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.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment