Is the Government seriously under-estimating the extra printing costs for agents, even if only one extra double printed A4 has to be added to all particulars?
For some agents – those whose existing particulars are already this size – costs will double.
But Government advisers appear to think that agents only have about five sets of particulars per property.
According to Susie Pattison, director of Ravensworth which is the largest digital printer of estate agents’ particulars in the UK, this is a woeful under-estimate.
“Our minimum order is 30 sets of particulars, but many agents order 50, 100 or 200,” she said. Ravensworth has 4,000 estate agency customers on its books.
It might be helpful for EAT readers to be able to advise the Government further.
What is the AVERAGE number of particulars you, as agents, expect to print per property, for (a) sales and (b) rentals?
.png)
%20A%20property%20tale%20for%20our%20times.png)
Comments
This is a prime example of misguided bureaucracy. Were we asked as an industry if it was required, beneficial or worthwhile?
Who on earth is in charge of this lunacy, as I will be the first to explain to them in no uncertain terms that they can go whistle. I for one will simply NOT participate in such an ill founded, unnecessary and unhelpful waste of time, money and paper!
We spend a lot of money producing smart professionally printed brochures and I will NOT be including a full EPC.
It would be nice if others follow suit, it's about time that reason and logic was given a voice to shout down, jumped-up, self proclaimed, jobs worth lawmakers who are so apparently, completely out of touch with reality.
Interesting NIck. My souces say the greens are pushing for the full pages, regardless if it's two or more pages the cost is outrageous. My understanding is that at this time the implementaion is driven by the EU to be on all marketing material (Fore Sale boards exempt!). So short mailing browse sheets will require the EPC for each property!
MW. Clearly you don't know what your talking about since you popped on EAT. As for EPC the legisltaion is very clear. They must be provided free of charge.
Hi Nick
We’re off again then!
Well done for your continued interest in protecting our profession from stupid government decisions.
Surely it is enough for the EPC to be available on-line and a sheet to be available to every viewer, so they definitely have the information before making a buying decision?
Best wishes
Lance
For the past few weeks SPLINTA has been quietly giving attention to the EPC changes and I have been in discussion with CLG. Because CLG apparently doesn't quite know where it is going on this one, or what the actual timescale for implementation will be, I have held back from any public comment.
The key issue for agents will be the requirement to include more of the EPC details on sales/lettings particulars. It is not going to be the full EPC, so let's stop thinking we'll have to print another 6 or 8 pages. It is most likely going to be two sides of a sheet of A4. Nevertheless, for most properties that will mean a doubling of the print cost. CLG think we only print 5 copies per property which is a gross under-estimation in my view. It would be very helpful to see some more responses to EAT's request for info from agents about how many particulars they print.
You also need to be aware that some time in the not too distant future the requirements may affect media advertising of property. Internet should not be a problem but print media costs may be if we are required to take extra space in advertising to show EPC info
SPLINTA is ready to make representations to government and CLG at the appropriate time but only if the industry wants us to do so. We would need a similar high level of expressions of support as we had with HIPs if we are to carry weight. To that end, if you feel strongly that putting more EPC info with the sales particulars is an unecessary or costly burden, send an email to info@splintacampaign.co.uk
I am not one to advocate civil disobedience but in this case as it's such an unnecessary waste of resources and energy, as well as a major expense, we should as an industry, boycott the whole idea. Come on Nick Salmon, we need you again!!
Could you get around this nonsense by sending out something other than particulars ... errr, Basic Property Information perhaps - with a note on every one that says 'The EPC for this property is available on our web site. If you require a printed copy of the EPC please send a cheque or postal order for the sum of £2.95 to our office and include a stamped and self addressed envelope. This is to cover our printing costs and time.
Just because the government forces you to do something, why shouldn't you charge for it?
The government insists in plenty of areas that you can only do things on-line. New registrants for VAT are forced to do their VAT returns on line now. Could you insist that people look at EPCs on line?
Oh dear, I may have been demoted to EstateAgentTooday's new 'ART CRITIC', but I can still be critical of NAEA too (although I don't enjoy seeing our Association getting it so wrong these days). Yes, they should have told Mr Pursehouse at the CLG exactly what nonsense the EPC revamp is. At the same time they could drop licensing AND stop sending out press releases saying 'don't use an NAEA Member unless licensed'.
OK forget the new instuction printing, what are you going to do with property match mailing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Currently you will be required to add 5 ot 6 pages per match sent per property. We mail weekly sets of property details (not all want or are on email), to over 500 prospective buyers averaging 20 properties = 50,000 pages per week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Utter nonsense.
I think the same will happen as with HIP`s...this ridiculous ruling will be ignored by the vast majority and it will soon fizzle out. You need an EPC and we will provide a front page (the graph) which is as a jpeg on our web site so the applicant can print out at their own cost!
Personally, I think that you do not need to provde applicants with a printed copy, you just have to provide them with the report.
On your details you can have the energy graph and a weblink to the full report. If they want it they can print it for themselves.
Likewise, my postal bill is a fraction of what it used to be because I email details to customers - these could have the report in full, or just the graph and an active weblink.
Should a buyer have an offer accepted I would then print them out.
Another nail in the coffin of the Royal Mail perhaps because we refuse to print details unless we go on a viewing?
Whilst the wording appears to be somewhat draconian, I have a feeling that as long as you keep to the spirit of law, Trading Standards are hardly going to come and go to the effort of doing anything other than fining you £100.
At current print costs (6 pence per page in black & white) a 5 page EPC would cost 30 pence - or 333 sets of details.
Why bother - the chances of getting caught are vanishingly small.
For the record, we print 10 brochures as soon as we are instucted then print 5 each time we are getting low. All in all i would say on average 20 A3 booklet brochures per property. 5 is a massive under estimate.
Isn't the whole point of EPC's to illustrate the Energy Efficiency and Environmental Friendlieness of a property? Providing every applicant with a full 6 page EPC is doing quite the opposite, wasting natural resources in the form of paper, toner and electricity to print.
Surely this issue calls for some kind of sensible compromise.
At present we provide the front page of an EPC as the final sheet of our property details as this shows the essential details of an EPC, whilst a hard copy of the full EPC is readily available if anyone wishes to see it.
I'd welcome comments on whether this would fit the bill?
@Chris Holmes
Good point YOU make. But where is the input to this subject from the RICS and NFoPP on behalf of their members?
I think that common sense must prevail here. Iagree that to order an EPC to be printed with every set of particulars is a huge cost burden but surely the way to meetr legislation is to simply print out a double sided A5 version every time a set of particulars is actually issued to a prospective purchaser. Yes it is still a cost but you are not then printing EPCs that are not being "used"