HIP Reform Group News & Articles

Kirstie Allsopp you should be ashamed of yourself

2010-05-23T13:42:00.000-07:00

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

2010-04-27T00:59:00.000-07:00

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

2010-04-26T04:36:00.000-07:00

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

2010-04-23T00:55:00.000-07:00

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!

2010-04-19T03:54:00.000-07:00

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

2010-04-19T03:40:00.000-07:00

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

2010-04-19T03:34:00.000-07:00

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?

2010-04-14T02:45:00.001-07:00

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

2010-03-25T06:31:00.000-07:00

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

2010-03-24T02:31:00.000-07:00

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?

2010-03-24T02:29:00.000-07:00

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

2010-03-24T02:25:00.001-07:00

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

2010-03-23T02:49:00.001-07:00

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

2010-03-17T08:06:00.000-07:00

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

2010-03-15T03:21:00.000-07:00

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

2010-03-15T03:20:00.000-07:00

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

2010-03-12T01:06:00.000-08:00

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?

2010-03-11T07:38:00.000-08:00

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

2010-03-10T01:05:00.000-08:00

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

2010-03-08T01:04:00.000-08:00

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

2010-03-04T08:49:00.000-08:00

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

2010-02-26T04:56:00.000-08:00

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

2010-02-25T07:29:00.000-08:00

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?

2010-02-25T04:38:00.000-08:00

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

2010-02-25T01:26:00.000-08:00

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.

Britain heading for hung parliament – Guardian/ICM poll

2010-02-23T04:02:00.000-08:00

Guardian reports - Tories might not win election outright, suggests new survey

The Conservatives should no longer count on winning the election outright, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today.

The new survey suggests Britain is on course for a hung parliament amid faltering public support for David Cameron's party.

The opposition have also lost ground on key policy issues, including the economy, and in particular may be losing their campaign against Labour's so-called "death tax". Labour leads the Tories by eight points as the party with the best policy on care for the elderly.

The two parties are neck and neck on their ability to sort out the economic crisis, against a nine-point Tory lead when the question was last asked in August 2009.

With no more than three months to go until polling day, the Conservatives have fallen to 37%, down three on last month's Guardian/ICM poll and down two on another ICM poll earlier this month.
The party has not fallen so low in an ICM poll since the tail end of the banking crisis, last falling to 37% in February 2008.

As recently as last October the Tories hit 45% in an ICM poll and the party will be alarmed by this latest evidence that the race is tightening, which confirms the findings of some other recent polls.

Meanwhile Labour's support, at 30%, is eight points up on its absolute ICM bottom last May, and slightly above its average for the second part of last year. However, there is no sign of either a boost for the party following Gordon Brown's Piers Morgan interview or a fall after this weekend's reports about Brown bullying his staff.

Labour's support is up one point on the last Guardian/ICM poll and unchanged from the most recent ICM poll. Research began last Friday and most was carried out before the serialisation of Andrew Rawnsley's book in yesterday's Observer, which may have affected Labour support. Around a fifth of responses were collected on Sunday.

Nick Clegg's hopes of a powerful place in a hung parliament are also boosted by today's poll, which puts the Liberal Democrats on 20%, unchanged from the most recent ICM and down one on last month's Guardian poll.

All this suggests that Labour and the Lib Dems are holding steady while the Conservatives lose some ground to smaller parties, which are on a total of 13%. Nationalists are on 5%, Ukip and the Greens on 3% each and the BNP on 2%.

Estimates of what these shares would mean for the parties on polling day vary, but a 7% lead is at the margins of what the Tories think they need to win a majority. One academic calculation suggests the result would leave Labour only 25 seats behind the Tories in a hung parliament, although any improved Tory performance in marginal seats would offset that.

• ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,004 adults by telephone on 19-21 February 2010. ¬Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

Saturday Telegraph reports on Shapp's problem with numbers

2010-02-22T09:39:00.000-08:00

http://www.hipreformgroup.com/sat_tel.pdf

Shapps confirms importance of HIP compliance

2010-02-22T08:04:00.000-08:00

The Association of Home Information Pack Providers (AHIPP) called on those providing HIPs to comply with the HIP regulations, following communication from Grant Shapps relating to the issue. For the full article: http://bit.ly/9jOen5

OFT Report casts further doubt over the credibility of Grant Shapps' policy on home information packs

2010-02-19T01:20:00.000-08:00

Today sees the release of the OFT’s Report on the home buying and selling process and as expected this highlights the problems faced by consumers when it comes to engaging with our very antiquated process for selling and buying residential property. In particular it stresses the fact that until exchange of contracts has taken place either party to the transaction can pull out without being liable to the other party for losses incurred. It records the fact that about 20% of transactions fail between offer and exchange.

The OFT consumer research found that almost half of those contacted were of the view that their transaction was part of a chain of transactions. This is of importance, as a chain seems to be where there is the most evidence of wasted costs and time as well as stress to both seller and buyer.

The conclusion was that change is needed to ensure there is an earlier binding commitment between the parties to make it more difficult for either party to pull out. The OFT recogonise that bringing about this change may be difficult without the appetite for change from buyers and sellers as well as the property professionals. They add it is difficult to quantify the benefits of such change but are confident in their presumption that the benefits of this would be ‘substantial’

On the subject of home information packs the OFT was unable to form either a positive or negative view on their impact but were able to recognize the benefit behind the requirement of early disclosure and delivery of information to the prospective buyer and specifically noted that some buyers said they found the HIP information useful and that it had influenced their decisions. The OFT summarised their conclusion on the role of the HIP within the home buying and selling process by saying: '…so it could be argued that HIPs in their current form have a positive impact’.

Hopefully this will now mark the end of Grant Shapps’ contention that the HIP is not serving any useful purpose and has no role to play in helping and aiding the consumer. Surely a failure to take note of these findings must question (once again) the credibility of a man who may very well be our next housing minister.

The OFT Report must also signal to Grant Shapps that the consumer is not happy with the home buying and selling process and there is, as there has always been, a hunger for change. The HIP provides an excellent vehicle for bringing about further change that would definitely help to improve the certainty and transparency of transactions as well as speeding up transaction time. There is no doubt that it has already helped to reduce loss incurred on failed transactions.

The public should be asking Mr Shapps what further evidence does he require before he will begin to take this issue seriously. One can only go so far with political rhetoric based on unsubstantiated claims about the so-called evils of one small part of the overall home selling and buying process, that is the HIP.

Would a home infomation pack product within the commercial sector help to reduce carbon emissions?

2010-02-17T07:17:00.001-08:00

Evidence emerged over the weekend that confirmed the belief held by many working in the commercial property sector that only around 1 out of every four commercial properties are sold or leased with an energy performance certificate.

The study conducted by the accreditation agency Elmhurst concluded that only 28 per cent of commercial buildings marketed for sale or lease carry the legally required EPCs.

Gavin Dunn, operations director of Elmhurst Energy, said the drive "is very much part of an attempt within the European Union and the UK to move towards decarbonising the economy. We need to reduce the energy consumption of every building, and the first step is to get the information about their efficiency'.

Non compliance at this level must raise grave doubt about the country's ability to meet a European Union target of reducing emissions by at least 20 per cent by 2020. Nearly one-fifth of UK emissions come from business and industry.

This also illustrates the major problem the Country would face in the domestic market if the Conservative Party proceeds with its intention of removing the home information pack. It is clear that the HIP has proved to be an effective mechanism for the delivery of the domestic EPC and has helped to achieve a major contribution towards the reduction of carbon emissions. In Northern Ireland where there is no HIP one out of every two properties are marketed without an EPC.

Asked about the high level of non compliance within the commercial market Grant Shapps, the Shadow Housing Minister is reported to have said:

"If we're going to meet our legally binding climate-change targets, then we'll need to see urgent action. We know that meeting the challenge of climate change requires thousands of small steps to be taken. We will start by recognising the energy performance of all buildings, domestic or commercial."

Not very reassuring, and as we have seen in other areas, there is little detail of what the Conservatives would do instead. Grant Shapps should first consult with the Law Society and find out why so many lawyers are exposing themselves and their firms to possible negligence claims by allowing their clients to become legally committed to a transaction without first ensuring the energy rating is in place.

Why not also increase the fine for non compliance from £5,000 to £50,000?

The time has come for present or future government to get tough and to begin taking energy ratings and carbon emissions seriously. Unfortunately with news that many Conservative MPs do not rate carbon emission reduction high on their political agenda, and with Grant Shapps finding it difficult to see and recognize the importance of the role of the HIP, the future for effective energy savings under a Conservative Government does not appear too hot!

Further nail in the coffin for Grant Shapps' policy on home information packs

2010-02-17T07:16:00.002-08:00

More evidence has today emerged that throws doubt on the credibility of the Conservative Party’ s flawed Policy on home information packs.

Data released today from leading conveyancer myhomemove reveal that failed property transactions have dipped into single figures since HIPs took full effect in April last year.

Since first day marketing without a HIP was removed, and the full search regulations became effective, this new set of figures show that only 9% of this company’s transactions failed between acceptance of offer and exchange of contracts. This contrasts favourably against the 23% of transactions failing as reported in Government’s Baseline Review published in February 2007.

No surprise here for those working within the industry, but yet a further credibility problem for Grant Shapps who continues to bang on with his blinkered assertion that the HIP must go as it is costing the house owner millions and millions of pounds. These statistics show otherwise, and prove that the home information pack continues to deliver and is helping to save millions of pounds each day in abortive sale costs. Not only is the consumer now saving a lot of time and money, but is also seeing and benefiting from quick and stress free transactions.

Unless there is an immediate review of policy Grant Shapps could very well find that this unwise policy decision could very well back fire and cause embarrassment.

Government help Grant Shapps understand energy performance certificates

2010-02-17T07:16:00.001-08:00

One would expect the shadow-housing minister, Grant Shapps, to have a basic understanding of the workings of an energy performance certificate, particularly in the light of the repeated assurances he has given of late that the role of the 12,000 energy assessors working in the industry will be safe under a Tory Government.

You would also expect a man who is bright and ambitious, and who sits in the shadow cabinet to have taken the time to talk with energy assessors, to understand the work they do, and to look at and comprehend the content of the energy performance certificate. Quite important to know what you are talking about when a flagship policy – Refit Policy - is very much based on the energy rating contained within an energy performance certificate.

Expectation along these lines is not unreasonable when the man the electorate is being asked to trust with future housing policy is involved, and in whose hands the livelihoods of many within our industry could very well rest.

Unfortunately expectation does not often in the world of politics equate to reality, particularly when an experienced shadow minister makes an almighty big faux pau when asking a straightforward question about the energy ratings of domestic property.

In an attempt no doubt to obtain information to feed his obsession with the HIP and EPC, Grant Shapps tabled yesterday the following question:

‘Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many and what percentage of properties entered onto the domestic Energy Performance Certificate database to date have had an energy rating of more than 450. [315661]’

Fortunately for Mr Shapps there was somebody at hand who knew his stuff and who was able to come to his rescue with the following explanation:

‘John Healey: Domestic Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) provide a rating for the energy performance of a building in the form of a rating from A to G using a scale of 1-100. It is not possible for a dwelling to have a rating of more than 100 and therefore, none of the properties that have had an EPC lodged on the Domestic EPC Register have been given an EPC rating of more than 450.’

I know that this was probably down to an error on the part of one of Mr Shapps’ researchers, but it must beg the question of whether he is genuinely interested in energy efficiency and carbon reduction, or whether all we have here is another ordinary politician whose only real interest is to win votes with populist and substance lacking sound bites.

Is Joanne Cash still in line to replace Grant Shapps?

2010-02-10T07:29:00.000-08:00

The woman tipped to take over the role of Housing Minister from Grant Shapps in the event of the Country being left with a Conservative Government after the next election, Joanne Cash, has it is reported within Inside Housing, fallen out with the constituency Chair of Westminster North.

At one point she announced she would not be standing at the election and it was only after intervention from Conservative Central Office that the matter seems to have been resolved.

She is viewed as one of David Cameron’s rising starts and according to Inside Housing this ‘in fighting’ highlights the tension that still exists between Tory Central Office and some on the constituency parties.

Will the real Grant Shapps please stand up!

2010-02-09T02:07:00.000-08:00

I had not heard of Grant Shapps six months ago. He had not registered on my radar. It was only after attending a dinner in London last year, at which he also attended, that I became aware of him and of how he had already, and would continue to play a major factor in the running and future planning of my business, as well as the businesses of many others operating within the home information pack industry.

So who is Grant Shapps, and why is it so important to understand how he ticks. More importantly is there any evidence available within his past, or with regard his approach to business, that could help us understand why he has become so obsessed with repealing the home information pack legislation, and in the process, destroying the heart and soul of a thriving industry. Some argue that the HIP policy is not so much a Party backed policy, but is rather a policy that has fast become a personal crusade on the part of this bright and very career minded MP.

Well we all know he has the important position within the Conservative Party of Shadow Housing Minister. Some may know that he has an ‘at arms length’ interest in a London based Printing Company called Print House that, much to his credit, was founded by him in 1990. Perhaps not so well known, and which may surprise some, is his former role as an Internet marketing guru in the company - How to Corp Limited. He held at least at one time a shareholding in this company in which he promoted marketing aids under the pseudonym, Michael Green. More on this rather interesting aspect of his life later!

He was born in Watford in 1968 and was educated in a Grammar School before obtaining a Higher National Diploma in Business at Manchester Polytechnic. In 1990 he founded the printing company in a way best described by the text which you can find on the home page of the company website at www.printhouse.com:

‘Way back in 1990 our founder, then a young entrepreneur, started us up during the days when design and print was just emerging from the dark ages.’

Looking at this there is, interestingly, a direct parallel to the approach adopted by many of us, who relying on brave legislative reform, took the opportunity it presented to invest time and money in building IT systems and recruiting people to do what others have failed miserably to do in the past (e.g. Law Society), and that is try and take the home buying and selling process out of the dark ages and into the modern age.

He remains a shareholder of Print House, and in a rather cynical marketing trick, the website contains passing mention of his role in politics:

‘Oh, and that founder of ours, he left us and went off to work elsewhere - as a Member of Parliament!’

The major break through in his political career, that started the same year as his marriage in 1997, came in 2005 when he was elected as the Conservative MP for Welwyn Hatfield at the 2005 election defeating the Labour MP and then Minister for Public Health, Melanie Johnson. He had as a result of the success access to large funds for printing and consequently spent, so it is said, an estimated twelve times what Johnson was able to invest in her campaign.

Now on the shadow front bench and a close supporter of David Cameron, Grant Shapps has sought to make a name for him self in the role of shadow housing minister, focusing his attention on several populist issues such as the homeless, and not forgetting of course, the abolition of home information packs.

Though his history does not give many clues behind this unhealthy obsession with HIPs, there is plenty from his background that makes his complete and politically driven disregard of the consequences his policy will have on an industry packed full with innovation and entrepreneurial spirit, difficult to comprehend, and indeed stomach.

Not only does this evidence lie within the success he has had with his multi- million pound print company, but also in a less publicised part of his life, that is, his former shareholding in the internet marketing company How to Corp Limited, established in 2002 at the same time he was beginning to rise within the ranks of the Conservative Party.

So what is How to Corp? Where do I start! Perhaps it’s best for me to quote Mr Shapps, or perhaps I should say, Michael Green:

‘If you are like me, you dream about making money on the Internet!

But maybe you're still wondering whether it is possible to really make big money online -- I mean, to achieve an outstanding and superior standard of living from the Internet.

Who am I?

My name is Michael Green, and the reason I dream about making money online is because I happen to know for sure that when I wake up each morning, there will be a pile of new orders just waiting for me in my email inbox!

So, you could say that not only do I dream about making money while I'm sleeping -- I do!

Better still, those shiny new orders populating my inbox don't even require any input from me. In fact, the only thing I do in the morning is file those credit card receipts in my new SALES folder. And...err....well that's it!’

Its fair to say that although Mr Shapps originally wrote under this alias, the company now uses the name Michael Green as a publishing name, with the products primarily commercially written by third-parties and marketed by How To Corp Ltd.

Interestingly however the website which gives the impression through fake US telephone numbers and the use of dollars as the primary trading currency, it is of USA origin, still contains a biography that makes mention of Mr Shapps, sorry Mr Green, as being a person who seems wholly unconcerned about people making a connection with his real identity and political life. His self-penned biography (well as afar as I can see it is self-penned) reads:

‘Michael Green is a 35 year old Brit who lives in London, England.

When he was just 21, he set up his own printing business. Today that same business has developed into offering Design, Print and Website development services and has a turnover measured in the millions.

Nowadays Michael works on a part-time basis as Chairman of his printing company and in his spare time he's developed http://www.howtocorp.com

Michael discovered that his offline, real-world, business experience helped make him an overnight online success. And the facts speak for themselves because he established his online How To Corp enterprise as recently as the Spring of 2002, yet today he has created over 16 toolkit products and these are marketed and sold worldwide via the internet.

Michael Green has achieved a #5 position in the much coveted ClickBank MarketPlace, which lists literally tens-of-thousands of other online products, so the chances are that by the time you've finished reading his biography, he will have made yet more internet-based sales!

Michael explains:

"Doing business both on and offline is much more similar than some people would have you think. You still need to provide good products and a great service. In addition it's important to be courteous, polite and responsive when prospective customers contact you by phone or email. These same rules all apply no matter which environment your business operates in."

Michael says that there are however some very big differences to doing business online. He confesses that he still struggles to believe how it has been possible to build such a profitable company, without the need to employ staff, hold physical stock or deal with so many of the other regulatory issues that surround traditional 'real-world' businesses’.

Lucky Grant Shapps that is what I say! Fortunately he operated and made a load of money in a world where he was totally unaffected by the political whim that he has and continues to impose upon hard working people like myself. The insult is even worse when you look that what he was doing is not too far off what we are doing within the HIP industry – that is, looking to use the Internet to make a living! Technology to provide an information-based product is what we do and what we do well!

The only difference is that we sell a product that is demonstrably helping to improve a system desperately in need of improvement, whereas How to Corp seems to be praying upon and selling to unsuspecting people who are persuaded through clever marketing techniques to part with hard earned money in the belief they will make their millions.

Not sure what this tells us about the type of person the electorate is being asked to elect as the Country’s next shadow housing minister – perhaps it is best to leave it to my readers to make their own mind up.

Research strikes blow to Conservative policy on home information packs

2010-02-09T01:21:00.000-08:00

Home information Packs are not hampering the property market is the message that emerges loud and clear from the results of research conducted by national estate agents, Connells. Figures released show a 9% increase in the number of new valuations carried out on residential property in January 2010, compared to January 2009.

