Anti-HIP petitions to become part of academic research |
Monday 13th February 2012
Twon anti-Home Information Pack petitions on the Downing Street website are to be part of an academic research project.
The first petition was raised by Nick Salmon of SPLINTA, and called for first-day marketing to be allowed beyond May 31, 2008. It attracted 9,599 signatures.
The second petition was raised by estate agent Trevor Kent in 2008 and attracted 1,684 signatories before closing on January 2, 2009.
It also called for first-day marketing to be allowed to continue without agents having to wait for a HIP first. The Government had announced its intention to make it illegal for agents to market properties without a HIP in place, or face fines of £200 a day.
Both are now to be part of research by Dr Scott Wright, a fellow at the British Academy and a lecturer at Leicester University, who is looking into petitions.
The Government responded at the time to the Trevor Kent petition, saying that its proposed change would “ensure that consumers can see and use the HIP to inform their decisions about a property. These changes will also make it easier for local trading standards agencies to identify specific cases of non-compliance and enforce the HIP duties”.
The official response concluded: “There is no evidence to support the assertion that removal of the temporary first-day marketing concession will have a negative impact on the housing market.” It said that HIPs had no impact on housing transactions or prices.
Trevor Kent commented: “No wonder the Government lost the election.”
| Tweet |
(4) Comments | Report Abuse
| |
I'm with you PeeBee. Complete waste of money time and resource.
Anepc - sit on it instead of talking out of it as you are a complete moron in stating HIP's are a good idea. For whom? Ahip - I could not have put it better myself. |
| | HIPS had no impact on whether or not people sold their properties and remain to this day a very good idea. |
| |
"Both are now to be part of research by Dr Scott Wright, a fellow at the British Academy and a lecturer at Leicester University, who is looking into petitions."
WHY? Who or what is paying for this "looking into" (as if I didn't need confirmation...)? At what cost? For what purpose? Any other taxpayers have an issue with this? It seems WE are paying for this study... |
DISCLAIMER:The views contained in these user comments are not endorsed by Estate Agent Today(nor its associates and advertisers) in any way and are provided by users who wish to publish their independent opinions on our news.Whilst every effort is made to moderate these comments,due to the instant nature of the posting not all offensive material can be removed instantly.Please help us keep the comments areas tidy by reporting details of any infringements to team@estateagenttoday.co.uk
Editorial Contact Details - Rosalind Renshaw
rosalind.renshaw@estateagenttoday.co.uk
Top agents admit to flouting rules on EPCs
Mortgage lending to hit a new low this year, says MAB boss
Asking prices edge up as supply of For Sale stock drops







