I have just read an interesting blog entry ( http://bit.ly/6dkDvj ) written by someone who operates an energy assessor. Don’t get me wrong everyone is entitled to their opinion, and indeed I have a lot of respect for people who express their views, however the writer of this blog entry really needs to be less insular and to get out in the world and speak with others.
To begin with, the rant starts with a rather ludicrous suggestion that the cost of the HIP/EPC is having an impact on social mobility. The blogger actually goes so far as to accuse the HIP of ‘imprisoning’ some home owners. I have come across a wide range of reasons to support the abolition of the HIP but never have I come across such a comical observation.
To begin with, the rant starts with a rather ludicrous suggestion that the cost of the HIP/EPC is having an impact on social mobility. The blogger actually goes so far as to accuse the HIP of ‘imprisoning’ some home owners. I have come across a wide range of reasons to support the abolition of the HIP but never have I come across such a comical observation.
The writer says referring to someone he knows:
‘He is now a prisoner in his own home, on the dole, and further hemmed-in by a lack of money to pay for a HIP’
How daft to blame the cost of the HIP and EPC for this situation. To begin with we all know that a HIP, including an EPC can be picked up for between £180 and £200. A large sum I agree, for some. However, is the cost of this really the determining factor when a home owner is thinking of selling? Surely jobs security, the availability of credit and the price of the property generally, are far more important?
Furthermore, if the writer’s friend has lost his job, and is looking to sale, yes he will have to find the money to pay for the HIP, but this is not the only cost he will have to meet as he will also need to instruct a solicitor to handle the sale. Before the HIP was introduced many solicitors would ask a seller at the point of instruction for a payment of account of between £150 and £200 to cover the cost of the searches. The ‘friend’ would still have needed therefore, with or without the cost of the HIP, to find the money to meet this requirement.
Social mobility is more to with the availability of more affordable homes and or a move away from our obsession in this country on home ownership. We should perhaps look to the continent where far more people rent and are therefore able to move around without the hang up of sale associated cost.
The writer then turns his attention to the ‘tit for tat’ exchanges between the HIP proponents and those who support Mr. Shapps with his obsessive desire to rid society of the HIP. In particular his focuses on people like myself who he says often attempt to defend the indefensible.
He points out:
‘One survey metric the industry is unable to fight, but still insists on trying to disprove, is the lack of interest in HIPs from buyers. ..................... HIPs are for solicitors; punters don’t want to wade through 60-odd pages of legalese, for every property they visit’.
He adds:
‘One side says something and the other feels compelled to say the opposite, within days. It’s like a childish game of tennis; except the only people playing are the one’s with most to win or lose – they certainly don’t include folks like my friend, or the lowly DEA trapped in the middle of this mess’.
In response why should I and others be made to feel guilty for wishing to correct ant-HIP propaganda? There is so much misinformation out there and add to this political spin it is not surprising that the consumer is confused and holds a jaundiced view of the HIP. I make no apology for wishing to educate and speaking out on issues which I firmly believe in.
It is also untrue to suggest that suppliers of HIPs have not time for energy assessors or those in financial difficulties. There are many suppliers out there who value the contribution of the energy assessor and who do all they can to ensure the energy assessor is not overlooked! Remember also there are a vast number of energy assessors who double up as HIP suppliers and have used the HIP to help maximize their return on the delivery of the EPC.
As for doing more to help those who cannot afford to move I am not sure what more the industry can do apart from offering deferred type credit schemes, even though I accept these are not perfect. Is it, I ask, really down to the HIP industry to address this issue when as said above we have little influence ( apart from our individual right to vote) on the formulation of policy on economic factors such as unemployment, lack of high LTV credit, and lack of affordable housing.
And why pick on the HIP industry. Where do solicitors and estate agents feature? Surely the same argument applies to these professionals. Estate agents do not have to charge for the HIP, they could absorb the cost as part of their commission.
I agree however that the buyer may not have any interest in the HIP other than to pass it onto his or her solicitor once an offer on property is accepted. But hey what is new? A buyer has never been interested in the legal process – the only concern is that the transaction proceeds as quickly as possible. However the fact the buyer may not read or have interest in the HIP should not distract from the benefit the HIP offers to the buyer.
The writer considers that the lack of social responsibility as highlighted above also features within the constructive efforts of the Industry to come up with ways to improve the HIP accusing the industry of not thinking through the social consequences of their proposals. He writes:
‘Yet still the reformers remain blind to the HIP industry’s social responsibility in its proposals. As far as I can tell, they fail to recognize that markets do, shock, crash; and that people like my friend do actually, shock, and exist, because of these events.
And so consequently they fail to “stress-test” the implications – both financial and social – on house-prices, shock, actually dropping significantly’.
This is all well and good and makes good reading but the reality of the situation is as I say very different. The HIP industry is only a very small clog in the wheel. There are so many other far larger and more influential stake holders all with vested interest that would have to play a part in any reform. In addition to this we have the wider economic issues as set out above. Given all of this how on earth can one expect the HIP industry to carry out effective ‘stress tests’? The ‘housing crash’ remember, came about through decisions made by governments around the world despite carrying out before implementing such policy, sophisticated impact assessments! All the industry can do is to make suggestions and continue to engage with other stakeholders to ensure both economic and social issues are taken into account. It is incredulous to believe that the industry should be left with sole responsibility for everything that remains wrong about the hone selling and buying process and the housing market generally.
Not surprisingly the writer concludes his rant about how he sees HIP suppliers turning their attention when speaking about reform to the energy assessor and green issues. He comments:
‘In its desperation for strength in numbers, some voices within the HIP industry have even recently attempted to ring-fence DEAs into its camp, using the ploy of “green-washing” HIPs, and arguing that any abolition would not only be dangerous to the livelihoods of energy assessors (appealing to self-interest), but also the environment (politicians eyeing-up the green vote)’.
In writing above I have in making reference to the ‘HIP Industry’ viewed and continue to view energy assessors as part and parcel of those operating within it. The EPC is integral to the HIP and will continue to be in the future – they come from the same stable of thinking i.e. the early delivery of information and documents that will help a prospective buyer acquire knowledge of a property before committing to the transaction. I accept that there could be more done to improve the format in which this information is conveyed but for it to be suggested the HIP and the EPC should be viewed separately is nonsensical.
Energy assessors have always featured largely within the industry and unless they stand united with the HIP suppliers there is a real risk of the industry becoming fragmented and vulnerable. It is my belief that many energy assessors recognise that if the HIP goes it will not be long before the EPC finds itself consumed by large energy retailers and the like.
Furthermore, it can be shown with certainty that the HIP has provided an excellent and effective vehicle for the delivery of the EPC and with it the consequential green benefits. Again why should we be guilty of making these points and in so doing trying as best we can do preserve the jobs of all those working in the industry. Perhaps this is where the industry is delivering its social responsibility, making sure we and thousands of others do not land up like the ‘friend’ of the writer.
So in conclusion I believe the writer is completely off beam to suggest the removal of the HIP is the key to improving social mobility. Instead of knocking the industry that has probably provided the writer with a reasonable income over the past year or so, his efforts would be better used pressing both present and future governments to look at the introduction of more affordable housing and schemes to make it easier for those less fortunate to move.
‘He is now a prisoner in his own home, on the dole, and further hemmed-in by a lack of money to pay for a HIP’
How daft to blame the cost of the HIP and EPC for this situation. To begin with we all know that a HIP, including an EPC can be picked up for between £180 and £200. A large sum I agree, for some. However, is the cost of this really the determining factor when a home owner is thinking of selling? Surely jobs security, the availability of credit and the price of the property generally, are far more important?
Furthermore, if the writer’s friend has lost his job, and is looking to sale, yes he will have to find the money to pay for the HIP, but this is not the only cost he will have to meet as he will also need to instruct a solicitor to handle the sale. Before the HIP was introduced many solicitors would ask a seller at the point of instruction for a payment of account of between £150 and £200 to cover the cost of the searches. The ‘friend’ would still have needed therefore, with or without the cost of the HIP, to find the money to meet this requirement.
Social mobility is more to with the availability of more affordable homes and or a move away from our obsession in this country on home ownership. We should perhaps look to the continent where far more people rent and are therefore able to move around without the hang up of sale associated cost.
The writer then turns his attention to the ‘tit for tat’ exchanges between the HIP proponents and those who support Mr. Shapps with his obsessive desire to rid society of the HIP. In particular his focuses on people like myself who he says often attempt to defend the indefensible.
He points out:
‘One survey metric the industry is unable to fight, but still insists on trying to disprove, is the lack of interest in HIPs from buyers. ..................... HIPs are for solicitors; punters don’t want to wade through 60-odd pages of legalese, for every property they visit’.
He adds:
‘One side says something and the other feels compelled to say the opposite, within days. It’s like a childish game of tennis; except the only people playing are the one’s with most to win or lose – they certainly don’t include folks like my friend, or the lowly DEA trapped in the middle of this mess’.