In fact this is the fifth time in a row that monthly valuations activity has exceeded that of the same month the year before. This news must come as a bitter blow to Grant Shapps policy stance on home information packs as it clearly undermines his repeated assertions of late that the cost of the HIP is deterring the home owner from taking steps to enter the property market. The argument with its origin in misguided political rhetoric has always lacked credibility and is now hopefully one that will finally be put to rest.

Is it not now time for the Conservative Party to admit defeat and begin to look at ways to impress the electorate with some positive and progressive policy?

Another major blow to the survival of the Home Inspector

2010-02-05T02:39:00.000-08:00

Yesterday’s news that Property Professionals has gone into administration will leave a large number of Home Inspector candidates that they were training left high and dry. Yet another unwelcomed blow, and one that follows a series of setbacks for the beleaguered Home Inspector.

Encouraged by Government to train and acquire qualification to meet the demand that was expected when the Home Condition Report featured as part of the home information pack, the Home Inspector has for the past year or so been left in limbo facing little prospect of seeing any increase in the very low level of demand for condition reports.

There may it seem however be some light at the end of the tunnel with the establishment of a new organisation known as the Residential Property Surveyors Association (RPSA). As part of FPIP the RPSA has been introduced to represent the interests of Home Inspectors (whether part or fully qualified and registered).

Upon hearing news of the demise of Property Professionals RPSA has I am told taken the initiative to arrange an emergency meeting to see if they can come up with an immediate solution that will help the people affected.

A Spokesman for RPSA has told me:

‘We are sincerely concerned for the people that have been affected by the Government’s dire treatment of HIs and our members have some good friends amongst them. We are determined to try and achieve for them what they are entitled to – which is support from Government (whether by way of compensation or other means) and a long term and rewarding career in condition reporting.'

Though no guarantee RPSA holds all the answers, it must be reassuring an organisation now exists that is looking to see if it can provide support and direction for the Home Inspector and hopefully ensure the HI does not become a forgotten professional.

The RPSA can be contacted via e-mail at registrations@fpip.org or by telephone 08709 507739.

HOME INFORMATION PACKS – A SUGGESTION

2010-02-05T02:27:00.000-08:00

Contribution from HRG supporter:

Ok, after a bottle of wine , here are my thoughts although I'm sure someone must have thought of this already and dismissed it out of hand and it would probably put me out of work but here goes:

I think that the problem lies in the way data is stored and accessed; and the answer is centralised data storage combined with not only licensed access but a broader set of records.

The knock on effect would speed up the selling process and would automatically create more uniformity across the whole of the country's housing stock, improve energy efficiency, solve some of the housing shortage and create and stimulate wealth within the economy and improve organic growth.

Here's how it works:

Currently, as you know, a Hip is comprised of several elements that have to be obtained from 3 or 4 different sources ( water board, local authority, landmark etc) - all at varying speeds and costs.
Secondly, Hip packs are confined to people selling their houses.

Thirdly, energy certificates are confined to properties being sold or let which seems daft if we as a nation are trying to reduce our carbon footprint.

and finally we have a housing shortage and an ailing economy when we also have so many homes empty or in such disrepair whilst we continue to build new homes

My suggestion is that we should:

• Make all Local Authority, property records , water / drainage, land , title etc centralised

• issue every dwelling in the country a property MOT ( Hip pack) containing an energy survey, electric, gas and stock condition report which gives an overall score with recommendations for improvement. ( this would mean using some of the housing / energy budget to enable the costs to be paid for initially)

• Add These reports to the central file which is only accessable by the home owner or an agent acting on their behalf and which are then simply updated whenever there are changes made by whoever is making those changes ie the owner/ occupier, local authority , water etc - so that all these parties have a duty ( as they do currently, to keep their part of the records up to date)

• This shouldnt increase bureaucracy as most of it already exists, its just fragmented currently.

• Phase two would be to issue grants/ incentive for any property falling below a certain rating to enable it to come up to a liveable standard and energy rating.

• When a person is selling their home, they then already have their own online login to their property records which they then pass over to their prospective buyer, or tenant in the case of rentals.

Ok, so the knock on effect of all this would be that :

1. The price of a hip would be uniform as it would be paid for centrally and would apply to every home.

2. It would stimulate the economy in terms of getting those properties up to scratch

3. would reduce sharp practice

4. speed up the process of exchange to home buyers to literally same day sales in theory.

5. improve our carbon footprint

6. give the country a true world lead in terms of the greener issue

7. Improve homelessness

8. Improve waste on new builds in favour of improving the existing housing stock

9. Create better warmth and security for our old

The advantages are endless and far outweigh the initial outlay.

I think if you added in a similar solution to commercial properties it would also stimulate the entreprenuers amongst us but I'll leave someone else to think that part through.

Thanks for listening

More news from the Conservative Party on home information packs

2010-02-05T01:30:00.000-08:00

Further clarification on issues surrounding the HIP have today emerged from Grant Shapps’ office. In reply to a letter sent to Mr Shapps by an energy assessor who like many of his colleagues is concerned about the loss of livelihood if the HIP is abolished, the Conservative Party has once again questioned the necessity for the HIP stating it:

‘.... believe(s) that if they (HIPs) are in fact an effective and efficient means of compiling important documents relating to a home and a useful source of information in the home buying process then they will survive in the market without the need for legislation’.

Ignoring the fact all attempts over the past 75 years to introduce, through voluntary take up schemes, such as protocols, have failed miserably, the letter then goes on to explain the reason for wishing to implement policy that will clearly throw us all back into the dark ages:

‘To clarify, we do not claim that HIPs have caused the financial problems which have pervaded in the economy over the period of their existence, but the continuation of such a costly piece of bureaucracy has harmed the market and created unnecessary costs for sellers in an already depressed market. All of the figures quoted have used the Government’s own estimates of HIPs produced and estimated average costs, obtained via Parliamentary Questions. Any problems with their basis should therefore be taken up with the Department for Communities and Local Government’.

At long last we have official acknowledgement from the Conservative Party that the HIP is not the cause for the collapse of last year of the property market. Halleluiah! Instead the focus is on how the HIP is costing the consumer more to move home. When will the Conservative Party ‘get it’, the HIP has led to lower conveyancing costs and the removal of the 1 million pounds per day lost in failed transactions. It is a simple set of fact but one that is continuously overlooked.

Asked about the Home Buying Survey commissioned back in 2007 and why the Conservative Party has consistently refused to disclose the findings Mr Shapps explains:

‘We undertook to review home buying during a very different climate for the market and we continue to monitor the market’s recovery and regularly receive testimonials from buyers and sellers describing their experiences and offering their thoughts on how the system could be improved. Grant will always pay keen attention to such correspondence and it is used to inform future policy.’

Sorry, but this is nonsense and Mr Shapps knows it is. We are all bright enough to view results in light of changes in market conditions and as the market is picking up and will inevitably go through a similar cycle why not let us see what the survey revealed. The truth must be that it does not support the policy Mr Shapps is pushing.

Strangely when asked about the affect his policy will have upon the spirit of entrepreneurialism, and how it will lead to job losses, instead of offering to see if there is an alternative route of achieving his aim but one which would have less impact, the response focuses on how political ideology seems to be the only factor that is important to Mr Shapps. His office writes:

‘ As you so rightly point out, Conservatives believe that entrepreneurs and others who work hard to benefit themselves, their families and the economy are the bedrock of a flourishing economy and are vital to any economic recovery. However, we do not believe that imposing bureaucracy and red-tape is the best means by which to encourage entrepreneurialism’.

Banging one’s head against a brick wall comes to mind when the response ends with a reiteration of the fact the policy thinking has always been consistent and that as the EPC is to be retained we should all be grateful. Interestingly his office is still labouring under the delusion that the policy is a popular one and will win votes. They say:

‘We have set out our stall and have always been consistent about our intention to abolish Home Information Packs. We will however maintain and enhance Energy Performance Certificates and leave it to the electorate to decide whose plans are best for the housing market’.

I believe he is wrong and that the Conservative Party is underestimating the power and influence of the industry when it comes to engaging with and educating homeowners. The problem is that rather than speaking with those who are engaging as grass root level , Mr Shapps is instead putting too much emphasis on feedback from a very small section of the property industry.

HomesMattter's view on home buying reform

2010-02-04T02:23:00.000-08:00

Contribution from HomesMatter (www.homesmatter.co.uk)

Problems

Consumers find the process of selling and buying a home to be stressful, time consuming and expensive and reform is long overdue. The major problem is there is no certainty a transaction will go ahead. A seller or buyer can pull out for any reason whatsoever without penalty prior to exchange of contracts resulting in unwanted cost and heartache for millions of sellers and buyers.

The technology, commercial nous and political will to make the process better exists but initiatives introduced by Government – for example Home Information Packs, Energy Performance Certificates and the Chain Matrix - have not fully delivered on this potential. Organisations such as the e-Homebuying Forum are attempting to resolve this. However, with many disparate types of organisations involved with differing interests, it is a complicated and time consuming process. Homes Matter's founder is trying to help move the process forward.

Solutions

Options being considered include:

Exchange-ready Home Information Packs containing everything a buyer's conveyancer needs to exchange contracts
Home Condition Reports carried out by a RICS approved surveyor to reduce the risk of a prospective buyer pulling out
Valuations acceptable to lenders prepared by a RICS surveyor. Most lenders accept these in Scotland.
In principle mortgage offers - should not be a problem for any lender
Sealed Bids as in Scotland to ensure certainty of transaction and reduction in house price inflation.
No obligation quotes for repair work highlighted in HCRs by accredited home service providers
Free Home Energy Audits and completion of recommended works to make the home more attractive to buyers
Online tracking so sellers and buyers can see how their sale and / or purchase is progressing
Where we are now

Home Information Packs
Home Information Packs (HIP) were introduced in 2007 with the objective of improving the homebuying process. However, estate agents, conveyancers and surveyors did not support their introduction and consumer opinion and the media is divided as to whether they have helped.

The push at the moment is for exchange ready HIPs to become the de facto standard. However, the Conservative Party have said that if they are elected this year, they will abolish mandatory HIPs. They have, however, said they would work with industry on voluntary exchange-ready packs provided they add something to the sales process rather than act as an additional cost for the seller. For further information on HIPs, please see the Government website.

Home Condition Reports
By providing a Home Condition Report (HCR) or survey on their property, owners could make it more saleable. However, sellers have purchased very few HCRs to date due to poor marketing. RICS and others are now working to create an improved version.

Around 85% of all property transactions involve chains of varying lengths and about 1/3 of these breakdown causing problems for everyone concerned. The major reason for breakdown is the buyer pulling out because of an unexpected problem with a survey and if a chain collapses because of this, then everyone loses out. If owners provide a survey, it will help reduce the risk of a buyer pulling out, chains breaking down, the need for sellers to have to accept an offer subject to survey and speed up the offer to exchange timeframe.

Under the "current" system, most of the information needed by a buyer is only produced after they arrange a survey. So, if there are any problems with homes these only come to light several weeks later by which time sellers have incurred legal and HIP fees etc. Problems include for example, a new roof being needed, faulty electrics, damp or subsidence. It could be a much smaller problem but once a buyer knows a problem exists, he/she thinks there might be more 'hidden' and will invariably either lower their offer once they have an estimate of the costs to repair the fault(s); ask the seller to fix it – or drop out altogether.

It is an established fact that many sales fall through when a prospective buyer has a survey carried out which reveals a fault(s) which requires remedy. If a seller arranges an survey upfront, all of the important information the buyer needs to make a decision is available, resulting in them being much less likely to pull out. In turn, this will lead to a quicker sale - and no disappointment for the seller.

Property lawyers begin to recognise the benefit of home information packs

2010-02-03T04:09:00.001-08:00

I am always on the lookout for evidence from property professionals that supports the view held by many that now the property market is picking up, the frequently attacked home information pack is actually beginning to fully deliver the benefits is was designed to confer.

As a solicitor I have always held the view that any mechanism that helps to place home sellers and buyers in a more informed position at the beginning of the selling process must be good new for consumers, and definitely worth saving. Delaying the legal engagement until the seller has found a buyer is a major cause of delay and makes little sense.

There are many solicitors around the country who are beginning to be vocal about the benefits of the HIP, one of whom London based, Jenny Khan, recently wrote:

‘As a conveyancing solicitor dealing with many conveyancing transactions on a daily basis we find the Home Information Pack useful in that it clearly lays out all the required information about a property. These forms could otherwise take weeks and even months to gather and in the pre Home Information Pack days the sale was delayed while the seller was gathering this information. In particular as a London Solicitor we are dealing with a significant number of leasehold properties which seem to be proceeding through to completions much more swiftly with the Home Information Pack in place’.

To hear this from a conveyancer is refreshing and hopefully this is a message that we will be hearing more and more as the HIP begins to bed in and there are more property transactions within which it’s benefits can be properly assessed.

Improving the usefulness of the home information pack

2010-02-02T08:20:00.000-08:00

The knives are out for the home information pack and those who would like to see the pack condemned to the history books seem to be very quick to block their ears the moment anybody comes up with a suggestion on how the HIP could be used as a basis for badly needed housing reform.

I have previously written at some length about the type of reform one could introduce and there are several good proposals circulating within industry that would present a new government with some constructive ideas. Most of these highlight the benefit of early disclosure of legal documents and information. Rather than re-hashing the arguments advanced in support of such reform I wish in this article to focus instead on other possible applications for the HIP, or an enhanced HIP.

It is sometimes easy to forget that the purpose of the mandation behind the HIP is to oblige a home seller to deliver information and documents on a property to be sold at a very early stage of the home selling process. This is not with the aim of making life more difficult for some estate agents, but rather for the benefit of you and me and other consumers. Buying a house is a major decision normally involving a large sum of money, and is therefore one where it is important that as much information on the property and its surrounding land can be given upfront so as to ensure an informed choice can be made.

At present there is only a limited amount of information available when we look at which property to select for viewing purposes. In the main we are apart from the information contained within a HIP, left to rely on sale particulars drawn up by estate agents, and which are primarily designed and prepared to draw us across the threshold in the hope we fall in love with the property and decide to buy it.

Would it not be so much more helpful if we were able to access within a HIP details of the local schools, the local crime rate, whether the property is situated in a flood plane, the broadband speed, the local amenities, the price at which the property was previously sold, details of previous suppliers of legal services, the local transport system.

In addition to this, and stemming from the energy rating, the pack could include details of grants for energy improvement, and also of schemes such as the Green Refit policy that the Conservatives seem excited about.

Local Council Information sheets could be included making the HIP an ideal and cheap means of distributing important information to householders.

The Property Information Questionaire has since its introduction, helped to draw the householder more into the process of selling and buying and by adding and including more consumer based information, the HIP can only succeed at becoming a more consumer friendly product.

Some HIP suppliers already supply certain of this information and are therefore already conferring extra benefit for the consumer. By leaving the HIP in place and allowing industry to continue to introduce other ‘added value’ ideas can only serve in may view to enhance the HIP experience and make consumers more involved in the selling and buying process.

Looking ahead why not look at developing the HIP further and turning it into a property log book to enable historical information like maintenance to be retained and requiring the legal aspects to be updated each time the property is sold? This can only result in a cost saving to both seller and buyer.

The point to all of this is that if we are going to move forward with making moving home more costs effective and less stressful for the consumer, we must not allow the HIP to go, as without it any hope of moving forward with progressive reform will be lost for many years and perhaps decades to come.

Clear evidence confirms that Personal Searches are as accurate as Local Authority Searches

2010-02-02T05:48:00.000-08:00

Press release from the Federation of Property Information Providers:

Clear evidence confirms that Personal Searches are as accurate as Local Authority Searches

- Independent assessment by Property Codes Compliance Board
- Results clearly demonstrate no difference in accuracy or completeness
- Personal Searches have more ‘additional information’

The Federation of Property Information Providers (FPIP) today welcomed the publication of the results of an audit carried out by the Property Codes Compliance Board (PCCB), the independent regulatory body responsible for maintaining and enforcing standards in the property information sector. The detailed audit of over 900 search answers revealed that Personal Searches are just as reliable as those provided direct by the local authority, with overall good quality standards from both sources.

The compliance exercise was carried out by the PCCB late in 2009. The series of pro-active spot checks was specifically designed to scrutinise the content of Personal Search reports from companies that subscribe to the Search Code - the voluntary protocol adopted by most Property Search Providers - and compare them to local authority searches carried out on the same property. The exercise has confirmed without doubt that there is no significant difference between the two types of report.

Responding to today’s results, Kate Nicholls, Chief Executive of the Council of Property Search Organisations (CoPSO) said:

“This test puts to an end once and for all the myth that Local Authority Searches are in some way better than Search Code-backed Personal Searches. The evidence is clear – that overall, there is no difference when it comes to completeness and accuracy of the searches. In fact, evidence suggests that some Personal Searches contain useful additional data.

We welcome the report, but it is worth noting that only Personal Searches that are covered by the Search Code were tested. It is therefore essential to make sure that if you are using a Personal Search provider that they are a member of the Search Code or COPSO.

COPSO members are constantly seeking ways to improve services and standards across the industry. We believe that independent regulation is key to this, and we look forward to sharing these findings with conveyancers, lenders and local authorities so we can continue to improve the quality and accessability of property data for the benefit of homebuyers.”

Mike Ockenden, Chief Executive of AHIPP and FPIP said:

“These results highlight once again the importance to estate agents, conveyancers and home buyers and sellers of only using HIPs provided by HIP Code subscribers. If a HIP carries the HIP Code logo, you can be sure that it contains all the relevant information, is accurate, up to date and above all reliable. Where a personal search is included in a HIP produced by a HIP Code subscriber, it must be provided by a Search Code Subscriber and these results show it is every bit as accurate as a local authority produced search. Buyers conveyancers can rely on the contents of a pack carrying the code logo to move transactions forward at a quicker pace, and remember there is always the Professional Indemnity Insurance of the subscriber to provider reassurance.”

PCCB Finds Good Personal Search Standards

2010-01-29T09:49:00.000-08:00

For information, please find below a press release being issued today by the PCCB regarding the recent search spot check exercise;

PCCB Finds Good Personal Search Standards

A recent PCCB compliance exercise has revealed good quality standards amongst personal searches and confirmed that they are just as reliable as Local Authority Searches.

The audit was just one of a broad range of compliance activities undertaken throughout 2009: investigations focused particularly on the legitimacy of information sources used by a representative sample of Search Code subscribers. In summary, the audit confirmed that the searches sampled were substantially compliant with the relevant regulations and with the Search Code. It did identify some errors and/or omissions, and weak practices, in several searches but these same failings featured in searches conducted by local authorities in roughly equal measure. These issues have been addressed with the Code subscribers concerned, and appear to result from a lack of diligence rather than from deliberate attempts to short-circuit the provisions in the Code. PCCB will also be taking up its concerns with the Local Authorities sampled.

