exposed to the potential of further loss associated with the return of increased abortive sales, as well as the stress of longer sale transactions.

Grant Shapps challenges democratic right to lobby

News broke today of a rather bizarre development in the ongoing debate on the future of home information packs.


In response to a well meaning letter sent by, and seemingly sent on the advice of, the London based PR lobbyists Luther Pendragon, and on behalf of their client, Association of Home Information Pack Providers, to Conservative MPs and Prospective candidates, Grant Shapps unleashed a scathing attack on what he described as a ‘crass’ lobbying campaign.


Commenting on the letter (as set out below) Shapps, a former American style online marketing guru, stated:


‘This is one of the most crass examples of public affairs I have ever seen from a lobbying company. Spamming parliamentary candidates with political abuse from a company email address hardly displays the intelligent political awareness that Luther Pendragon proclaim on their website.'


He added:


‘Email has great potential to engage Parliamentary candidates with the public in the forthcoming general election. Yet the public affairs industry needs to realise that like poorly targeted, unsolicited press releases, email also has the potential to annoy and undermine the very issues you are championing.


Conservatives are happy to talk to the housing industry over our plans to scrap Home Information Packs, but personal, angry campaigns are not a great way to win friends and influence people.'


Rich coming from a shadow cabinet member who not too long ago was involved in his own ‘crass’ example of public affairs when he was photographed wrapping red ribbon around a house! Cheap publicity and a stunt clearly determined to infuriate those who are working hard to bring about reform and save businesses they have worked hard to establish and develop.


It is also hard to understand why a man who has plenty of personal experience in using spam type emails and other types of marketing tools to run past and present campaigns can express outrage in such alarmist terms at a perfectly legitimate use of a public database.


Perhaps the decision to take this step has unsettled Mr Shapps. Perhaps the pro-hip lobbyists and those within his party who secretly support the HIP are finally getting to him?


Lobbying of political parties is part and parcel of a democratic society and the practice has been around from centuries. In attacking AHIPP and its actions is Mr Shapps not challenging a very fundamental democratic right? Does this not smack of sheer arrogance on his part?


What is perhaps more worrying is the decision of the lobbying company Luther Pendragon to respond to the outcry by ditching AHIPP as a client. How comes? One can only speculate that some political pressure has somewhere along the line been applied. It will be interesting to see how Luther’s other clients react to this rather public denunciation of a client who had for a healthy fee placed its confidence and trust in its hands.


THE LETTER IN FULL


Dear XXXXXXX


Many thanks for your response to my earlier correspondence on Home Information Packs. Whilst I appreciate there is an established Party line on this issue, I am disappointed that you did not take the opportunity to review the evidence for yourself and come to your own informed conclusion. I hope you will consider this letter and take a personal stance on the issue.


Grant Shapps, the Shadow Housing Minister, believes that scrapping HIPs would be a popular and inexpensive manifesto commitment. Having adopted a perceived vote winning policy in a neglected area, Mr Shapps has chosen to ignore the many voices and reams of evidence pointing towards the need for further reform through the development of the HIP product. Consumers, stakeholders across the property industry and the press are clear that the future of home buying and selling lies in Exchange-Ready products. These products reduce cost, delay and stress from the process of buying a home, and the removal of the requirement to produce a HIP provides an ideal opportunity to introduce them. Grant Shapps' refusal to introduce Exchange-Ready products is irrational and regressive.


A policy to scrap HIPs with no mandatory replacement will cause enormous short term damage to the housing market. Following the election of a Government with a commitment to scrap HIPs, homeowners will delay selling their home until they are scrapped. This would stifle any hopes of a long-overdue recovery in the housing market.


The market will also suffer damage in the long term. Before HIPs, the unavailability of reliable information and legal documents early in the home buying and selling process were the prime cause of stress, delay and abortive transactions, which cost consumers approximately £1 million every day. With this information provided in the right format, at the right time, and at the right price through a HIP, costs are kept down, transactions run more smoothly, and professionals like lawyers and estate agents are freed to carry out their specialist work.