In response why should I and others be made to feel guilty for wishing to correct ant-HIP propaganda? There is so much misinformation out there and add to this political spin it is not surprising that the consumer is confused and holds a jaundiced view of the HIP. I make no apology for wishing to educate and speaking out on issues which I firmly believe in.
It is also untrue to suggest that suppliers of HIPs have not time for energy assessors or those in financial difficulties. There are many suppliers out there who value the contribution of the energy assessor and who do all they can to ensure the energy assessor is not overlooked! Remember also there are a vast number of energy assessors who double up as HIP suppliers and have used the HIP to help maximize their return on the delivery of the EPC.
As for doing more to help those who cannot afford to move I am not sure what more the industry can do apart from offering deferred type credit schemes, even though I accept these are not perfect. Is it, I ask, really down to the HIP industry to address this issue when as said above we have little influence ( apart from our individual right to vote) on the formulation of policy on economic factors such as unemployment, lack of high LTV credit, and lack of affordable housing.
And why pick on the HIP industry. Where do solicitors and estate agents feature? Surely the same argument applies to these professionals. Estate agents do not have to charge for the HIP, they could absorb the cost as part of their commission.
I agree however that the buyer may not have any interest in the HIP other than to pass it onto his or her solicitor once an offer on property is accepted. But hey what is new? A buyer has never been interested in the legal process – the only concern is that the transaction proceeds as quickly as possible. However the fact the buyer may not read or have interest in the HIP should not distract from the benefit the HIP offers to the buyer.
The writer considers that the lack of social responsibility as highlighted above also features within the constructive efforts of the Industry to come up with ways to improve the HIP accusing the industry of not thinking through the social consequences of their proposals. He writes:
‘Yet still the reformers remain blind to the HIP industry’s social responsibility in its proposals. As far as I can tell, they fail to recognize that markets do, shock, crash; and that people like my friend do actually, shock, and exist, because of these events.
And so consequently they fail to “stress-test” the implications – both financial and social – on house-prices, shock, actually dropping significantly’.
This is all well and good and makes good reading but the reality of the situation is as I say very different. The HIP industry is only a very small clog in the wheel. There are so many other far larger and more influential stake holders all with vested interest that would have to play a part in any reform. In addition to this we have the wider economic issues as set out above. Given all of this how on earth can one expect the HIP industry to carry out effective ‘stress tests’? The ‘housing crash’ remember, came about through decisions made by governments around the world despite carrying out before implementing such policy, sophisticated impact assessments! All the industry can do is to make suggestions and continue to engage with other stakeholders to ensure both economic and social issues are taken into account. It is incredulous to believe that the industry should be left with sole responsibility for everything that remains wrong about the hone selling and buying process and the housing market generally.
Not surprisingly the writer concludes his rant about how he sees HIP suppliers turning their attention when speaking about reform to the energy assessor and green issues. He comments:
‘In its desperation for strength in numbers, some voices within the HIP industry have even recently attempted to ring-fence DEAs into its camp, using the ploy of “green-washing” HIPs, and arguing that any abolition would not only be dangerous to the livelihoods of energy assessors (appealing to self-interest), but also the environment (politicians eyeing-up the green vote)’.
In writing above I have in making reference to the ‘HIP Industry’ viewed and continue to view energy assessors as part and parcel of those operating within it. The EPC is integral to the HIP and will continue to be in the future – they come from the same stable of thinking i.e. the early delivery of information and documents that will help a prospective buyer acquire knowledge of a property before committing to the transaction. I accept that there could be more done to improve the format in which this information is conveyed but for it to be suggested the HIP and the EPC should be viewed separately is nonsensical.
Energy assessors have always featured largely within the industry and unless they stand united with the HIP suppliers there is a real risk of the industry becoming fragmented and vulnerable. It is my belief that many energy assessors recognise that if the HIP goes it will not be long before the EPC finds itself consumed by large energy retailers and the like.
Furthermore, it can be shown with certainty that the HIP has provided an excellent and effective vehicle for the delivery of the EPC and with it the consequential green benefits. Again why should we be guilty of making these points and in so doing trying as best we can do preserve the jobs of all those working in the industry. Perhaps this is where the industry is delivering its social responsibility, making sure we and thousands of others do not land up like the ‘friend’ of the writer.
So in conclusion I believe the writer is completely off beam to suggest the removal of the HIP is the key to improving social mobility. Instead of knocking the industry that has probably provided the writer with a reasonable income over the past year or so, his efforts would be better used pressing both present and future governments to look at the introduction of more affordable housing and schemes to make it easier for those less fortunate to move.
No comments:
Post a Comment