The experience gained from this exercise will inform the Board’s risk based approach to both compliance and enforcement of both the Search and HIP Codes of Practice in the coming year - and also feed into its work with different Trading Standards officers. The exercise has also enabled PCCB to develop and refine the guidance it issues to registered firms to further improve compliance.

PCCB Chairman, Richard Footitt said: “The PCCB is pleased to note the progress and improvements that have been made by the personal search industry during what was a very tough year. Our compliance activities show that Code subscribers are working hard to achieve high standards, and as we carry forward our work, we expect to see standards improve yet further. PCCB continues to attract new Code subscribers, and following on from our pre-registration product vetting processes, it is clear that there are significant benefits to be realised by firms registering with the PCCB, not least to bring their products up to Code standards. During 2010, we aim to develop our relationship with Trading Standards to the point where personal search firms currently outside the scope of the Code are subject to similar checks as those faced by Code subscribers.

We fully anticipate that further developments to the Code, together with the support we provide to registered firms, will ensure higher standards in 2010 and beyond to the benefit of consumers. Whatever happens in the future, it is vital that the significant progress and advances made by the personal search industry since HIPs were introduced are sustained by maintaining a regulatory framework. Searches containing accurate information and produced quickly up front are critical to the home buying and selling process, and a return to old practices is not acceptable.”

Kind regards

Frank Finch

Property Codes Compliance Ltd

The home information pack leads to improvement in the quality and delivery of the water and sewage search

2010-01-29T06:05:00.000-08:00

Two years into the era of home information packs it is easy, given the political uncertainty surrounding their future, to overlook the benefits of the change they have made in certain areas, to our antiquated home buying process.

One area in particular where there is real evidence of improvement is the delivery and quality of water and sewerage searches. Under the HIP regulations there is an obligation upon a seller to include within the pack comprising of legal documents and the energy performance certificate, information on the possibility of the property being flooded by foul sewage, as well as the established information about connection of the property to the public sewerage and mains water networks and the liabilities and restrictions associated with the proximity of water company assets to a property.

This represents a far more comprehensive collection of data than was previously supplied before the HIP was introduced and has clearly placed the consumer who is thinking of buying, in a far more informed position.

Encouraged by government to put into place improved infrastructure to cope with the expected increase in demand following the introduction of the HIP, water companies have invested heavily in new technology and service areas of their business, with the consequence that almost 90% of water searches in England and Wales are delivered in less than 3 days. This compares favourably with only 71% of searches being delivered in less than 3 days in 2006, prior to the beginning of the HIP regime.

There remain in my view areas within the water industry where there could still be further improvement. The cost of the water and sewage search still remains rather arbitrary and high, and as for the data the reports contain, there is strong argument for this to be delivered in a more consumer friendly summary so as to make it easier to follow and understand.

The water companies clearly have much to thank the HIP for, and as this has also resulted in a benefit to the consumer, it is hard to see why any future government, particularly a government that prides itself on being ‘progressive’, would wish to see an end to the ongoing improvements to the home buying process that industry is continuing to introduce on the back of the HIP.

Government gives it's support to the Home Information Pack industry

2010-01-27T02:56:00.000-08:00

There was more debate in the Commons yesterday on Home Information Packs, and as sure as night follows day, Conservative MPS were at it again, raising the same old questions and quite amusingly relying on purported feedback from estate agents and the Law Society. Not the most reliable sources when it comes to looking for informed views!

The questions kicked off with a question that has featured before regarding the methodology to be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the HIP. As Government has explained on countless occasions in the past there is no up to date information on this though as the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Mr. Ian Austin explained, the Baseline Report published in 2007 is in the process of being updated.

Not content with this Mr Austin was then challenged on the effectiveness of the HIP given that estate agents in Southend claim rather bizarrely that the HIP has damaged the property market. I have to contain myself when I hear a claim of this type! I am no economist but really how can anyone claim with an air of credibility that the humble HIP costing little more than £200 has had such a major and catastrophic effect on the housing market. Utter rubbish!

At least with Mr Austin we have someone who understands the real world. In rebuttal MR Austin explained:

‘I do not accept that at all. Despite a difficult housing market, evidence shows that HIPs actually speed up sales. I am not sure whether there is a branch of Connells estate agency in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, but its survey of more than 37,000 transactions showed that sales with HIPs go through an average of seven days quicker.’

Not happy with raising a ridiculous claim the Conservative MP, Mr Mackay, decides to ask Mr Austin why Government continues to run with the HIP, presumably on the basis that the agents in Southend on which the whole country’s view is based think they are not working and should be scrapped!

Mr Austin then quite rightly responded by highlighting that irrespective of what the agents in Southend may think Mr Mackay needs to think beyond agents and take into account the thousand of jobs that would be lost if the Conservative Party is elected and goes ahead and ‘scraps’ the HIP. He told Mr Mackay:

‘ As always, I am very grateful for the right hon. Gentleman's advice, but I can tell him that thousands of jobs and hundreds of small businesses depend on the HIP process and 13,000 people have invested thousands of pounds in training as energy assessors. The Opposition need to explain why they want to put all those jobs and businesses at risk. He needs to tell all the people in his constituency whose livelihoods depend on the process why the Opposition want to put them out of work’.

From those lovely agents in Southend, attention then turned to the Law Society, the trade body that purports to look after the interests of solicitors. I say ‘purports’ as its my belief, and one shared by other solicitors, that it has little understanding of the needs and requirements of the high street solicitor and has done very little to protect those with interests that fall outside of the City.

Mr Jones, Conservative asked:

‘The interim results of the updated baseline research report are not due to be published until this summer at the earliest. Given that no empirical evidence is therefore available to the Government about the impact of HIPs on the current housing market, why do they not listen to bodies such as the Law Society, which has said clearly that HIPs "add a significant layer of costs for consumers but produce no discernable benefit"?

I am not sure which document this quote comes from but it is clear that as before the question is raised on wholly inaccurate information. There is no added cost. The HIP is part of the legal process and with or without it the consumer pays the same. In fact the cost of selling and buying has come down since the HIP was introduced. As for benefits Mr Austin covered this in his response:

‘As a result of HIPs, more than 2 million home owners now have an energy assessment and recommendations in their energy performance certificate that can help them cut their fuel bills by hundreds of pounds and reduce carbon emissions. That is just one of the many benefits of the HIP process that we have introduced. I thought that tackling climate change was one of the big priorities for the new, modern Conservative party. So much, I suppose, for voting blue to go green’.

He added:

‘The recent Office of Fair Trading consumer research on the HIP process showed that a third of buyers were influenced by the HIP and that they had found the new property information questionnaire the most useful component of it. As I said earlier, Connells estate agents surveyed 37,000 transactions and showed that HIPs sped up the process, which is good news’.

Mr Austin was then asked about the Baseline Survey and of how this according to the Conservative MP Mr. Stewart Jackson showed there ‘was minimal public knowledge of and interest in HIPs, that people considered them a waste of time, that buyers were not consulting them and that costs were being duplicated’.

In response Mr Austin made the valid point that it is still too early too make this type of claim and that in any event the research actually shows that the benefits are there to be seen:

‘As I said a short while ago, what the research actually shows is that in a short period, nine out of 10 buyers used the HIP. One in three said that it helped them decide which home to buy, which is a big improvement on the figures shortly after the introduction of HIPs, and shows that the system is becoming more helpful and useful all the time. The question that the hon. Gentleman and other Conservative Front Benchers must answer is why they want to sling out of work the thousands of people who have invested time and money in training to implement the process, and to cut the jobs of their constituents who depend on it’.

How refreshing to see Government sticking up for the industry it created and for highlighting the massive job loss that will follow if the HIP is scrapped. I personally believe that Grant Shapps is also concerned about this aspect – he is a businessman and must be aware of the sacrifices, hard work and personal investment in both time and money that goes into establishing and making a business a success. People in power and who ‘play’ politics must always keep in mind the personal tragedy that can happen when industries are dismantled for no reason other than political gain.

Government defend home information packs in lively Lords' debate

2010-01-26T02:43:00.000-08:00

A lively debate took place this week within the House of Lords involving as the Government’s spokesman, Lord McKenzie of Luton – the Parliamentary Under- Secretary of State, DCLG & DWP. This stemmed from questions raised by Lord Redesdale on the subject of EPCs.

Below are some of the relevant extracts:

‘Lord Bates: My Lords, when energy performance certificates were introduced in Northern Ireland, they were not attached to the costly and bureaucratic home information packs. Will the Minister explain why the same policy approach was not taken in England and Wales?

Lord McKenzie of Luton: My Lords, home information packs are bedding down well and have proved to be a useful instrument to help purchasers. I think that the right decision was made.

Lord Tope: My Lords, how many buildings in the commercial and domestic sectors do not have EPCs?

Lord McKenzie of Luton: My Lords, EPCs are needed for buildings that are constructed, sold or rented out. There are something like 4 million domestic EPCs and 141,000 non-domestic EPCs on the register. I cannot specifically answer the question how many there should be, but there are high levels of compliance, certainly in the domestic sector.

Baroness Gardner of Parkes: Will the Minister comment further on his remark that the home information packs are bedding down well? Has he not read in the
press comments by estate agents saying that the packs have not been any help whatever, which I believe is the general public view?

Lord McKenzie of Luton: My Lords, more than 2 million HIPs have been prepared, providing important information up front to help to inform buyers' decisions. As a result, more than 2 million home owners now have an energy assessment and recommendations in their EPC that can help them to cut up to £300 off their fuel bills. Despite a difficult housing market, HIPs are helping to reduce transaction times. An estate agency survey, which looked at 37,000 transactions, showed that, on average, sales with HIPs go through seven days quicker.

Baroness Byford: My Lords, on the home information pack figures that the Minister gave us, how many people have had to go back and get new information packs because there is a very short timescale for their viability?

Lord McKenzie of Luton: My Lords, I do not have that information to hand, but I can say that we intend to evaluate the effectiveness of HIPs by updating the 2007 HIP Baseline Research report. The new report should be available later this year.

The history behind home information packs shows that it is the consumer that counts

2010-01-25T05:56:00.000-08:00

At a time when the future of the home information pack looks rather gloomy it is perhaps helpful to remember and remind ourselves of the background to, and reasons behind the establishment of the HIP.

In fact the HIP has its roots in a cycle of ‘boom and bust’ similar to that recently witnessed. It was following the housing boom of the late 1980s and the subsequent housing market recession of 1991-93, the then Labour opposition began to consider whether fundamental reform was needed in the housing market. This finally took expression in the Labour Party manifesto in 1997 which stated: "The problems of gazumping have reappeared. Those who break their bargains should be liable to pay the costs inflicted on others, in particular, legal and survey costs. We are consulting on the best way of tackling the problems of gazumping in the interests of responsible home buyers and sellers."

Upon election to Government Labour found following research that the current home sales process was wasteful and inefficient with around 28% of agreed transactions falling through between acceptance of the offer and exchange of contracts. As the then Minister of State, Jeff Rooker commented (28/12/2002): "Sellers' Packs will make the home- buying and selling process more transparent, faster and consumer friendly. They will reduce the stress and wasted costs suffered by hundreds of thousands of consumers each year."

Details of proposals for HIPs were published for consultation in "The key to easier home buying and selling' (DETR, 1998) and in chapter 4 of the Housing Green Paper 'Quality and choice: A decent home for all" (DETR, 2000a). This policy was confirmed in chapter 2 of the subsequent Housing Policy Statement "The way forward for housing" (DETR, 2000b). A pilot study in Bristol (ODPM, 2001) examined the practicality of HIPs although the number of packs evaluated was small. There was widespread criticism of the proposals but, despite that, the Government introduced a Homes Bill in 2000 that would have made a seller's pack mandatory. The Bill ran out of time as a result of the general election in May 2001. The Labour party reaffirmed its commitment to introduce a seller's pack in its manifesto and when re-elected consulted further on proposals for a HIP as part of a wider Housing Bill in March 2003. The Housing Bill was introduced in November 2003 and became an Act in 2004.

The Government faced a number of choices when it set about reforming the transaction process. These included the use of a binding contract over buyers and sellers, requiring lenders to provide faster mortgage offers and encouraging greater use of information technology to speed up the process. However, the Government took the view that ensuring buyers were better informed about the property they were purchasing would be the most practical way forward. A particular issue was the condition of the property. Only 20-25% of home buyers commissioned their own surveys before completing a purchase and it was felt that better information on condition in particular would improve price bargaining and make for a more efficient market.

The Government argued that HIPs would:

• Enable buyers and sellers to negotiate from an informed position;

• Increase openness and transparency, helping to make the process less adversarial and stressful;

• Help the parties commit more quickly to the transaction, shortening the period of uncertainty between acceptance of an offer and exchange of contracts;

• Increase certainty by avoiding unwelcome surprises which currently cause renegotiation and transaction failures after terms have been agreed;

• Reduce wasted costs resulting from high rates of failed transactions; and

• Help shorten the overall transaction timescale.

The Government's resolve to introduce legislation has been strongly tested. Although it was an original commitment was made in 1997 it was not until 2004 that legislation was introduced and passed.

It took this time as Government came across much resistance. This is not surprising given reform to the housing market has never over the centuries proved easy. However, it survived partly because the Government felt that despite the arguments being posed by solicitors and estate agents against reform, popular support remained very strong with the Department of Communities and Local Government, (or Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) as it was then), experiencing its biggest ever post bag of public support for the reforms when they were announced.

In March 2006 the government gave the go-ahead for multiple certification schemes. In June 2006 draft regulations were made setting out the detailed contents of Home Information Packs, rules governing the availability of packs, exceptions from the pack duties and arrangements for enforcement.

Originally the HIP was going to be required from June 1, 2007. However, just ten days before that date, Communities Secretary Ms Kelly announced that they would be phased in from August 2007, and initially only for larger properties. Between 1 August and 10 September only homes marketed with four or more bedrooms were legally required to have an HIP. This was extended to cover homes with three or more bedrooms from September 10.

On November 22, the then Housing Minister Yvette Cooper announced that HIPs would be rolled out to include one and two bedroom properties as of December 14, completing the Government's phased introduction of Home Information Packs to residential homes marketed for sale within England and Wales.

A chequered history! However we are now here with an established industry through which the consumer is beginning to see and benefit from the delivery of the original objectives of greater certainty and transparency as well as shorter transaction times. After taking so long to get where we are it would be a travesty to be thrown back into the dark ages. We should learn from the lesson this history discloses, that is, irrespective of stakeholder self interest and the general lack of support for change within certain camps, at the end of the day it is the consumer that has and continues to be totally disillusioned with the home selling and buying process. The political party that tunes into this vein of feeling will be the party that has a greater chance of winning support for housing policy. At the end of the day the HIP informed consumer ‘gets’ the objective of the HIP and given the choice would retain the HIP providing it could be used as a basis for reform.

Apathy if not addressed will be the death of any hope of success with reform proposals... a contribution from Daphne Payne

2010-01-22T06:15:00.000-08:00

As a founder member of Pro DEA I and my colleagues found that apathy amongst those that purport to support this fledgling industry for Energy Efficiency can’t be bothered. We were putting in (as you are) our time and efforts to try to organise a Not for Profit organisation for Energy Assessors from all the Energy Streams only to find if it meant committing their selves by putting their hand in their pockets or getting involved they then disappeared into thin ice.

There are none so blind as those that don’t want to see – that they will be out of a job come the summer.

Blog Contribution by Sharon Crossland, founder of www.leaseholdlife.info

2010-01-22T06:13:00.000-08:00

HRG is very pleased to add to their blog an article that Sharon Crossland the founder of the excellent website www.leaseholdlife.info has kindly written.

The site is an information resource for leasehold owners, resident management companies and renting tenants. Sharon has written extensively for News on the Block, a publication specifically for flat owners, and has also written a number of articles for hipconsultant.co.uk. She has also been featured in the Observer on the importance of securing a good managing agent. Her experience and current role as acting intermediary between the Directors of her block's RTM company and their managing agent has led to her being accepted by the Institute of Residential Property Management as an Affiliate Member.

ARTICLE

I have been following the unfolding story of HIPs with a great deal of interest and came to the early conclusion that fundamentally they were a sound proposition. They came into the public arena in the guise of Sellers Packs in 1998 and transformed into HIPs in 2006 but their aim remained the same - to improve the conveyancing process. If anyone recalls how AHIPP laid out their stall they will remember that it was pretty well thought out. It's all somewhat irrelevant now though because if the Conservatives get into power at the next General Election they will probably be scrapped, at least in their current guise. The Shadow Housing minister Grant Shapps has made no secret of his hatred of them but he has yet to come up with either an alternative or any ideas on adaptation so where will this leave conveyancing, especially leasehold?

Of the two residential property tenures, freehold and leasehold (I am not including Commonhold because of its pretty non-existent takeup), leasehold has always been the more complicated tenure because of the involvement of additional parties and the complexities of the pre-contract enquiry information. The HIPs (No 2) Regulations broke down leasehold information into two sections – required (mandatory) and authorised (voluntary). There were fourteen questions in the voluntary section which were designed as a 'catch all' provision to allow sellers to disclose all, part or none of it, at their own discretion.
AHIPP were lobbying to get this voluntary information made mandatory and had arranged for the introduction of a Private Members Bill into the House of Lords in 2007. Unfortunately it was not pursued past a second reading due to other priorities at the time.

Sourcing leasehold information from third parties remained problematic in that managing agents were under no obligation to provide it either under the old system or the new and certainly not to a timeframe dictated by the seller. Pricing varied widely between agents as there were no statutory guidelines and a leasehold HIP was proving to be considerably more expensive than that of freehold. So at the beginning of 2009, the only mandatory document required for a leasehold HIP was that of the lease. There was however a new addition to the HIPs pack being worked on - the PIQ (Property Information Questionnaire) which was going to add some mandatory leasehold questions.

There has never been enough information on leasehold tenure provided early enough in the conveyancing process but I personally think that AHIPP have gone further to assist prospective leaseholders than anyone else. The fact that the lease was included as a mandatory document was helpful because buyers don't usually get to see what they have purchased and signed up to. This is due to the fact that the procedural element of assigning the lease is dealt with by the conveyancer, leading to buyers often finding themselves with defective leases (the other main cause of leasehold problems). The PIQ introduced some key mandatory leasehold questions which AHIPP thought was a good start and went some way to addressing the issue of putting leasehold information provision at the front of the conveyancing process, which it did. This issue was further assisted by the inclusion in the pack of the ARMA downloadable leaflet 'Living in Leasehold Flats' ensuring that yet more information would be getting out into the wider domain.