Critics of the HIP claim that the searches included are not authoritative, and lawyers are commissioning their own searches. The most recent report by the Property Codes Compliance Board, which regulates property searches, showed that there were no differences in quality between the searches in HIP Code compliant HIPs and searches provided by the Local Authority. Critics also say that HIPs add cost to the home buying process. This is simply not the case, as the savings made through efficient search delivery outweigh the upfront cost of the packs. The reduction in the cost of moving home seen over the past two years has been as a direct result of the introduction of HIPs, and scrapping HIPs would increase costs once again.


Finally, Grant Shapps assures voters that he will retain the Energy Performance Certificate element of the HIP, as he accepts that it is a crucial tool in reducing carbon emissions. He has, however, ignored evidence from all other European Union member states that have attempted to introduce the EPC as a stand-alone document. In Northern Ireland, where there are no HIPs, 45% of houses are sold without an EPC, versus less than 5% in England. Indeed, in the rental or commercial property sectors in the UK, where HIPs are not required the levels of non-compliance are over 40% and 73% respectively. No member state has managed to achieve meaningful levels of compliance with the requirement to produce an EPC, except for states that require it as part of a HIP-style pack. There is no reason why the UK would be different.


Grant Shapps has ignored calls from the HIP industry, the Law Society, Which?, numerous estate agents and consumers, for further reform taking into account the progress made through the HIP. He has ignored his own research and consultation exercise, the 2007 Home Buying Review. This exercise, which sought to investigate the possibilities for further reform, was cancelled shortly after Owen Inskip, an independent expert, submitted his report. This has never since been released, despite repeated requests. Should he be elected, by the time Grant Shapps consults on his proposals, with the market in turmoil and jobs already under threat, it is likely to be too late to build on the achievements of the HIP.


I hope you will give all of these issues your urgent attention. Grant Shapps intends to make a national election issue of his opposition to HIPs, but he underestimates the industry's ability to make the case for itself with voters. I hope, that having considered the issues, you will write to me outlining your own position on the issue.

Yours sincerely


Mike Ockenden


Director General

Has Grant Shapps lost the support of estate agents?

HIPs – it’s a funny old game!


It was not too long ago when the National Association of Estate Agents (NAEA) was falling over itself to knock at every given opportunity the beleaguered home information pack. There were constant accusations that the HIP was nothing other than an unnecessary and costly barrier to speculative sellers and how this was in turn causing a major housing shortage.


On top of this we were seeing Grant Shapps and his loyal band of supporters proclaiming that the estate agents they spoke with were all united in their view that the HIP was not wanted and was making a major contribution towards the failing property market.


What a difference a couple of months of a recovering property market has had on estate agents as we have within the past couple of days seen Gary Smith, the President of the NAEA, write an open letter to the OFT in response to its survey on home selling in which it would seem estate agents are beginning to see the HIP in a more favourable light.


The letter that can be viewed in full below was written in response to concern over the lack of regulation within the Estate Industry ( I wonder what Grant Shapps makes of this !!) and of how this will allow the likes of Tesco to set up in competition.


Mr Smith says:


‘Presumably the OFT will also be excusing the supermarket chain the bother of having to comply with the Money Laundering Act and having to provide an Energy Performance Certificate or Home Information Pack. For a senior Director of the OFT to be happy to advocate the sweeping aside of carefully considered legislation aimed at consumer protection, energy conservation and anti-money laundering, defies belief’.


What a turn up for the books – the NAEA saying for the very first time that the HIP Regulations should be viewed as ‘......carefully considered legislation..’!


Is this really a turning point, can the NAEA really now be saying it recognises the importance of the HIP and of how this is providing protection and benefits for the consumer. If it is, I am not surprised as many of the estate agents I have spoken with clearly support the aim of the HIP. Though they feel it could be improved, they are firm in their view that it should remain. Returning to a system that was clearly not working is simply not an acceptable option.