Whilst the issue of leasehold information provision is likely to be raised at a future meeting of AHIPP's legal and leasehold working group, which I hope will again focus on the voluntary information currently contained in the Regulations, the focus for the time being is on the future of HIPs should the Conservative win the general election. That is perfectly understandable but regardless of who wins, the leasehold sector cannot afford to lose this foothold on leasehold information provision. if it does, how on earth is any prospective purchaser going to be able to adhere to the guiding legal principle of buying residential property, that of Caveat Emptor' (buyer beware)?

Are home information pack suppliers socially irresponsible?

2010-01-19T03:54:00.000-08:00

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.

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.

Government Latest on Home Inspectors and Home Condition Report

2010-01-15T06:23:00.000-08:00

Sarah Teather, the Liberal Democrat Housing Spokesperson, has been busy over the past week or so asking parliamentary questions of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. The answers received do not reveal very much new, though do highlight a lack of monitoring on the impact of EPCs as well as deficiencies on the tracking of issues relating to Home Inspectors.

In response to the question about the effect on the level of energy efficiency of buildings John Healey revealed the absence of data and was also unable to give figures on the level of non compliance within the commercial and domestic sectors.

There then followed questions relating to the plight of the Home Inspector. Ms Teather asked John Healey to provide information on the number of Home Inspectors who have paid for training, whether any assessment of job opportunities for Home Inspectors exists, how many Home Condition Reports have been commissioned, and whether any assessment has been made of the voluntary roll out of the HCR.

Mr Healey’s response was far from enlightening:

‘The home condition report (HCR) remains authorised for inclusion in the home information pack (HIP) on a voluntary basis and certificated home inspectors are accredited to produce domestic energy performance certificates (EPCs) which are a required component of the home information pack. No such assessment of the job opportunities of home inspectors has been made.

Communities and Local Government does not hold information on the number of people who have paid fees to train as home inspectors, or the number of people who have undertaken or are undertaking such training. The most recent figure supplied to us by the national EPC and HCR register operator, shows that there are 971 certificated home inspectors as of 4 January 2010. This figure may include duplicate numbers of those home inspectors who have registered with more than one certification scheme.

Although since the decision in July 2006 to make the HCR an authorised rather than required document, we continued to promote the benefits of including an HCR within a HIP. However, take-up has been disappointing with only 327 reports lodged on the central register since 1 August 2007 and it is clear that the product as it stands is not seen as the right one either by consumers or industry.

We still believe that consumers should be better informed about any property they are looking to buy before making what is undoubtedly one of the biggest purchases of their lives and that they want information about the condition of homes before they commit to buying them. As a result Margaret Beckett established the Working Group on condition information in the home buying and selling process to explore options for ensuring consumers receive appropriate information about a property's condition before they commit to buy, by building on existing products such as the HCR, and creating opportunities for all practitioners including home inspectors’.

Regrettably there is no indication of probable publication date of the Working Group’s findings, though given it existence there may perhaps be a glimmer of hope for the beleaguered Home Inspector.

Where next for HIPs?

2010-01-15T05:18:00.000-08:00

Source: Mortgage Finance Gazette: James Sherwood-Rogers of Quest

Home Information Packs have had a rocky ride since they were first envisaged and have created much debate within the industry.

They say thirteen is an unlucky number, and it would appear that this may well be the case for Home Information Packs (HIPs). Thirteen years after the initial concept was devised, the Conservative party is making very clear and vocal its plans to eradicate HIPs if the party are successful at the polls. Whether this is to improve the homebuying process or just win votes, the HIPs industry, it is fair to say, is in turmoil.

What happened?

New Labour government first introduced the concept of HIPs back in 1997 where it was agreed as a new way of improving the homebuying and selling process across England and Wales. It was, after all, due an overhaul as prior to this new reform, no major updates had been made to the process of buying homes since 1925, and reports showed that consumers were losing £1 million per day, as a result of failed property transactions.

After ten years of formulating the new initiative; working with the industry, making revisions, setting up accreditation schemes, training domestic energy assessors (DEAs), running pilots and making yet further revisions, HIPs finally came in to force in August 2007.

Unfortunately, this coincided with the start of the market decline and as such, HIPs are seen by many consumers as one of the contributing factors towards why we are where we are today with the current property sector and house prices.

Of course, we know there are many more serious reasons for the crash in the property market, however, it is certainly true that HIPs have been dogged by a raft of negative press since the legislation was passed.

Only three years into the scheme coming into force and change is already on the horizon. With a general election imminent, the Conservatives are pledging that should they come to power, HIPs will be one of the first things they will look to scrap.

Grant Shapps, shadow housing minister for the Conservatives was only recently quoted in The Times newspaper saying that HIPs would be scrapped, “in a matter of weeks” by using emergency powers, although the Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) would not realise the same fate.

In fact, Shapps has some major plans in place to use EPCs as a launch-pad to make consumers “green-up” their homes. In a climate change speech that was given in November, he was quoted as saying that EPCs would “be a catalyst for an environmental revolution” through the Conservative’s planned ‘Green Deal’ initiative, which would see each household in the country benefit from a £6,500 allowance towards energy improvements.

So, what’s next?

Although there are no guarantees that the Conservative party will be successful at the general election, it is seen by many as the most likely outcome at the moment, with a hung parliament a possible second option. With no one giving Labour much credence, it makes clear sense to take stock of what options are available for government and industry

A panel of experts at the Land Data Great Housing Market Debate in 2009, which included the director general of the Council of Mortgage Lenders, chief economist at Morgan Stanley, the chief economics correspondent at the BBC and the group chief executive of Countrywide all unanimously agreed that, “while packs had been poorly implemented they should not be scrapped but instead adapted and improved”.

The Association of Home Information Pack Providers (AHIPP) is also calling for the successful party to build on the progress made to date by modifying and improving the reforms that currently exist, by working hand-in-hand with the industry in order to move to the next stage of the home buying reform. It points out that the last major reform of the homebuying process was in 1925, and that the market needs legislation to push through reforms that are in the interest of the buyer and the seller.

AHIPP recently commissioned an Ipsos MORI poll to identify current consumer opinion of HIPs and it highlighted that people believe that the homebuying process is too slow and more upfront information is desired – potentially even more than is currently provided by HIPs. A majority agreed that homebuyers should be provided with more upfront information about the condition of the property they are buying and over eight out of 10 respondents agreed that the process of buying and selling properties takes too long.

In light of this, there is support for a detailed review of how the legislation could be adapted to ensure relevant information is presented to potential buyers up-front, to make the due-diligence process quick and easy and to support both buyers and sellers through the process.

There are a number of potential options available to government, from producing a ‘light’ version of the HIP, which strips out much of the legal data and provides more consumer-facing documents to support the purchasing process, to a full-on HIP that includes every possible piece of information relevant to a particular property’s location.

Scotland

Many observers are taking a close look at Scotland (see November’s MFG, page 42). The Home Report initiative in Scotland is a prime example of what could be achieved here. Since this was introduced in December 2008, published industry figures and feedback is confirming that, although originally greeted with cynicism, the reports are providing consumers with more transparency by offering critical information on the property in advance.

The Home Report actually only contains three documents compared with seven in freehold HIPs (or more if it’s a pack for a leasehold property). These are a Property Questionnaire that contains information on relevant local data, such as Council Tax banding, parking information, local services and any relevant planning notices; a Single Survey report that gives detailed information about the condition and value of a home; and an Energy Performance Certificate to provide a review of the property's energy efficiency.

In terms of who is responsible for the report’s completion, a chartered surveyor produces the Single Survey and also the energy efficiency report in Scotland, whilst the seller completes the Property Survey. The estate agent then collates this information on behalf of all parties.

In contrast, HIPs in England and Wales have no survey or valuation data and the exclusion of these documents that were initially seen as many in the industry as the ‘core value’ of the packs are what many believe has led to their imminent downfall. However, some people may be sceptical that homebuyers will actually rely on such reports that have been produced by a seller, and will not instead seek to have their own independent reports produced.

Supporters of the Scottish model suggest that it demonstrates that by presenting consumer-facing data that really matters to prospective buyers upfront – the condition, locality information and energy rating of the home - the report is digested by potential purchasers and used as an active tool in helping them make their decision on progressing with the purchase of the home. However, the homebuying process in Scotland is fundamentally different, and therefore it is not clear that the same product would work effectively across the UK.

Exchange Ready Packs

Another potential way forward for HIPs is to take look at the advantages of what is being called Exchange Ready Packs (ERPs). These add further information to the basic HIP in order to ensure a buyer is able to proceed immediately to exchange of contracts once an offer has been accepted as all documentation required by a conveyancer is made available through the pack.

There are pack providers and estate agents already using this method who are finding that it reduces the time between acceptance of offer and the actual exchange of contracts. One supplier claims that as a result of ERPs, the time taken to get to exchange has halved.

The ERP contains five additional items to a standard HIP. A ‘contract for sale’, which is prepared by a lawyer; Seller Property Information Forms that include details about the fixtures and fittings of the property; copies of any planning permissions, building regulations consents and guarantees – all of which are supplied by the seller; additional documents that have been referred to in the Register; and a lawyer’s certificate confirming that the pack is exchange-ready.

AHIPP is calling for ERPs to be made mandatory and that they must be ordered before marketing commences and the EPC would need to be included before the property is actually marketed. All other documents would then need to be included within 28 days of the first day of marketing, and they report that the cost for such reports is comparable to HIPs.

In spring 2009, the shadow housing minister revealed he is not averse to the concept of ERPs and was quoted as saying that, "If an Exchange Ready Pack can be produced because estate agents know it’s best practice and they've got evidence that it speeds up the process, it's obviously a great idea. Why don't estate agents get together and propose Exchange Ready Packs?"

However, this also indicates that there is no desire to legislate for ERPs, but to simply support the market in delivering it if the market demands it.

Simplifying the process

If we continue to explore other potential routes that government could take to ‘reform the reform’, the question is whether the process could be simplified yet further still, whilst continuing to provide consumers with useful data at the beginning of the buying cycle to deliver transparency and still help speed up transactions?

Currently, a domestic energy assessor visits a property in advance of it being marketed to conduct the energy survey in order to generate an Energy Performance Certificate. A chartered surveyor then visits the same property to undertake the valuation and, if instructed by the buyer, a detailed Homebuyers Report.

Some market commentators believe this process could be streamlined so both items are done with one visit to the home, prior to the property being marketed. Following the lead of the Scottish system, the professional could also undertake a Single Survey report to capture the condition of the property.

It is, however, difficult to see a time when a surveyor isn't the arbiter of valuation, although technology and data gathering by DEAs could change the shape of the market. And, although it could save time upfront, it would require a change in legislation as currently the Energy Performance Certificate is paid for by the seller and the valuation is instructed and paid for by the buyer, through its lender. In order for this approach to be considered, it would make sense for this to be one transaction that is handled by the seller of the property.

There are certainly many avenues to explore that must take into consideration the speed of the process, transparency provided to consumers, associated costs and importantly how easy the data is for consumers to digest upfront. Government must work with the industry to determine an approach that works for everyone and delivers the best possible outcome.

Whatever happens over the coming months, I am certain that Home Information Packs will certainly be back in the headlines and creating more attention, conversation and debate. Their existence has stimulated a range of new products that may succeed even when legislation is removed, not least because they now provide a valuable income stream for estate agents.

Whichever political party succeeds at the general election, the homebuying market needs further reform to really deliver the promise of HIPs. Whether that is by taking a step back to move forwards we will have to see. Creating something that meets the interests of the homebuying public but is workable across all stages of the buying and selling process – with lenders, surveyors, estate agents and conveyancers - is tough, and the only thing that is agreed is that HIPs in their current form are not the full answer.

Personal property searches are more reliable than council searches

2010-01-13T09:07:00.000-08:00

The debate of whether official searches should be preferred to personal searches continues to challenge the minds of many of us, particularly as personal searches are now far more widespread than they were prior to the introduction of home information packs. In fact the majority of property searches produced within the home selling and buying process emanate from personal search providers.

Before the changes to the HIP Regulations in April 2009 major differences existed between search reports prepared by councils and those produced by personal search agents. The main difference was that the personal search company could if certain data was not readily available take out insurance to cover any adverse consequences stemming from that missing information.

Since April it is no longer possible to include insurance of this type when producing a search report for inclusion within a HIP. This has meant that for all intent and purposes the HIP pack search is as good as an official search produced by the Council.

Even though both personal and official searches are back by indemnity insurance cover, there is still in certain quarters a stigma associated with personal searches, with many property professionals viewing a personal search as an inferior product.

There is no rhyme nor reason for this view to be held and a from a report released by the Property Code Compliance Board which regulates the personal search companies that subscribe to the Search Code, it seems that quality control issues rest more with official than they do with personal searches.

In October, November and December 2009 the PCCB carried out thorough investigations of its Code Subscribers to check on the standards of personal searches compared with official.

Frank Finch of the PCCB reporting on the findings of this investigation stated:

‘A total of 58 searches, comprising 900 questions were scrutinised, with errors being found in just 3% of answers and none of these related to the substantive allegations that data was either missing or inappropriate data was being used'.

Finch went on to comment on the errors by saying that they:

‘Appear to result from a lack of diligence rather than deliberate attempts to short-circuit the provisions in the Code. This is borne out by the fact that these failings featured in searches conducted by both personal search firms and local authorities in roughly equal measure.’

The fact this investigation shows that over half of all errors or omissions identified in the exercise related to local authority reports, suggests that Official searches are no more reliable than those provided by personal search companies.

Has the time not come for the myth surrounding the personal search to be put to rest and for all regulated searches whether supplied by an agent or the council to be viewed as ‘official’? Your views would be welcomed.

Estate Agent supports legal front loading on property sales

2010-01-13T03:29:00.000-08:00

How spooky – within weeks of releasing their draft proposal for Reform - New Year, New Start, the Hip Reform Group (http://bit.ly/5PTgxw) , seem to have found a chain of estate agents who are thinking along the same lines.

In an article that appeared today in the Daily Telegraph by Caroline McGhie – ‘Selling houses: 10 ways to open doors to buyers’ (http://bit.ly/8V6sNp) we see a spokesmen for the prestige estate agency chain, Savills encouraging sellers to engage with solicitors at the point of marketing:

“Speak to your solicitor well in advance,” says Justin Marking of Savills. “My advice would be to complete a standard preliminary inquiries form before marketing. That way, key information can be with their solicitors within 24 hours of an offer being accepted. Also, get your lawyer to prepare a draft contract before a buyer is found, so you are in a position to exchange within 10 days.”

Good advice Mr. Marking! Perhaps we can call upon you and other like minded agents to make representation to Grant Shapps on how he has before him with the HIP a ready made and effective vehicle for bringing about well overdue reform to the selling and buying process.

HIP Overshadowed by Fear of Unemployment and Lack of Credit

2010-01-13T03:05:00.000-08:00

Factors affecting the supply and price of housing stock seem at to be the focus of much attention at a time when many experts are making predictions about what is likely to happen to the property market in 2010.

In a recent article that appeared on lovemney.com a team of experts were invited to put forward their views on how they see house prices panning out over the next 12 months

Interestingly, only one of the invited experts, Mr Peter Bolton King, of the National Association of Estate Agents, chose the opportunity to make mention of the home information pack. Commenting on factors influencing house prices he could not resist the temptation to knock the HIP by saying:

‘…..recent price rises have been driven by demand outstripping supply in some parts of the market. Supply will remain stable in the run up to the general election. However, if more properties come onto the market - which may happen particularly if Home Information Packs are scrapped - prices are forecast to flatten, and in some cases, fall’.

Bolton King purportedly speaking on behalf of the estate agency community is a known opponent of the HIP despite the fact that many of his members are still out there raising large sums of revenue on the back of HIP sales, and using the HIP to tie un-expecting consumers into expensive retainers.

It would be refreshing to hear the NAEA coming forward with their own proposal for reform rather than attacking without foundation every move made that has any mention of making the home buying and selling process quicker and more transparent.

Fortunately not all agents follow the NAEA line of thinking.

It is also reassuring that the real experts in this field were far more tuned in and picked up on the true economic factors that they consider are, and will continue in 2010 to affect supply and pricing.

Here is a sample of the comments:

‘Ernst & Young ITEM Club, an economic forecasting company, predicts a dip in the first half of 2010. Hetal Mehta, Senior Economic Advisor at ITEM says the recent surge in house prices is a 'false dawn', supported by cash buyers and the shortage in property. Again, prices are expected to fall due to a dearth in available mortgage funds and tight lending criteria.’

‘The Halifax predicts prices will be flat in 2010.The mortgage lender isn't convinced the upward trend in 2009 will be repeated in 2010. Although lower rate mortgages and recent improvements in the labour market have fuelled prices in the short-term, the lender is unable to see a sustained recovery this year unless the economy strengthens, and the supply of properties for sale increases significantly.

‘Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) predicts prices will rise between 1% and 2% in 2010. Simon Rubinsohn, Chief Economist at RICS forecasts the shortage in supply will continue with stocks on surveyor's books remaining at historical lows. This could fuel further house price gains in the early part of the year. The imbalance between supply and demand is expected to narrow, resulting in a rise in the number of property transactions as stock gradually increases. Transactions are forecast to step up from a monthly average of 55,000 or 60,000 to 70,000.On the downside, first time buyers will face continued difficulty in finding mortgage finance unless assisted by parents. While cautious lending, a flat labour market and uncertainty in the economy will result in low house price growth.’

Lovemoney.com also courted the views of the consumer. Their survey showed that the consumer expected prices to increase by 3 %. They gave the reason for this as follows:

‘Confidence is rising among bullish consumers following a stabilisation of house prices during the latter part of 2009. However, rising unemployment is expected to temper stronger growth in 2010, while the ability of borrowers to raise a sufficient deposit is also seen as significant barrier’.

In conclusion there is little certainty amongst the views expressed on expected price increases/decreases, though the reasons for the stock shortage and prices fluctuation are far clearer. The fear of unemployment and lack of high LTV mortgages are clearly the only influential factors. The HIP factor pales into insignificance when compared to these major economic factors.

General Election date fixed for May 6th

2010-01-12T07:04:00.000-08:00

Not sure if this has reached the masses but it seems from a slip made by Chris Bryant, the Europe Minister, speaking to diplomats in London, the general election will be held on May 6th, the same day as the local elections.

The report on this published today reads:

‘Mr Bryant was discussing Britain’s relations with Latin America at Canning House, a diplomatic think-tank, with a group of envoys and academics.

Referring to recent tensions between Britain and countries including Venezuala, Mr Bryant said: “I hope that by the time of the general election on May 6, relations will have improved.”

Ministers have been ordered by No 10 not to discuss the date of the next election, to avoid helping the Conservatives with their planning.
Some Labour strategists have been urging an early election in March, and Mr Brown has refused to commit himself to any date. The election must be held by June 3 at the latest.

This not the first time Mr Bryant has revealed sensitive Government information ahead of time. In October, he used Twitter, the micro-blogging website, to disclose that he had been appointed to the Europe job at the Foreign Office, several hours before it was announced by Downing Street.

The Foreign Office confirmed that Mr Bryant had used the May 6 date in the briefing. A spokesman said the minister had also said that he did not actually know when Mr Brown would call the poll’.

Morning – inadvertent admission from the Europe Minister that the election is planned for May 6

Richard

Chris Bryant: general election will be May 6
Chris Bryant, the Europe Minister, has risked the anger of Downing Street by blurting out the date of the general election.

James Kirkup and Heidi Blake

Published: 10:00PM GMT 11 Jan 2010

Speaking to diplomats in London, Mr Bryant appeared to confirm that the poll will be held on May 6, on the same day as the local government elections.
Mr Bryant was discussing Britain’s relations with Latin America at Canning House, a diplomatic think-tank, with a group of envoys and academics.

Referring to recent tensions between Britain and countries including Venezuala, Mr Bryant said: “I hope that by the time of the general election on May 6, relations will have improved.”

Ministers have been ordered by No 10 not to discuss the date of the next election, to avoid helping the Conservatives with their planning.
Some Labour strategists have been urging an early election in March, and Mr Brown has refused to commit himself to any date. The election must be held by June 3 at the latest.

This not the first time Mr Bryant has revealed sensitive Government information ahead of time. In October, he used Twitter, the micro-blogging website, to disclose that he had been appointed to the Europe job at the Foreign Office, several hours before it was announced by Downing Street.

The Foreign Office confirmed that Mr Bryant had used the May 6 date in the briefing. A spokesman said the minister had also said that he did not actually know when Mr Brown would call the poll.

Cheap Home Information Packs Fast Service

2010-01-12T02:20:00.000-08:00

Source: Troy's orderhouseplans.com/blogs

For the full blog please visit: http://bit.ly/6S6dpm

The Home Information Pack caused quite a stir when it was first introduced in 2004. Many people sensed that it could cripple the property marketplace as people would have to go over an extra hurdle to be able to sell their house. However, despite this contention the Home Information Pack has been widely regarded as a success story, since it has freed up a great deal of time in the buying and selling process, and improved the data available to future buyers. You no longer have to worry, for example, about any scares late on in the process when you find out the home you so needed to buy was actually built on a dump!

Ever since Home Information Packs have been introduced, buyers have been protected much more and sellers now have to be completely open about any issues that the property has. Even though the Home Information Pack can take a while to be put together, once you have done it you can show it to anyone who is considering your property, and it can also save you a great deal of time trying to explain everything there is to know about it.

The Home Information Pack is essentially a group of documents which explain different aspects of the house, such as energy performance or the age of the property. There is a great deal of information which has to be presented and it is for this reason that many people are delaying selling their home, since they are concerned over how long it will take them to assemble all this information. However, there are now firms which can handle the whole process for you, saving you a great deal of time and hassle. You can have a home information pack within a matter of days for a small fee, allowing you to concentrate on the more important aspects of the selling process. In the time it would have taken you to put together a HIP, you could be making modifications to the house so as to increase its value in the eyes of the estate agents and prospective buyers.

The best way to get a cheap Home Information Pack is to look online, all you have to do is fill out a short form and within a matter of seconds you will know exactly how much you will have to pay for the firm to put together the home information pack for you. It’s as simple as that and can save you a huge amount of time and money!

Agents say Home Information Packs are beginning to work

2010-01-11T07:36:00.000-08:00

The Independent on Sunday carried an article (http://bit.ly/6dRHsA) on personal finance in which there was some commentary by the journalist concerning the Home Information Pack.

The piece caught my attention through its reference to some feedback from estate agents. Julian Knights, the journalist, whose view he notes, until receiving this feedback, was that the HIP was not of much value, wrote:

‘I had my views challenged last week by – of all people – estate agents. At HIPs' introduction, estate agents would look to the heavens and bemoan bureaucracy, but of late many have changed their tune. It seems the expense of a HIP (£300-£400), which falls on the seller, is deterring those who just want to test the water. One agent told me that the number of sales falling through had halved. It's not how HIPs were supposed to work – the idea was that they would speed sales up – but at least they are having a partly positive impact, although they could still do with a full structural survey being made mandatory pronto’

How refreshing to see someone put into print something which HIP supporters have been arguing without acknowledgement for some years now. Surely the fact that over 1 million pounds per day, it is estimated, is saved through reducing failed sale transactions is evidence per se of the benefit of retaining and improving the home information pack. Hopefully the likes of Grant Shapps and other HIP doubters will start to think more about the positives of the HIP and begin calling, not for abolition, but rather review.

Lawyer Accuses Pack Providers of 'Hijacking' the HIP

2010-01-11T01:24:00.000-08:00

The HIP Reform Group’ draft proposal for Reform – ‘New Year, New Start’ (CLICK HERE), has it is pleasing to report, prompted positive comment and support.

The proposal that advocates the early engagement and instruction of an ‘Advisor’ and for information and documents to be available for delivery to the buyer within 28 days of the first day of marketing, has received widespread coverage, and apart from some expected negative commentary, mainly from anonymous sources, the idea seems to be hitting the right buttons.

One response that is perhaps worthy of particular note is from a conveyancer who took the time to write into the solicitors’ periodical – The Law Society Gazette (CLICK HERE).

The contributor beginning with a reference to Grant Shapps intention to abolish home information packs opened his letter by saying:

‘……….we must encourage the seller to instruct solicitors early in the selling process, which is still not happening despite the good intentions behind the HIP. Ideally the solicitor needs to get on with the ‘completion-ready’ pack before a buyer is found'.

He added:

‘We need to educate the public to understand the process and to instruct lawyers when the house goes on the market. We know of course that sellers are reluctant to incur costs before a buyer is found, so it will be an uphill struggle to change attitudes’

There are all good points and all very much in line with the theme of the HRG proposal. It is, as most supporters of the HIP will tell you, important to promote full and early disclosure of information and documents, as well as greater transparency for the consumer. The ‘smoke and mirrors’ surrounding the home selling and buying process serves no purpose, other than self interest, and must be removed.

The Property Information Questionnaire introduced back in April 2009 was a step in the right direction that clearly encourages the seller to be more involved in the process and to ask questions about procedure that were perhaps not asked too frequently beforehand.

Many consumers still find it difficult to ask their lawyer questions, some fearing it will add to the cost, whilst others find their lawyer unapproachable or too busy. Many lawyers run large caseloads in an effort to make their conveyancing practices profitable, and therefore do not have the time to engage with their clients as much as they would like.

Energy Assessors often say they are asked about the selling and buying process and to explain the purpose of the home information pack. Once explained and with a better understanding the seller acknowledges the benefit of delivery of upfront information and goes away feeling more involved.

Back to the letter and the part where the correspondent accuses pack providers and other involved in the industry of ‘hijacking’ the HIP. He claims:

‘HIPs were certainly hijacked by interested parties. These people were not lawyers and, as we now know, HIPs were introduced with little regard for the views of the legal profession. Sadly the product fails to serve anyone in the conveyancing process other than those who hijacked it. Only the energy certificate should be required at the marketing stage, although even that is of little value’.

Sorry, but this makes little sense. The legal profession was, and remains, better placed than most to adopt and run with the home information pack and use it as what has clearly been shown, by many other lawyers, to be a powerful and effective marketing tool.

Apart from the EPC, the HIP comprises of legal documents and information. Who better to deliver this than a lawyer!

Many lawyers like myself toured the Country before and after the introduction of the HIP, speaking to large groups of lawyers and stressing the importance of embracing the HIP and making it the number one priority in future business planning.

Did they listen? No they did not, well the majority did not, dismissing the HIP at the time as a requirement that would never work, and generally as an unwelcomed change.

Those who did listen have despite the recession done very well and have preserved and increased their conveyancing caseloads.

One of the main problems was the failure of the Law Society to get behind the HIP and to encourage solicitors across the country to seize the opportunity. Unfortunately the Law Society is not the quickest body on the block and is often more influenced and driven by politics than its membership.

In its defence, and for me to defend the Law Society it a rare occurrence, there is it seems quite a large amount of apathy within the legal profession. This was illustrated quite vividly in steps taken by the Law Society in the latter part of last year when it issued a Consultation Paper – ‘Improving Residential Conveyancing (CLICK HERE) inviting its members to comment on such proposals as a ‘Completion Pack’.

Bearing in mind there are over 12,000 plus solicitors practicing in this country how many responses do you estimate they received? Was it 6,000, or 3,000? Wrong! There were only 354 responses!

The Results of the Survey was even more surprising with the majority of those responding saying they did not see there was a problem with the process and that there was little that could be done to improve it.

Commenting on the timeliness of the exchange of information it was noted

‘…. around three quarters of respondents (74%) did not believe that this could be improved. Just over two thirds of respondents (69%) strongly disagreed’ or ‘disagreed’ that an agreed protocol would make conveyancing more efficient. Half of respondents disagreed that an electronic infrastructure for document exchange would speed up transactions’.

In conclusion it is hard to see any justification in the accusation of ‘hijacking’. The HIP was introduced in 2004 with the promulgation of the Housing Act. This left plenty of the time for conveyancing lawyers to plan and prepare so as to be first in the queue, and well ahead of the ‘interested parties’. Just because the majority failed to act, invest time and money and take the risks as many others have, it is hardly a basis for valid complaint. There was no hijack, it was more akin to a horse race where the favourite horse failed to leave the starting stalls.

Related Article: A Review of the Law Society’s Consultation Paper: CLICK HERE

Addressing the growing concern about the continuing promotion of training programmes for energy assessors:

2010-01-07T05:34:00.001-08:00

Contribution from Nicholas Shaw, Home Inspector, addressing the growing concern about the continuing promotion of training programmes for energy assessors:

‘My personal agenda on this issue stems from the fact that when I began my training to qualify as a Home Inspector I, and all the other trainees I met during my course had been given the impression by quoted examples of the high income that could be made from working as a HI/DEA. Throughout our course we were constantly encouraged to believe that very high earnings were possible from producing HCRs and EPC. We were encouraged to believe that even a change of government would make no difference to the market for our skills.

As to a solution to the problem of a small pool of work being shared out amongst an increasing number of qualified practitioners the only solution seems to be that ABBE, prompted by the CLG should call a halt to training. I fully understand that the government will say that it does not have the authority to do this but the Housing Act must allow for the enactment of a moratorium on the certification and accreditation of HIs and DEAs until the market situation stabilises. We already have more than enough DEAs to meet the demands of even a recovered housing market. As a further step I believe that those like myself that took the Home Inspector, that are as yet unaccredited, root should be eligible for some degree of compensation as the Dip HI qualification is not worth the paper it is printed on. Compensation could take the form of monetary recompense and their free transfer onto the DEA scheme. As time goes on I have noticed that the particular trainer I used, or was used by, shifts its ground by moving its newspaper adverts from qualification to qualification. It went from adverts for Home Inspectors to Energy Assessors and now has moved on to Air Conditioning Assessors as each specialism fills up.

I am sorry if this turned into a bit of a rant by I feel very hard done by, as do many of my colleagues. Cheated by our training companies with the assistance of the government by failing to retain proper control of the development of this supposed 'new' group of professionals. We can expect no help or sympathy from a new Conservative administration as they will just use the usual excuse of it not being their 'fault' and that we should blame the previous three Labour governments.’

7/1/10

Homeowners point to lack of credit as reason for shortage of homes

2010-01-07T05:16:00.000-08:00

Fresh evidence has emerged today which helps support the belief of many that the lack of credit, rather than the home information pack (believe it or not this is still being claimed), is the main reason for the shortage of homes for sale.

In a survey carried out by Zoopla.co.uk called ‘Housing Market Sentiment Survey’ it found that although there exists increased confidence amongst homeowners, the results did show confidence alone was not enough to boost activity in the housing market as much still depends on the availability of mortgage funding.

It records:

‘75% of those surveyed claim that it is no easier now to get a mortgage than three months ago, placing the onus on lenders to work to increase confidence and help further lift the transaction volumes’.

Overall the results of the survey were positive, and indicate that compared with last year, when confidence was rock bottom, the outlook for 2010 is far more favorable. Homeowners signalled in the survey that the clearest indicator to them of a property market recovery ‘would be evidence of greater market activity in their local area – both in terms of more properties on the market for sale and transactions taking place’

Asked in the survey what homeowners were expecting to do over the next 6 months there was a clear intention to improve their properties in the coming months. In fact ‘42% of homeowners stated they would be embarking on home improvements over the next six months’, and which according to Zoopla, ‘may signal a greater willingness to get homes ready to put on the market’.

To see the full results please visit: http://bit.ly/4uKGIV

Abolition of HIPs could present bleak future for Energy Assessors

2010-01-06T01:05:00.000-08:00

There can be little doubt that without the vehicle provided by the Home Information Pack, the Energy Performance Certificate would have over the past year or so struggled. Its impact on reducing carbon emissions and on presenting home sellers and buyers with upfront information on the energy efficiency of property would have been far less. This can be stated with an air of confidence, given the outcome of a recent survey carried out by the OFT that shockingly disclosed that one out of every two properties in Northern Ireland, where there is no HIP, is marketed without an EPC!

The Conservative Party says it will retain the EPC and look to adopt the Northern Ireland model. This can only, given the Northern Ireland experience, strike fear in the hearts of many energy assessors as without the HIP there exists a real danger of assessors seeing less work as well as experiencing lower charges. As the market is currently flooded by assessors there would be commercial factors at play that could force the price of an EPC down even further.

This begs the question of how low can an energy assessor realistically afford to go when it comes to fixing a fee?

One assessor has carried out an analysis of the costing behind undertaking 521 EPCs over the last 8 months. Applying the average overheads incurred during this period to what is fast becoming an average ‘panel’ fee for an EPC of £30, the figures show:

‘Panel’ Fee £30.00

Less Overheads

Lodgement fee £-6.15

Accreditation fee £-2.50

PDA Fee £-2.00

Mileage Allowance £-3.17

CPD (£250pa 500 EPCs) £-0.50

Phone Costs £-1.00

Advertising £-0.14

Travel, meals £-0.19

Net fee per EPC = £10.65

The situation becomes even bleaker when applying this figure to the actual time involved in producing the £30 EPC.

Applying the fee to a 3 bedroom house, and a one off job, the time involved for straight forward EPC survey is:

Travel to and from site 30 minutes

Time on site 45 minutes

Administration 10 minutes

Total 85 minutes

The above produces an hourly rate of £7.52 which if then extrapolated out to an 8 hour day equals £60.14. Assuming there are 190 days during a working year (220 less 30 days for public and personal holidays) this gives rise to £11427pa gross wages – just £3,000 over the annual minimum wage!

However, to achieve this modest return the energy assessor would be required to carry out 1073 EPCs at £30 gross which works out at around 6 EPCs every working day. The question is how many DEAs are undertaking 6 EPCs a day every day of every week? Not many!

Some energy assessors believe that fees will increase if HIPs are abolished. The truth is that by removing the HIP work levels will fall and market pressure will force the EPC price down even further. At least the HIP has provided many energy assessors with the opportunity of maximising the return on their inspection with some earning around £100 to £150 on each transaction.

(Tags: Home Information Packs; Domestic Energy Assessors; Energy; HIPs; Home Inspectors; Conservative Party)

Grant Shapps: New Year, Same Old Story!

2010-01-03T13:29:00.000-08:00

Entering a New Year seems to have had little effect on the determination of Grant Shapps and his team to plunge their knife deeper into the flesh of the Home Information Pack industry. In the latest communication emanating from his office (one sent in response to an increasing number of letters and e-mails that are sent to him on this topic) Shapps acknowledging that the HIP has not, due to the recession had the best of starts, now begins to turn his focus on the so called ‘cost burden’ of the HIP:

‘Compulsory HIPs have created an additional £650 million burden on an already beleaguered housing market. It is fair to say that the lack of credit availability and paucity of capital seen in the last 18 months has been unprecedented so it's true that the introduction of HIPs could not have come at a worse time but additional and unnecessary burdens should not be tolerated merely because maintaining the status quo is the simple option’.

It is unclear where this £650 million figure comes from and one can only guess it is calculated with reference to the retail cost of the HIP. If this is correct then it begs the question has his office actually undertaken a survey to ascertain the average cost of the HIP and to compare this with the cost of home selling and buying both prior to and post the introduction of the HIP?

In a recent article in which Shapps was quoted the price of a HIP was stated as being £400! Just shows how far off beam he and his officials are, as we all know that the average cost of a HIP is more in the region of £250, if not lower.

His office should also be asked to consult with conveyancers and search providers before making comments of this sort. It’s a shame the Shadow Housing Minister and his researchers find it is a chore to do some ‘home work’ before putting pen to paper. If contacted most conveyancers and search providers would say that the cost of the sale and purchase of a home has since the HIP was introduced fallen by around 40%. This is due to an increase in personal searches and the beneficial impact this has had on prices.

More fundamentally the statement that the Hip has cost the consumer £650 million pounds extra is nonsense. Apart from the energy performance certificate, the HIP places no additional cost onto the consumer. All the other components comprise of information and documents that the consumer would need, and be required to pay for, with or without a HIP.

Not content with quoting one wholly misleading figure, Shapps Office then moves onto the money it claims will be saved by the abolition of the HIP and which could then be used elsewhere within the economy. His office claims:

‘The housing sector and the wider economy will benefit from the £350 million a year boost that scrapping HIPs will bring and Grant is committed to delivering that much-needed shot in the arm by keeping the Party's promise to abolish HIPs as soon as possible should Conservatives win the forthcoming General Election’.

As before, the brandishing of a figure without any data to back it up is not helpful. One can only again make an educated guess that this relates to the cost of maintaining the scheme, covering for example, the cost of promotional material and enforcement.

To claim if the HIP is removed this money would be free to be used elsewhere is disingenuous in the extreme. The cost would not be saved as there would still need to be funding to support the energy performance certificate that the Conservatives say they will retain. There is unlikely to be little difference in funding a HIP with an EPC included and an arrangement where the EPC is liberated and operating alone.

The figure of £350 million is in any event more than justified when one looks at the 28% sale transaction failure rate that cost consumers £1 million each day before the HIP was introduced.

Yet again we see different and varying reasons emerging from Shapps Office indicating a lack of cohesion and uncertainty. No longer is there mention of the HIP ‘stifling’ the property market and of the urgent need to suspend the legislation. The current line of response is to throw meaningless figures into the arena in the hope these will cause further confusion and lead to consumer support.

Surely the time has now come to accept that the HIP has benefits and to adapt rather than scrap is the only way forward. It is important for us all to make sure the Conservative Party is reminded of this and to maintain communication along these lines with Shapps Office and local conservative MPs or prospective conservative candidates.