The letter also brought a smile to my face as the call for further regulation clearly does not sit comfortably with the dislike Grant Shapps and other Conservatives have for regulation and of how they see the HIP as a symbol of over regulation. Perhaps the NAEA has woken up to the hypocrisy it would be guilty of if it were to persist with an anti-HIP campaign whilst calling at the same time for additional regulations to protect its members.


It will be interesting given his well know connections with the estate agency community how Grant Shapps deals with this rather interesting development.


'Dear Sir/Madam


The Office of Fair Trading's (OFT) proposals (18th February) to change the laws under which properties are sold in the UK to favour the involvement of Tesco, seriously both negates and brings into question the OFT's role of consumer protection in the UK.


Under the Property Misdescriptions Act of 1991, it is a criminal offence for estate agents to make false or misleading statements regarding properties placed on the market. The OFT is advocating a change in this law to allow certain corporations such as Tesco to be exempt from the Act. This would place the burden of responsibility on the seller to ensure that all information on the marketing of the property is accurate.




Presumably the OFT will also be excusing the supermarket chain the bother of having to comply with the Money Laundering Act and having to provide an Energy Performance Certificate or Home Information Pack. For a senior Director of the OFT to be happy to advocate the sweeping aside of carefully considered legislation aimed at consumer protection, energy conservation and anti-money laundering, defies belief.


The average home owner cannot be expected to have the skills to assess the state of their own property, nor navigate their way through the complex regulations that they would need to abide by in order to sell a property.



The National Association of Estate Agents (NAEA) has always been in favour of protecting consumer rights. We recognise that buying or selling a home will, for most people, be the most complicated and greatest financial transaction of their lives. But these OFT proposals have been ill-thought through and do not take into account the complexities of the buying and selling process which a private seller would have to face.


The NAEA has been calling for more stringent regulation of estate agents to offer additional and necessary protection for consumers, which is why we will be introducing our own licensing scheme for NAEA members later in the year.




The OFT really should not be seeking publicity with these wild headlines but should instead concentrate on fulfilling their role - that of consumer protection and adherence to Trading Standards.




Yours faithfully


GARY SMITH


President, National Association of Estate Agents'

Home Information Packs help to reduce 'bribe' culture

The Daily Mail carried an article over the weekend in which it highlighted a long running but very rarely reported practice of solicitors paying to estate agents fees of £100 plus for referrals.


Some lawyers consider this part and parcel of running a modern day practice and see the payment of a fee as nothing other than a marketing expense. Others however look upon referral fees as ethically indefensible and are concerned about the quality of commercially motivated advice.


Many smaller practices with limited resources also find it difficult to compete with larger ‘conveyancing practices’ and believe that unless the Law Society act quickly to outlaw referral fees they will be left out in the cold.


Solicitors are allowed to pay referral fees providing they disclose this to the client at the outset of the instruction. Unfortunately many get around this through hiding the disclosure in very long terms of retainer. One large conveyancing practice in London for instance has terms and conditions that run to around 30 pages in which if you look closely, and have time to spare to read the small print, you will see they pay for leads.


On balance payment of ‘bribes’ of this type have been part and parcel of our commercial world for centuries and any outright ban on referral fees would only lead to forcing the practice underground. They should therefore continue, but if a fee is payable the payer should disclose the fact and be required to make this perfectly clear and to provide the client with options. This is my view.


It is argued that thelead fees inflate the cost of conveyancing. This is nonsense, as the money used to pay for the lead would otherwise be used for other marketing initiatives. Payment for leads is nothing other than a marketing expense – it does not add to the cost of the fees. In fact since the introduction of home information packs the cost of selling and buying has come down.


The HIP has also helped to reduce the practice of referral fees as may solicitors and estate agents now work in local networks and instead of paying fees to each other they simply make fee-free cross referrals. The solicitor will do the HIP for the estate agent and the estate agent will refer the client back to the lawyer for the conveyancing work.


Local established networks born in the post HIP era are good for the property professionals and the consumer in terms of keeping cost down and quality of service high. Hopefully Grant Shapps will keep this in mind, as a factor, when he comes to review his policy on the future of HIPs.