More contributions from HRG supporters

2010-01-03T13:26:00.000-08:00

Hi

I calculate ( low estimate ) that the cost to the government if they cancel the HIP and EPCs get kicked into the long grass is a £ 200M. This is based on 2M HIPs per annum and 12000 DEAs and HIP provider staff claiming benefits

Can any government afford to give up this amount of revenue

Regards

Sev Holt
H&H Energy Assessors Ltd

Hi,

I was wondering how the Conservatives were planning on replacing all the revenue generated by out industry going directly into the governments purse. I don’t know how many HIPs are produced every month but I suspect that the vast majority of them charged to the vendors include vat, as they in the main won’t be able to claim back that vat the government must be earning in the region of £50 for every HIP produced, that is a lot of money. Are they going to increase everybody’s personal taxes to compensate for this large loss of income?????????????

Nick Stilton
J&N Energy

Latest figures v Mr Shapps

2010-01-03T13:21:00.000-08:00

The figures today from Chartered Surveyors have shown the mortgage take up for November 2009, has outstripped the figures for November 2007. While giving caution for these figures, the hope is the market is more stable and less speculative, and that the peaks and troughs of previous years is less evident.

The conclusions then are that

The HIP has had no detrimental effect on the housing market and it is clear that it has been an assistance in the early recovery.

The up-front information contained in the HIP is converting the sale of properties early and with less ‘fall through’ of transactions, exactly as it is supposed to.

The market is not over subscribed with phantom or over speculative vendors but contains properties which are for sale at a market price and with more information available than ever before for would be purchasers.

The challenge to Mr Shapps must now be to have a proper debate about the HIP and not just to play silly electioneering games which threaten the good work and livelihoods of the people working in the industry.

We have to insist that he has got this wrong, the argument he uses are now shown to be flawed and the tories must replace the man with a more experienced shadow housing spokesman, he has clearly lost the argument and most probably the plot.

HRG would like to thank Brian Dodd for the above contribution

The Partnership December Newsletter

2009-12-22T06:59:00.000-08:00

“They say we’re young and we don’t know …”

We’re starting to feel like Bill Murray’s Phil Connor in Groundhog Day, waking up to the sounds of Sonny & Cher every morning. Previously, only Labour had been accused of changing their minds over HIPs, but it seems the same story all over again, with the Conservatives exhibiting the same vagueness of direction when it comes to their future. As we describe below, the opposition are learning that anything to do with property is always more complex than it might first appear. The confident November tone of “we’ll scrap HIPs in weeks” has been replaced with a rather more subdued December mumble of “we’ll scrap them in 100 days … after a consultation … and a new piece of legislation”. Despite this repeated HIPs uncertainty, we wish all our readers a happy Christmas break in preparation for what looks like being a very busy start to 2010 and for all your support during 2009.

Conservative plans for HIPs at risk of derailing?
Despite promises from the shadow housing minister to scrap HIPs immediately upon their election, the fact that the Conservatives have acknowledged that a consultation is required is raising doubt about their ability to carry out their plans for HIPs. Notwithstanding concerns about the increase in unemployment that they will cause (estimates range from about 5,000 to 20,000) the legal minefield they are walking into is challenging. Their claim to require only secondary legislation (a statutory instrument) is problematic as the law they are trying to change is actually primary legislation. Indeed, the mechanism they were hoping to use can be likened more to a train’s “Emergency Alarm” rather than a “Power Off” button on a TV remote control – in other words, there must be concerns about striking a car stuck on a level crossing, rather than just a disliking for X-Factor.

The Partnership joins the HIP Reform Group
We have always distanced ourselves from pressure groups and trade associations, as we find their often highly-polarised positions do not match our views. However, based on the increasingly positive feedback from agents concerning elements of the HIPs, we have signed up to the HIP Reform Group who are looking at ways to improve the contents of HIPs. We share agent’s concerns about the delays caused by the lack of first day marketing, and question the wisdom of allowing variable-quality local authority searches in the HIP. We believe that the HIP Reform Group is a very positive step forward to improving the house buying process, and hopefully avoiding throwing the baby out with the Conservative’s bathwater.

Referral Fees – concerns broaden to conveyancing
Further to our concerns about the referral fees being paid by HIP providers to agents that are not declared to their clients, it appears that conveyancers are now coming under similar scrutiny by the Legal Services Consumer Panel. As we do not approve of referral fees for either our HIP service or our new conveyancing service, this increased exposure by regulatory and advisory bodies are a welcome change from the ambivalence that has appeared to be the case up until now.

Grant Shapps Decision to 'consult' is a Sham

2009-12-21T06:48:00.000-08:00

HipConsultant.co.uk has today run a blog entry to record a reply from Grant Shapps’ Office to a series of questions.

Like most replies from politicians the response ( as detailed below) does not fully address the issues raised, and in fact, as is usual when dealing with Shapps, raises more questions than it purports to answer.

In fact there is nothing new in the response. We have been aware for some time of the ‘back tracking’ with the 100 day consultation period, we know he does not intend to replace the HIP with anything similar, and as regard the EPC apart from repeating it will be retained there is very little in the response to provide comfort to energy assessors.

The reply reads:

‘We do not plan to replace HIPs with anything else. If we win the next election, we will scrap HIPs as soon as possible after a consultation period - we expect to be around 100 days. We are very keen to see industry/market driven solutions to any problems in the home-buying process but do not believe that the Government should impose more red tape and expensive bureaucracy on consumers, particularly during the longest and deepest recession on record. Though the compulsory element of HIPs will be removed they will remain voluntary and it is up to the industry to create a product that consumers value and want.

Grant fully appreciates how difficult this is for inspectors and shares their anger about the money they and others have spent on training. We believe that this Government has led you up a garden path by introducing a needlessly bureaucratic, expensive and largely pointless piece of legislation and we have every sympathy for someone in your position. However, it does seem to me that the people to blame are the ones currently in power. We have been consistent in our intentions and have warned the market place that HIPs didn’t enjoy our support throughout. We have set out separate policies on our support for EPCs and our expectation that they will become more widespread, an important tool in combating climate change, which will help those who are trained as DEAs.’

Interestingly the language used remains contradictory in that there is mention of the word ‘scrap’ whereas later it records: ‘Though the compulsory element of HIPs will be removed they will remain voluntary and it is up to the industry to create a product that consumer’s value and want’. So Mr Shapps you are now saying the HIP is not going, it will still be available but on a voluntary basis! If so please drop the word ‘scrap’.

We all know (or should know) as indeed Shapps does, that voluntary delivery of the HIP will simply not work. There needs to be an element of compulsion otherwise the benefits it delivers will be lost. We only need to look at the Law Society’s National Transaction Protocol to see that it will fail if left to voluntary take up. Shapps should be reminded of what he said in his Home-Buying Review where he recorded on the subject of the HIP: ‘Labour’s attempt to improve the home buying process through HIPs has been an unmitigated failure but what lessons can we learn? If solicitors were required to confirm that they were a) instructed b) had the necessary documentation to hand and c) were ready to send out a contract at short notice, prior to placing a property on the market, would this not go a long way to solving the problems of delay?’

More significantly how on earth does a ‘Conservative Government’ hope to carry out objective consultation when they have already condemned the HIP and all those associated with it! Surely the correct and more advisable message must be ‘we need to have a re-think on the HIP front and for this reason we are carrying out consultation’. As the situation currently stands (and it appears to me to be irreversible) Shapps is simply intending to use consultation as a means to a predetermined end. Does this not make a mockery out of the whole process?

I also question the objective of the consultation. Is this a process that will help decide whether the ‘power to suspend’ should be invoked, or is it part and parcel of planned primary legislation? If the former, I very much doubt the so called ‘power to suspend’ can as I had said countless times before, be used for the stated purpose of ‘scrapping’.

Christmas is a time when we should all be honest with each other. It’s a pity that this does not, it seems, extend to Shapps and his Party. For the sake of making sure we do not see a major stalling of our property market recovery we should all be calling upon him to come forward with a New Year resolution of postponing any plans to do with the HIP until he (or as is more likely his successor) has had a chance of carrying out a wider and more comprehensive review of the home buying and selling process.

The Home Information Pack Suffers Due to Lack of Education

2009-12-18T07:41:00.000-08:00

It is so easy for the anti-HIP lobbyists to argue that the HIP should go simply because nobody 'so it is claimed' wants it! The problem with this statement however, is that although it has an element of truth it really does not, as with most ‘spin’, truly reflect the view of the consumer. Perhaps a truer and fairer pronouncement would be – ‘The HIP should go as nobody really understands its purpose and benefits’.

The problem that exists and which is not helping the proponents of the home information pack is that there is a total lack of education surrounding not only the objective of this pack of legal documents, but the home selling and buying process.

For so long now, a home seller and buyer have had little involvement in the process other than furnishing information, signing papers when requested and making payment to the Conveyancer once the transaction is at an end. This is partly down to some Conveyancers not taking the time to explain the process ( the ‘smoke and mirrors’ approach), as well as the home seller and buyer having little interest in the legal process other than wanting to move into their new home as quickly as possible. This is hardly surprising. The legal process is not the most exciting of processes and at the end of the day this is the very reason a Conveyancer is employed in the very first place.

So why is it that so much is made of the fact that a consumer responds in a negative way when asked about the Home Information Pack? Probably a consumer who has yet to be involved in the selling process and te majority of which probably have no knowledge of the HIP other than what they have read in the Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph. Their view is therefore influenced by the ant-HIP propaganda that as we know is often misleading in the extreme.

So why is there such a lack of education? One reason is that the HIP was launched in such as shambolic way that it hardly had the best of starts and public perception of its worth has failed ever since to recover. However the true reason is the lack of time given by the seller or the facilitator to explain the purpose of the HIP and to outline the benefits. Some estate agents see the HIP as means to an end rather than as a product that if sold correctly can be used as a basis of securing loyal and long term customer.

My experience which is widely reflected within industry is that when time is taken to explain to the seller why a HIP is required, and what will be achieved by it, that the initial scepticism fades and support for the product emerges. Most sellers for example do not know that the majority of documents within the HIP are documents that they would need and have to pay for even if the HIP was abolished. Nor do they know that by front loading the legal side of the sale the time it takes to proceed to exchange is shortened. The addition of the Property Information Questionnaire to the HIP has also made sellers become more involved in the process and has helped them understand a lot more about selling and buying.

The same applies to the criticism surrounding the energy performance certificate. Some argue that nobody looks at the EPC and are not interested in the recommendations etc. I received an email recently from an energy assessor who undertakes work for the USA military bases. He wrote:

‘I operate in the Thetford/ Mildenhall area where we have lots of military housing, the most ridiculous thing is the US personnel know more about the EPC than UK consumers because the military have seen fit to brief new entrants and take the time to explain what the EPC does and how it will affect the individual.’

Grant Shapps is therefore disingenuous when he refers to a lack of interest in the HIP. In making such a comment he is ignoring the fact there was to begin with (well before the HIP was introduced) little consumer interest in the legal process of home selling and buying, and moreover the fact in making the statement he is not taking into account the widespread lack of education as regard the purpose and objective of the HIP.

Rather than continuing to provide the electorate with only half of the story he and his Party should be looking a ways of making the whole process more transparent, quicker and less expensive. Bring on the compulsory ‘ready to exchange’ pack!

To support us in our campaign, please visit us at www.hipreformgroup.com and register now.

www.hipreformgroup.com

Contribution from HRG supporter:

2009-12-18T03:24:00.000-08:00

The person who posted this diatribe is totally out of touch with what is actually happening with the delivery of the Home information Packs and Energy performance certificates.

When I arrive at the homes of my clients, most do not have a clue as to what the EPC or the Hip’s are about, only that they are required by law. Quite a few begin by being hostile towards the Hip’s. I take the time to explain the system and it’s benefits, afterwards many agree that the Hip’s is a far better system. Many have told me that that under the old system they had been out of pocket, still having to pay for surveyors and solicitors fees when transactions failed, and that they wished that HIP’s had been in place when they were buying their homes. When I deliver the Energy Performance Certificates, I explain the recommendations to my clients, and have helped many of them to gain free cavity wall and loft insulation through the local authority schemes.

I can honestly say that it gives me a great deal of satisfaction to be able to help so many people make their homes more energy efficient and save money. So to say that people are not interested in the EPC is nonsense, they just don’t know the truth as so much anti Hip’s proper gander has been put out. Rather than scrap the Hip’s the government should have a national campaign to explain the reasons and benefits of the Hip’s and Energy Certificates before its too late. It’s high time that they did something to help the industry that they instigated and give assistance to all of us who have invested so much time effort and money in making the system work.

Kenneth Goult

MAJOR EPC REPORT BY NATIONAL ENERGY SERVICES ‘SEIZING THE OPPORTUNITY’

2009-12-18T03:20:00.000-08:00

Since the introduction of HIPs in summer 2007, the many Domestic Energy Assessors and Home Inspectors working within the NHER accreditation scheme have produced 313,000 EPCs.

This month National Energy Services at Milton Keynes have produced a 41 page Report
Entitled ‘Seizing the Opportunity’, it gives four key findings and seven recommendations for EPCs in 2010. There are many graphs and pie charts to illustrate the analysed statistics in the main report.

I will let you read these on the Executive summary link below

http://www.nher.co.uk/documents/news/Seizing_The_Opportunity_Executive_Summary.pdf

The big picture is that about 1 million homes sell each year and if the EPC recommended improvements are made by the buyer, there would be £200M saved on fuel costs and 1,360,000 less tons of CO2 released into the UK pa.

The average household produces 5.4 tons of CO2. If the EPC improvements were done by the home purchaser; this would reduce to 4.2 tons and save £182 pa on energy bills.

Interestingly, within the report, there was a survey of 302 home buyers in October and what their reaction was to the EPC.

• Two thirds of buyers had made some form of improvement to their home since buying it.

• 39% had made significant improvements (like replacing the old boiler with an A rated condensing boiler).

Alastair Darling introduced the boiler scrapage scheme in the Pre Budget Report, and if a home has a G rated boiler (less than 70% efficient), then a £400 grant will be given to install a condensing boiler which is about 92% efficient. It is hoped that this scheme will have the same success as the car scrapage scheme.

This important piece of work opposes the HIP critic’s claim that home buyers ignore EPCs.

This NES report proves that EPCs are read by home purchasers and acted upon to reduce future energy bills.

HRG thanks Alastair Herriott for this article.

Latest from hip-consultant.co.uk - Grant Shapps cuts HIP red tape and reveals … err… ??

2009-12-17T07:37:00.000-08:00

December 17th, 2009 www.hip-consultant.co.uk Posted in HIP News, Home Information Packs, Property Conveyancing

The Conservative HIP policy is being criticised by a number of industry professionals at present and quite ironically from both Pro-HIP and Anti-HIP supporters. The common ground which is uniting these two groups is ambiguity, uncertainty and lack of clarity from Mr Grant Shapps on his intentions and implementation plans if they were to win the next election.

With the current lack of detail that has been given by Mr Shapps, Anti-HIP supporters have acknowledged that chaos in the property market may follow if they were to win the next election and have suggested immediate suspension of the HIP policy if they were to win. The immediate suspension does not appear as if it would be legally possible and would be more complex than they would like. Therefore, this raises questions including exactly how the present Conservative HIP policy will be managed as not to damage the current property market recovery.

The good news is Mr Shapps’s office has contacted us to clarify some points and offered to directly answer our questions posed in a recent article Conservative Home Information Pack policy to stall property market?. We also took the opportunity to ask a few additional questions which Grant Shapps’s office have very kindly indicated that they will answer. Of course, we will provide you with an update as soon as we receive the responses.

This week, Mr Shapps acknowledged the second anniversary of almost all domestic properties requiring a HIP (see HIP exclusions) to be legally marketed by wrapping a ’semi’ in red tape. This was meant to signify the Home Information Pack legislation which details the requirement for upfront information to be provided about your property when you intend to market your property for sale.

This milestone for the Home Information Pack could have been marked by explaining to the industry and the wider public, the Conservatives’ detailed intentions on their possible ‘Scrapping the Home Information Pack policy’ if they were to win the next election. Unfortunately, this opportunity was lost and instead replaced with quite an amusing publicity stunt. However, we are told the house did look incredibly festive and Christmassy and certainly raised a smile here.

Can we expect that the red ribbon is soon to be cut into sections and sold on eBay and/or be used as vouchers towards discounted estate agency fees from SPLINTA members?

Apparently, Grant released the owners of the property David and Helen Wright, from their HIP turmoil with one sharp cut of his shears. It is written in the stars that Mr and Mrs Wright sold their house due to the publicity soon after and lived happily ever after. Oh, no they didn’t, oh yes they did.

With all the current Christmas cheer, amusement and political posturing we were nearly diverted from the actual issue at hand and the burning questions many are still searching for actual answers to. Hopefully, Mr Grant Shapps will be able to cut through our questions with some detailed answers with his upcoming response.

http://www.hipreformgroup.com/

Cracks Appear in Grant Shapps HIP Policy

2009-12-16T02:13:00.000-08:00

After yesterday’s report in the Daily Telegraph announcing that the Conservative Party intends to replace the Home Information Pack with a ‘more robust ready’ pack of documents, we today hear via the Estate Agency Today publication that this is not correct.

The article reports that Grant Shapps office has stated the Tories have no intention of replacing the HIP with anything ‘compulsory’ and that in so far as seeing another pack introduced this would not happen unless industry takes the lead and its ‘voluntary’.

This must once again question whether Shapps and his office know what they are doing. Its difficult to imagine that the Telegraph article would have led with such a definite statement had the information not come from a reliable source.

Does this suggest that there may be some disagreement on HIPs within the Conservative Party. There is much talk that this is more of a personal crusade on Shapps part and that all within his Party do not share this obsession.

www.hipreformgroup.com

Daily Telegraph report Home Information Packs will be replaced - The full story

2009-12-15T03:53:00.000-08:00

If you would like to see the full article, please click here

Daily Telegraph report Home Information Packs will be replaced!

2009-12-15T02:23:00.000-08:00

The Daily Telegraph carried an interesting story on Home Information Packs this morning in which is suggested the Conservative Party was looking to replace the HIP with an Exchange Ready Pack. Though it is fair to say the article contains no quotes from Grant Shapps or his office, the appearance of such an article in a national newspaper with no input from the Association of Home Information Packs, should in my view be viewed as significant.

The article by Caroline McGee written on the second anniversary of the full roll out of the HIP opens as follows:

‘Is our relationship with the (Hip) almost over before it has really begun? Shadow housing minister Grant Shapps has vowed to abolish the compulsory seller’s pack within weeks of coming to power, and replace it with a more robust 'ready pack’ that will include a draft contract and other legal documents’.

Better still the article actually includes a quote from an estate agent who appears to be given his full support to the idea:

“If your solicitor is away and the junior is on a sabbatical, then the litmus test is that the office cleaner can send out a complete package of documents within an hour,” says Trevor Abrahamsohn of estate agents Glentree in Hampstead, where multi-million houses are staple fare and thoroughness is important. “This will speed up the conveyancing process and minimize gazumping during the vulnerable period between agreement and exchange. It will rejuvenate the market.”

Encouragingly this is the first time I have seen a national paper write an article advocating quite independently of any pressure group the benefits of an ‘exchange ready offering’. As to whether we will now begin to see Grant Shapps publically lending his support to this credible proposition only time will tell.

For further information on Exchange Ready Packs see my article: http://bit.ly/33c61e

SPLINTA resigned to long wait for the abolition of the home Information pack?

2009-12-14T02:50:00.000-08:00

The debate about how long it will take a Conservative Party to abolish the Home Information Pack continues today with yet another article appearing in the Estate Agency Today online publication in which we have AHIPP and SLINTA making comment.

Regrettably there is not much new to report on within the article, though it is perhaps worth commenting that even the anti-HIP lobbyists seem to be resigned to the fact that to attempt to use secondary legislation to dismantle the HIP would be risky and that primary legislation is the best way forward. This is interesting as I have always held and expressed the view that exercising or attempting to exercise the power to suspend section 162 of the Housing Act would not be a wise legal choice.

Commenting on this Salmon the spokesman for SLINTA says:

“It is sensible to scrap HIPs via secondary legislation.

“If it was only suspended, then like some hideous beast from a horror movie, HIPs could come back ‘revived from the grave’ by a future government. Safer to kill it stone dead.”

He reference to ‘secondary legislation’ is wrong as the only secondary legislation available is section 162 and therefore it is clear that this statement amounts to an admission on his part that passing primary legislation that could take up to 18 months is the only way forward.

This must be good news for supporters of the HIP as if primary legislation is required why not take the opportunity to use the HIP to bring about badly needed reform to the home buying and selling process.

www.hipreformgroup.com

Energy Assessors would benefit from a 'ready to exchange' pack offering

2009-12-14T02:09:00.000-08:00

The idea of developing the Home Information Pack into a more comprehensive pack of legal documents has over the past month or so picked up pace. We saw the Association of Home Information Pack Providers invest heavily in a stand at the Conservative Party Conference where there was engagement with Party members on the premise that the HIP lends itself well to the evolution of the pack into a ‘ready to exchange’ offering. We have also seen recently the launch of an organisation known as BOLD (bundle of legal documents) that is primarily directed at the legal profession and which advocates the delivery of upfront legal documents and information but without the property searches.

There is no doubt that the idea of adding more to the HIP and making this available upfront has a great deal of appeal mainly due to the indisputable fact it will speed up the time it takes to proceed from offer to exchange as well as making sure we do not return to the dark ages where millions and millions of pounds were lost in countless aborted sale transactions.

In this article I look at who would be the winners and losers if as is proposed the HIP evolves or is replaced by some form of ‘ready to exchange’ offering.

There idea would clearly benefit the legal profession who would be best placed to offer the ‘ready to exchange’ pack either separately or as part of a conveyancing package. Given the HIP is nothing more than a bundle of legal documents plus an energy performance certificate it is surprising that not more legal firms have embraced the HIP and used this as an effective marketing tool to preserve and expand conveyancing practices. This leads me to question that even if a ‘ready to exchange’ pack emerged there would be as many lawyers entering the arena as one might otherwise expect. Lawyers are slow to react to opportunities hence the reason many high street firms are likely to close over the next couple of years particularly when the Legal Services Act comes into full force giving non-legal entities such as supermarkets the option to offer legal services.

I also believe that the energy assessor is in a strong position to benefit. Not only would such an offering also include the energy performance certificate but it would also require quite a large amount of administrative work undertaken upfront. The ‘ready to exchange’ idea could perhaps require a seller to order a ready to exchange pack before marketing and place an obligation on the seller to deliver this pack within 28 days. This would therefore mean that quite a substantial amount of ‘data’ collecting would be required at an early stage in terms of helping the seller complete the fixture and fitting form and the Property Information form. The energy assessor in visiting the home to carry out the inspection would be in an ideal position to offer this service as well as helping the pack compiler to obtain from the vendor documents such as guarantees and planning permissions.

I recently read an article written by conveyancing solicitors in which it was stated that the main reason for delay was not necessarily the property searches but rather the time to it took the seller to complete forms and produce documents. The engagement of the energy assessors to fulfil this role would clearly ensure that the benefit of speed would not be lost.

This would also free up the lawyers time and allow the lawyer to focus on what it does best and that is to advise on the legal issues rather than spend time running around collecting data and documents.

The energy advisors role as an agent of the lawyer could also include the physical checking of land boundaries as this is often a major reason for delay and abortive transactions. This again would help to reduce time and ultimately the cost of the whole process.

Other beneficiaries of this idea are estate agents, in terms of being able to offer property as ‘ready to exchange’ and gain quicker access to their commission, as well as the consumer. In fact the consumer would be the ultimate beneficiary. By getting the majority of the legal work undertaken upfront issues that could turn into ‘deal breakers’ can be easily identified and remedied, and with providing full transparency the stress and length of the whole selling and buying process can be reduced substantially.

Upfront delivery of information and documents would also benefit the first time buyer as there would be very little if any cost to meet.

So this leaves me with the question of who will be the losers if this were to happen. Well despite giving this a great deal of thought I find it difficult to see who would actually lose from this as it seems to be a ‘win, win’ situation for all. So much so one really has to ask the question why would Grant Shapps and the Conservative Party not wish to adopt and run with what is quite clearly a workable solution to the problems that currently exist within the home selling and buying process.

Is Grant Shapps back tracking on Home Information Packs?

2009-12-11T03:58:00.000-08:00

When will Grant Shapps learn that to be a Minister in waiting one must begin to at least give the impression that he has some knowledge and understanding of the subject matter on which he purports to formulate his Party’ policy?

First we have him make some twisted (and factually incorrect) joke about Mr Brown not having to worry about a Home Information Pack when he leaves No 10, suggesting he would abolish the HIP within the first few days of taking office, and now it is reported that he has had a re-think and perhaps it would be safer for him to engage in some consultation before going ahead to ‘suspend’, and then pass legislation to abolish the HIP. Does this man have any idea of the consequences his ever changing message has on both his credibility and more importantly, the fragile state of the housing market?

In today’s Estate Agency Today it is reported:

‘Tory shadow housing minister Grant Shapps has now explained why it might take 100 days for HIPs to be abolished – because it would actually be the shortest route. However, the 100-day period would have to include a consultation.

The Conservatives have repeatedly said they will abolish HIPs, with Shapps maintaining that he would do it immediately or “within days”.

However, at the Home Sale Network conference last week, Shapps mentioned for the first time the 100-day time lag.

Last night, a spokesman in his office told Estate Agent Today: “I think our process will be a consultation, followed by a Statutory Instrument to suspend HIPs, and then legislation to abolish them.”

This latest message is confusing at best, and wholly misleading at worse. Though reference is made to a ‘statutory instrument’, he is, it seems to me, still referring to what some mistakenly label as an ‘emergency power’ within the Housing Act.

In fact this is Section 162 that was introduced back in 2004 to enable Government to temporarily suspend the HIP regulations for a set period if, according to the debate as recorded in Hansard, problems occurred during the HIPs trial period.

Some argue (wrongly) that this ‘power’ can be used as a mechanism to bring immediate relief to the housing market if Government takes the view this is needed.

I consider the section was not designed or introduced for this purpose and in any event the explanatory notes to the Housing Act clearly state suspension should only be used in exceptional circumstances. Given the housing market was in a far worse position back in 2009, and that all the current indicators show it is making a recovery, a Government may find it difficult to argue that there now needs to be a ‘suspension’, let alone speculating that this will be the case in Mat 2010!

Furthermore there would be no need for Government to suspend as it would be within the scope of the regulations to go back to the arrangement whereby a property could be marketed if a HIP was ordered. Interestingly similar to the arrangement proposed by Shapps for the delivery of the EPC. By allowing property to be marketed in this way it would have the same desired impact as a suspension and could be implemented that much sooner given no consultation would be necessary.

One must also question whether making use of this section for “suspension’’ when everyone including the dog knows that what Shapps is actually using it for is to ‘’scrap’’ ( as he seems to get some perverted delight in reminding us all of this every time he speaks in public) is a proper and legitimate application of the power.

The time is now for Shapps to clarify his intentions by making it clear that he will and can only abolish the HIP ( if indeed it remains his wish ) by passing primary legislation. By making this clear he will probably save face, prevent potential damage to his career, as well as helping Industry to ensure the recovery within the housing market remains firmly on track.

Conservative Party Latest on Energy Performance Certifciates

2009-12-10T02:49:00.000-08:00

The uncertainty surrounding what the Conservative Party intend to do with the energy performance certificate has become a little clearer today in a reply from Grant Shapps’ Office to a letter sent by a worried energy assessor. However as can be seen there remain a number of unanswered questions.

Questioned about the Conservative’s plans for the energy performance certificate Shapps’ Office states:

‘Where Grant talked about EPCs, there would be no changes to the role of DEAs in carrying out assessments for EPCs. By strengthening EPCs in this way, Grant expects there to be more work for DEAs.

With regards to the role of EPCs in the home buying and selling process, Conservatives have no plans to remove the requirement for an EPC. Whilst scrapping HIPs, Conservatives would restore the EPC regime to pre-April 2009 requirements. That is to say that a property could be marketed for sale provided that an EPC had been commissioned by the seller’.

So we now know under a Conservative Government we will see sellers being required (yes regulation from a party whose case for ‘scrapping’ the HIP is that it involves unnecessary bureaucracy) to commission an energy performance certificate before marketing begins. So as Shapps says we go back to how the arrangement was before the 6th April.

Fantastic you may say if you are an energy assessor, but as always with this Party there is never any detail. When will Shapps ‘get it’? The EPC without the home information pack will simply not work either from the consumer’s point of view or the environmental perspective. In the rental and commercial markets where there exists a similar arrangement for delivery, there is evidence of wide spread non compliance.

In the commercial arena for instance a survey carried out by Quidos shows that Landlord compliance with the 1-year-old Energy Performance Certificate legislation for commercial property (currently for sale or let) was still very low, with only 22% of commercial property appearing to carry a valid energy certificate.

Speaking after the publication of that report, Quidos Operations Director Nick Branch spoke in favour of moves to improve awareness of energy efficiency; "These certificates provide a valuable asset rating of the energy performance of buildings. This data can and is being used by forward thinking landlords to improve the energy efficiency, and value of their property portfolio. With low cost loans available from the Carbon Trust, these energy saving improvements can be capital neutral in the short term and revenue generating in the longer term."

By ‘liberating’ the EPC from the HIP, as Shapps puts it, he says the true benefits of the EPC will be allowed to emerge. Sorry, but this is simply rubbish! The EPC to be effective and to serve a true mechanism to bring down the level of carbon emissions it needs to remain in the HIP or a similar equivalent. The Northern Ireland experience proves this beyond doubt. In Northern Ireland where there is no HIP and where the seller is required to order an EPC one out of every two properties are marketed without the energy performance certificate.

Shapps and his Party say they are taking the ‘green’ issues seriously. If this is so why do they not acknowledge the role the HIP has played in delivering to the consumer the benefits of the data contained within the EPC. One must seriously question the Conservatives’ ‘green credentials particularly in a week where the Carbon Trust has stated the UK has no chance of hitting its target of reducing 80pc of carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 unless the commercial property sector embarks on a massive drive to improve the energy efficiency of buildings.

This coincides with the recent publication of a report from the National Energy Saving Trust that discloses that with more than one million homes changing hands in a typical year, there is the potential to reduce our annual CO2 emissions by some 1.36 million tonnes and reduce energy costs by £200 million in a single year.

If Shapps could find it within himself to step down from his personal crusade to ‘kill’ the HIP (and all those associated with it ) and begin to look objectively at the merits of retaining a vehicle like the HIP ( that has proved its worth) for the delivery of the EPC, then perhaps those who care about the environment may start to take him and his Party more seriously.

Conservative Party's Attempts to Attack the Home Information Pack Backfire

2009-12-09T03:02:00.000-08:00

In a lively Commons’ debate that took place yesterday it was refreshing to see the Government respond to the recent Grant Shapps led anti-home information pack campaign. It was even more refreshing to see the Conservative spokesman struggle to support to sustain credibility.

The debate began with Mr. Andrew Robathan, a Conservative, asking the question:

‘What assessment he has made of the effect of home information packs on the housing market since their introduction?’

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Mr. Ian Austin, responded by saying:

‘We are currently working up proposals to evaluate the effectiveness of the HIPs programme, and we expect the results to be available in 2010. However, early independent research undertaken by Europe Economics and published in November 2007 concluded that the introduction of HIPs would not have a negative impact on the housing market.’

Not happy with this Robathan then resorted to Party line language by inquiring:

‘Those constituents who raised the matter with me tell me that they find HIPs to be untimely, expensive, and bureaucratic and, really, a waste of time. They quite like the energy performance certificates, so will the Government realise the error of their ways, realise what a waste of time-time, effort and money-the process has been, and scrap it?’

It’s questionable whether his constituents were consulted and if they were whether anybody within his Party took the time out to explain the purpose of the HIP and the benefits they present. Fortunately Mr Austin took the opportunity to inform Robathan of this as well as belittling his intelligence in the process!

Mr Austin adopting his usual direct approach responded by saying:

‘The hon. Gentleman does not need to ask ludicrous questions like that to confirm to the House that he is not exactly the sharpest tool in the box. However, thousands of jobs and hundreds of small businesses depend on the HIP process. Some 13,000 people have invested thousands in training as energy assessors, so the Opposition need to explain why they would put all those jobs and all those businesses at risk, and the hon. Gentleman needs to explain to all the people in his constituency whose livelihoods depend on that process why he wants to put them out of work’.

He added:

‘The Leader of the Opposition swans off to the Arctic to hang around with huskies, but the hon. Gentleman and the Opposition are showing today why nobody will take seriously anything they say about climate change. As a result of HIPs, 2 million home owners now have an energy assessment and energy recommendations that can help them to cut their fuel bills by up to £300 and reduce carbon emissions. Is it not extraordinary that even today, as the world gathers in Copenhagen, the Opposition are still committed to abolishing the HIP, which is one of the main ways of helping home owners to cut carbon emissions and tackle climate change?’

How refreshing to see the Government stand up for an industry that has worked hard to implement well intentioned policy that despite a rocky start is beginning to deliver real benefits to the consumer as well as making a major and important contribution towards carbon reduction. Grant Shapps should pause, take note and decide whether obsessively pursuing the HIP is really worth the risk of his policy backfiring and causing damage to his career aspirations.

NES Report Questions Grant Shapps 'Green' credentials

2009-12-09T02:41:00.000-08:00

Love them or hate them there is no doubt that the Home Information Pack has, and continues to deliver an efficient mechanism for the delivery of the energy performance certificate.

In contrast to Northern Ireland where there is no HIP and one out of every two properties is marketed without an EPC, the majority of those selling and buying in this Country are all beginning to reap the benefits of having to hand upfront information on the energy efficiency performance of their homes.

Despite Grant Shapps best efforts as well as those who support his madness, there is no escaping the fact that the HIP has helped and continues to help consumers, as well as making a major contribution towards reducing carbon emissions.

And now we have the proof to question Mr Shapps’ ‘green’ credentials in the form of a report on the impact of the EPC as prodcued by the National Energy Saving Trust.

The headlines of the Report show:

• Implementing the recommendations in the EPC to bring homes up to their potential rating, would on average reduce each home’s CO2 emissions by 1.2 tonnes and cut its fuel bills by £182 a year.

• With more than one million homes changing hands in a typical year, there is the potential to reduce our annual CO2 emissions by some 1.36 million tonnes and reduce energy costs by £200 million in a single year.

• At least two thirds of the homebuyers the researchers spoke to (68%) had made some form of alteration to their new home in the last year – 39% of them making significant alterations and 29% opting just for cosmetic changes.

The full report can be found at http://bit.ly/4ERoKx and will clearly help strengthen the campaign to retain the HIP and to ensure it continues to be the primary delivery vehicle for the one of the most effective tools we have to hand to help reduce carbon emissions.

Why HIPS must stay

2009-12-09T01:16:00.000-08:00

The Conservatives seem to have stepped up their campaign against HIPs, claiming they stall the property market and add unnecessary expense to the home buying and selling process. Is this credible? Where is the evidence that people are being put off from marketing because of the cost of the HIP? Perhaps the Shadow Housing Minister, Mr Shapps, could explain that if the HIP is the sole deterrent, why is there still a shortage of housing stock in Northern Ireland where no HIP is required? As for the cost of the HIP, there are a number of schemes availble which allow the seller to defer the cost until completion. These are schemes similar to the one Mr Shapps is looking to implement to support his ‘green’ retro energy improvement scheme, announced last week. Mr Shapps should have a duty to inform the public of all of the issues surrounding his ‘scrap’ policy on Home Information Packs, such as the following, in my opinion:

• Apart from the EPC costing £40 or so all the other documents and information within the HIP will need to be produced and paid for as part of the selling and buying process even if the HIP requirement is removed.
• If you remove the HIP the cost of moving home will increase by around £150 given that the cost of personal searches will immediately increase by around 40pc.
• The removal of the HIP will also lead to further delays and added stress within the selling and buying process.
• By liberating the EPC from the HIP as is planned, this will increase the EPC non compliance level and lead to a loss of an effective tool for reducing carbon emissions.
• By allowing speculative sellers back into the market we will all once again suffer from wasted costs when they decide at the last minute to pull out of a transaction.

The HIP is not perfect but life without it could represent bad news for the consumer. To get this message across a new action group – HIP Reform Group – has been established. For more information you can email me at david.pett@hipshomes.com

Government defend HIPS

2009-12-08T09:20:00.000-08:00

Mr Andrew Robathan (Conservative Party) asked today a question about HIPs not being very useful and too expensive. Ian Austin (Labour Party ) slapped him down a bit by referring to him as ‘not the sharpest tool in the box’ and set out how HIPs had improved the situation for home movers. There was another question later on about EPCs which Ian Austin jumped on and criticizing the Conservative Party for endangering the benefits of the HIP/EPC during the Climate Conference in Copenhagen. Full transcript to follow.

HIP Reform Group Formed

2009-12-08T09:07:00.000-08:00

The Shadow Housing Minister, Grant Shapps, repeated statements to abolish the Home Information Pack has left the HIP industry’s future in doubt. It has also planted a time bomb that could ignite early in the New Year bringing with it misery for estate agents, other property professionals and the home seller and buyer.

If the Conservative Party should gain power at the next general election, Mr Shapps has made it increasingly clear that his first task will be to scrap the current HIP. With the HIP’s future uncertain and Mr Shapps refusing to commit to what will replace it, many vendors will at the beginning of next year facing a dilemma as to of whether to sell or wait until after the election before going to market. It does not take an economist to predict what the likely affect this will have on what is already a very fragile market.

Not only a concern for the consumer, this should also set off alarm bells with estate agents and other property professionals as what will this mean for those looking to formulate and agree business plans for the first 2 quarters of next year.

Added to this is the personal tragedy this will bring to the 30,000 plus working within the HIP industry. At a time when unemployment is high the overnight closure of a major industry must be a concern for any Government.

This does not only concern HIP providers. Home Inspectors and DEA’s who are so crucial to the current HIP, and in helping to reduce carbon emissions, could also find themselves surplus to requirement. These are people who have invested personally and financially in finding a role within an industry that the Government itself encouraged.

In recognition of this strength of feeling, and wishing to see reform brought in on the back of the HIP, a new group of likeminded people has been formed under the title of the ‘HIP Reform Group’. The aim of this group is to ensure the consumer is given a full and not a partial picture of the benefits of the HIP, as well as advocating reform to what is recognised by many as an antiquated home selling and buying process. Those wishing to lend their support can sign up at www.hipreformgroup.com

The following is on the Order Paper today. Questions start at 2.30pm

2009-12-08T05:29:00.000-08:00

Mr Andrew Robathan (Blaby): What assessment he has made of the effect of home information packs on the housing market since their introduction.

Ian Floyed met him in September. The question is 11th in the list but will be taken with 17 and 18 (below)

Angela Watkinson (Upminster): What assessment he has made of the effect of home information packs on the housing market since their introduction.

Mr David Jones (Clwyd West): What recent assessment his Department has made of the effects of home information packs on the housing market since their introduction.

Labour blast Grant Shapps’ £6,500 Green Refit Loan as a ‘Con’

2009-12-08T05:11:00.000-08:00

The subject of the Conservative Party’s flagship ‘green’ policy that will offer the consumer loans up to £6,500 to refit their homes with energy saving measures received reference today in the second reading of the Energy Bill.

Greg Clarke, the Conservative Party’s Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, could not resist the temptation of repeating details of the scheme that Mr Shapps, the Shadow Housing Minister, had unveiled a couple of weeks’ ago. He said:

‘We will allow every household in the country up to £6,500 in approved energy efficiency insulations, and the system will be conditional on money being saved on their bills during the payback time. That is a win-win situation’.

Responding, Edward Miliband, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, stated the difference between me and the hon. Gentleman is that I recognise that this proposal will have a cost: we are providing £4 million to make those pilots possible. This comes back to image versus substance. He wants to claim that he can give £6,500 to every household in the country, costing up to £180 billion, and that it will cost no public money. That is clearly a con’

Dr. Alan Whitehead, for labour added: ‘we have heard the suggestion -it was repeated this afternoon-that every household should be given £6,500, and that that will sort out the whole question of insulation and active energy generation concerns. As a result, it is suggested, we will have fully insulated and approaching zero-carbon households, but it is akin to the other short-lived policy we heard about a while ago, whereby everybody was to put £8,000 into the pot and they would then have their health and social care needs taken care of for the rest of their lives. That policy ran into similar mathematical difficulties. The mathematics of the £6,500 policy-over and above requiring loan guarantees of some £160 billion to £170 billion to be injected into the economy if the guarantee is from the public purse-would require savings of £360 a year, if the loan is to be serviced and assuming that it would not be just given out to householders’.

It is clear, or should be, that the Conservative Party’s policy for ‘green’ reform should not be accepted at face value. As with policies of this type the devil is within the detail.

Conservative Home Information Pack policy to stall property market?

2009-12-07T09:25:00.000-08:00

Source: December 3rd, 2009 www.hip-consultant.co.uk

Grant Shapps has re-iterated his and the Conservative’s plans to scrap Home Information Packs HIPs; yet again over the last few days. However, yet again he has not detailed any planned phase out or replacement of the HIP.

Grant Shapps’s latest statements covered by the man stream media are nothing new and do not detail any plans or future proposals of what he may or may not implement. This continual repetition is becoming slightly tiresome to those genuinely interested in the future of the UK housing market and put the market at real danger of ’stalling’ and house price instability.

We are at risk that as the election moves closer and without any clear direction being given on this matter that the property market will be negatively impacted upon. With the notion that the Conservatives have promoted ; that Home Information Packs cost sellers more to move (which we disagree with, see Benefits of Home Information Packs for a different view point), how many people will put off placing their property on the market until after the election and what effect will this have?

We have tried to get an answer to what Grant Shapps proposes via numerous routes, including email, letter, comments on the Conservatives blog and even twitter (@grantshapps) but alas have failed. We have of course received appreciated responses in most avenues but without the requested answers. We were maybe slightly politically naive expecting a direct answer to a direct question and are yet to be convinced that Grant Shapps has a full understanding about the industry - Grants Shapps - Strong Foundations or Weak Understanding?.

On reflection, it is not surprising we were not able to get an answer when others such as AHIPP have tried over and over.

Now there is not much to summarise but here it is; Conservatives say they will:

scrap HIP
keep EPCs (which they do not have a choice about)

Again, maybe more political naivety, we believe in plain English and would like the following questions answered with this in mind.

Q1. Are you going to replace Home Information Packs with anything else?

Q2. If so, what?

Q3. What are the planned timescales to the answer in Q2?

Q4. How will you manage the scrapping process, timescales and actions?

Of course, we will update you if we do get an adequate response and continue to follow this specific topic with interest. However, it would be so much more interesting if Grant Shapps actually discussed a little of possible future policy.

Foxton's Case points to the need for reform on the back of the HIP

2009-12-07T05:28:00.000-08:00

It was reported last week that a court has ordered estate agent Foxtons Ltd to pay more than £4,000 in fines and costs for failing to give accurate information about a property for sale. As an advocate of reform to the home buying and selling process based on principle of mandatory delivery of upfront information I found this case of interest.

In the case Magistrates heard that a would-be buyer had been interested in buying a home in Hackney Foxtons, but the estate agent chose not tell the buyer that the £450,000 property was designated not as residential, but as "work/live" - to be used as part-business, part-residential.

This was only discovered later after the buyer instructed a solicitor and incurred £600 of legal fees. The buyer was then faced with either a £20,000 bill for planning covenants to convert the property to solely residential use or pulling out and losing both time and costs.

The buyer chose to withdraw and a complaint was made to Trading Standards in Hackney, who referred the case to Islington Council. The agent was subsequently

issued with a fine of £3667, and ordered to pay £680 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.

The buyer here was lucky.

Many others are not and before home information packs were introduced many sellers and buyers lost thousands and thousands of pounds in abortive transactions. This is one fact that Grant Shapps conveniently seems to forget when speaking to the press and the public.

If in this case the property had been advertised by Foxtons as residential, then according to the law a HIP should have been produced and presented to the buyer. It’s not clear whether this happened or not, though if a HIP was available then planning issues may have been uncovered through the personal searches that are contained within the HIP.

The case also highlights the benefit of taking and using the HIP as a basis for improving the home and buying and selling process by requiring the seller to deliver legal information over and above those legal documents already within the HIP, such as for example planning documents. See my earlier article on ‘ready to exchange’ packs.

Had this requirement been in place a case of this type would never have occurred. Perhaps this explains the number of estate agents urging Grant Shapps to follow through with his intention to abolish the HIP.

As always with politics the consumer seems to be low down on the list of priorities and much lower than the estate agent on the Grant Shapps’ list!

Grant Shapps vows to 'scrap' Home Information Packs within 100 days

2009-12-04T03:43:00.001-08:00

In the same week as he was struggling to recall the name of one of his fellow conference speakers, Grant Shapps is in the news again today claiming in an article within the web based Estate Agents Today that he has now set a very precise timetable for the ‘scrapping’ of Home Information Packs.

Out goes the same day revocation and in comes a three months timetable commitment to see the end of the HIP within a very precise period of 100 days.

His obsession with the pack comprising legal documents and carbon reducing energy performance certificates is unremitting and is now coming across as a very personal crusade.

As mentioned before I fail as a lawyer to see how he can deliver this commitment, given no statutory power is available to him, or rather Caroline Spellman, to bring the HIP to an end. Primary legislation would be required that would take much longer, probably 18 months or longer.

He knows this, we know this, and therefore we must question his motive for spinning these unfounded statements. I have a theory. Is this all part and parcel of a master plan designed for the purpose of bringing to a standstill in spring of next year the ongoing recovery of the property market?

By saying the HIP is going, and tirelessly repeating this at every opportunity, along with the pledge of reducing the stamp duty threshold, is the Conservative Party deliberately engineering a situation that could if not stopped derail the property market as well as the Government’s wider game plan to get us out of recession. What right thinking person is going to market their home or purchase a home in the early part of next year, when they are being encouraged by Mr. Shapps to wait ( and pray) in the hope that if the Conservative Party if elected in either March or May moving home will , according to him, be cheaper.

I am not usually a believer in conspiracy theories, but it does make you wonder when it must be going through their minds that if the economy continues to pick up, options to attack the Government and improve their chances at the Poll will clearly begin to diminish.

As always the net effect of this political game is uncertainty for businesses, loss of jobs and the possibility of us finding ourselves deeper in recession that we were this time last year.

'Toe Curling' Grant Shapps

2009-12-04T03:41:00.000-08:00

I saw this in Building Connect and it made me smile:

'Gary Sharpps, MP

If shadow housing minister Grant Shapps was trying to make an impression on the green building sector, he could have done better than getting the name of its most powerful operator wrong. Throughout his address to Building’s Making Sustainable Development Happen conference, he referred to UK Green Building Council chief executive, Paul King (with whom he has shared a platform several times) as “John”; cue the sound of

500 sets of toes curling within sandals throughout the hall.
nd despite the moderator, shadow energy minister Greg Clark, clearly addressing King by his real first name later on in the event, Shapps didn’t learn from his error: seeing King’s PR guy, John Alker, backstage, he asked him: “Where’s the other John?”'

Is there any hope for us, I ask?

Grant Shapps - The HIP Spin Doctor

2009-12-04T03:39:00.000-08:00

The latest ‘spin’ emerging from the Shapps’ propaganda machine sees the Daily Telegraph carrying in this morning’s paper news that ‘Home information packs have cost sellers more than half a billion pounds since their introduction two years ago – and raised nearly £100 million for the Government’.

Passing to the Daily Telegraph information gained through raising Parliamentary questions, Grant Shapps, the shadow housing minister, said: "By imposing a £657.6 million burden on the housing market during the longest and deepest recession in living memory, Labour's short-sighted bureaucratic policy is milking the industry dry. They should have listened to the consumers, the industry and the Conservative Party and scrapped this discredited scheme before it even began. HIPs will be history under a future Conservative Government, with only the useful energy performance certificate surviving."

As usual with stories of this type, Mr Shapps ‘spinning’ for political gain has omitted to present the full story with the consequence the unsuspecting public is left with a distorted and highly misleading picture of Home Information Packs. But hey what is new there!

The story fails to mention:

• That this cost represents no extra burden. If the HIP is removed the ‘burden’ would still remain, as apart from the cost of the energy performance certificate (that Mr Shapps says he will keep) all of the other components in a HIP are components that a seller and buyer would have to pay for in any event.

• In fact if he removes the HIP the so called ‘burden’ will increase as the cost of personal searches that have, since the introduction of the HIP come down, are likely to increase by around 40%. So the Consumer will be paying more.

• If the HIP the HIP is removed the consumer will be returned to the days of a 28% failure rate with property transactions costing consumers £1 million each day along with the stress and misery this causes.

• The energy performance certificate without the HIP will fail to help to reduce carbon emissions as it can be proved that where the EPC operates independently of the HIP the level of non compliance runs at around 40%.

The HIP remains an easy target for Mr Shapps. In his eyes using the HIP for political spin presents him with almost guaranteed national press coverage. I believe the public is becoming tired of hearing about this and are more interested in hearing more from Mr Shapps and his Party on far more important issues such as Afghanistan, Europe, and the economy as the health service. As I have said many times, is does not take too much intellectual skills to knock and mock, the true measure of a good politician is in the formation and delivery of good and substantive policies for progressive reform.

Five reasons why estate agents should support the retention of the Home Information Pack

2009-12-04T03:36:00.000-08:00

The National Association of Estate Agents has gone out its way to put down the Home Information Pack, and indeed within recent weeks has called for the suspension of the HIP regulations (http://bit.ly/7YNQvF). I find it difficult to see the logic behind this strategy, particularly as the high street estate agent should in my view be looking at the HIP not as the enemy, but rather as an asset that can, if used properly, bring about many benefits.

So here are my Top 5 reasons for the estate agent to embrace rather than reject the HIP:

1. First and foremost, the HIP is one of the only vehicles out there that can be used to capture the seller at a stage when they may not have had any contact with other property professionals. The HIP should be looked at as an effective sales tool to bring in more clients and to then once secured, and with the help of associated professionals such as IFAs and solicitors, be used as a basis to earn referral commission. If the HIP is taken away, many sellers may revert back to contacting IFAs before beginning the process of marketing.

2. The importance of capturing the seller at the beginning of the selling process, and as such being a head of the queue, should not be underestimated, and for this reason the cost of the HIP should be viewed as part and parcel of the agent’s annual marketing budget. Most HIP suppliers can supply the HIP at short over base cost and rather as some agents do, mark this up with a higher retail price, my suggestion would be to offer the HIP FREE of charge. This can then be absorbed as part and parcel of the marketing budget for that property. This will not only attract more sellers, it will also encourage loyalty. This is of particular importance at a time when Grant Shapps and the Conservatives claim (disingenuously) that the cost of the HIP is stalling the property market.

3. The HIP presents a golden opportunity for the agent to pause and engage fully with the seller. I do not understand why more agents do not use the Property Information Questionnaire as a means of selling and highlighting the positive features of a property. For instance if it’s been re-wired or had a new roof, why not push these features and attach to the PIQ the documents evidencing the cost of the repairs/improvements. Some may look at this as a burdensome exercise but I know some agents do invest the time to make sure as much information and documentation is provided within, and with this form so as to make sure the time between offer and exchange of contracts is shortened.

4. The principle of delivery of upfront information on which the HIP is based should only be viewed by the agent as helpful. How many times has an agent and indeed a buyer only found out about a defect in title or about an adverse boundary after the property has been removed from the market and a solicitor is engaged. Surely the seller, the buyer and the agent would all benefit if any potential problem of this sort could be identified at the time marketing rather than later. The seller benefits as early detection of problems presents the opportunity to find early solutions so as to ensure the property is marketed in the full knowledge of the problem but with the solution attached. This then avoids the loss of time and cost associated with abortive transactions. The buyer is also kept happy and more likely to stick to the transaction and arrange a mortgage without having to deal with unforeseen queries. The buyer will also avoid having to waste the time and expense that is associated with late withdrawal from a transaction. Finally, the agent benefits through having a happy seller and the prospect of repeat and recommended business, as well as getting his hands onto his commission that much quicker.

5. The proposed evolution of the HIP into a ‘ready exchange pack’ (http://bit.ly/33c61e) brings to the agent all of the above benefits as well as creating the opportunity of a sales edge on competitors. What better way is there to market a property in the shop window as both ‘exchange and mortgage ready’! If I was a buyer and there were two properties almost identical other than the fact one was ‘ready to exchange’ it would be a no brainer which one I would choose.

So come on agents, the time has come to get behind the HIP and register with the NAEA your displeasure about how the Association is trying to remove from you one of the best, if not the only sales tool that has come your way during the last decade.

Estate agents ill-considered call for home information pack suspension

2009-12-04T03:31:00.000-08:00

The National Association of Estate Agents, the trade association of estate agents, has issued a call this week for the suspension of Home Information Packs. Nothing new here, as the Association has always viewed the HIP as a threat to their members control over the information the HIP presents to a buyer. It’s a shame the Association has taken this stance as a) this is not fully representative of the view of a large number of estate agents, and b) its attention would be better focused on assisting the HIP industry to push for further and long overdue reform to the buying and selling process.

The Chief Executive of NAEA, Bolton King said: "The cost of the packs punishes sellers, while more than three quarters of buyers – 77 per cent - do not consider them before they decide whether to buy a property. During a recession this is an unacceptable situation. The NAEA calls on the Government to immediately suspend HIPs while the UK economy is in recession, and to commit to re-examining their viability once the economy is out of recession."

Interestingly Mr King does not echo the call of Grant Shapps for the ‘scrapping’ of the HIP, and is merely seeking the temporary suspension. The problem with this however is that a suspension would have the same result on industry as a complete cessation. It would die a death overnight. The fact that many estate agents have and continue to make a decent income out of HIPs may also be one of the reasons there is not an out and out call for ‘scrapping’.

Mr King in making his plea says over three quarters of people do not consider the HIP before they purchase. How does he know this as in the majority of cases the HIP is passed by the buyer to his or her solicitor who then checks the content and advises. If the solicitor finds on looking at the content there is a problem the seller may be advised to reconsider the sale.

Furthermore, as a HIP is nothing other than a bundle of legal documents with an energy assessment certificate, it is not surprising the buyer has little interest and relies on his or her solicitor to undertake the due diligence.

The statement is also devoid of any real understanding of section 162 of the Housing Act ( giving Government a power to suspend) as this is a power that can only be exercised in exceptional circumstances and one not designed for the purpose Mr King mentions.

Instead of always looking to the HIP as the cause of problems within the housing market Mr King should be advocating changes to the selling and buying process as surely it is in his members’ best interests to see the introduction of improvement in speed and transparency. It was only last month that Ian Tonge, chairman of the NAEA International Committee, stated that our system can "give you time to reflect. But I do think we could have a faster system of commitment."

Those advocating the retention of the HIP consider the HIP presents an excellent vehicle to bring about reform of this type and to bring about benefits for the consumer in terms of less cost and more importantly, stress.

Perhaps Mr King’s statement was designed to deflect attention away from his own industry given the article in this week’s Times Newspaper in which Estate agents were accused of boosting profits by strong-arming potential buyers into using in-house mortgage services, leaving customers thousands of pounds worse off.

It was reported: ‘Evidence has emerged that buyers are being pressured into taking additional services that earn agency staff commission payments’.

The report disclosed that a consumer survey prepared for the OFT found that one homebuyer in 20 who had taken a mortgage from an estate agent had been told he or she had to do so to secure the purchase.

The HIP is not perfect. It does however provide a buyer with information that would not otherwise be provided by an estate agent, as well as helping to speed up the selling and buying process once an offer is accepted.