Changes to HIP regulations on April 6 – which will mean that no marketing of a residential property can take place until a substantial proportion of the HIP is complete – will amount to an assault on personal liberty whilst inflicting more damage on the housing market, a leading campaigner has warned.
SPLINTA founder Nick Salmon said that taking away the right of a home owner to sell their property at will amount to 'another unnecessary burden on an already fragile housing market and a small but significant erosion of our liberties'.
Salmon said: "Good estate agency practice requires the agent to begin marketing a property as soon as possible after receiving instructions from the seller. This practice has already been partly curtailed by the requirement order a HIP before telling anyone that a property may be coming up for sale but from April 6, it will be impossible to begin marketing until the major part of the pack is physically complete. I do not understand why this government is so seemingly hell-bent on causing as much damage as possible to the housing market and as much inconvenience and expense to home sellers."
He went on: "A new seven page document, The Property Information Questionnaire' (PIQ) will be required to be in the HIP. This form has to be completed by the seller and asks questions about their property such as rights of way, building works, flood risks, and leasehold information. The government claims potential buyers will want to see this information before even viewing a property but the experience of the overwhelming majority of estate agents is that only a handful of buyers ever ask to see the Pack, and then only when they have settled on a property . The HIP is of no interest to buyers and most estate agents are not asked for it until after an offer is accepted. It is absurd for the government to believe that buyers will wade through dozens of pages of text before they even view a property."
Salmon also drew attention to the fact that the seller does not have to sign the PIQ, so there can be no check on who completed the form or whether the answers are truthful, while a disclaimer tells buyers that the PIQ is not a substitute for legal documentation. "Buyers' solicitors are unlikely to accept the PIQ as part of the conveyancing process and will still require sellers to complete the existing Sellers Property Information Questionnaire. This will lead to duplication and further expense for sellers," he said.
SPLINTA renewed its call for the Government to suspend HIPs or to make them voluntary.
SPLINTA warns new rules on HIPs 'will erode liberty'
Latest Features
-
AI struggles to pass the trust test in the workplace
Artificial Intelligence will not be taking over people’s jobs any time...
-
Scottish housebuilding needs to return to levels from 25 years ago
Scottish housebuilding needs to return to the completion numbers from 25...
-
There is a future in buy-to-let
High interest rates, slow price growth and more stringent tax rules...
Sponsored Content
-
Electric Vehicle Charging: What Homebuyers Really Want to Know...
As electric vehicles increasingly populate our roads and the necessity for...
-
Prestige & Village announce exciting new partnership with Desert...
In an exclusive interview with Estate Agent Today, Simon Coaker, Sales &...
-
A Market-leading ecosystem for estate agents ...
At iamproperty we are excited to share the announcement of our...
-
Upcoming Stamp Duty Change may spur sales in short term
An expert says a change in Stamp Duty Land Tax, coming...
-
Industry Views - Airbnb Crackdown - this time it's not just Michael Gove...
It’s tempting to think that Michael Gove’s proposed clampdown on Airbnb-style...
-
Stamp Duty Cut possible in Mini-Budget - government briefing
A report in the Times newspaper says Chancellor Jeremy Hunt is...
-
Rightmove: It's difficult for agents to provide material information
The task of obtaining material information is more difficult than it...
-
Stamp Duty Revolution - call for sellers to pay instead of buyers
A prominent estate agent has started an online petition to reverse...
-
Agency regulation and enforcement will improve home sales - claim
Estate agency regulation is needed to help improve the homebuying and...
60 second interview
Jake Gann, Sales Director at Bamboo Auction
Who are you and what does it say on...
Ashley Day - Director of Bristol Property Centre
Who are you, and what does it say on...
Graham Paterson ‘Co-founder and CEO of Jitty’
Who are you and what does it say on your...
Comments
We have voted,apparently for people who can make these decisions for us. That is why Labour has to go. They dont act for the people any more and are to disrespectful to listen.
because its not democratic. Who voted for him? Who voted for hIPS? We need to re-gain democracy for democracy to work. Every decision this government makes should be put to the public via internet/tv voting. Text yes if you want hips no if you dont etc. Only then will the people have the final say.
Democracey is the will of the people. A democratic government impliments the will of the people. So how come this goverment doesn't impliment the will of the people?
The posts this week on EAT are encouraging. There seems to be a ground swell of opinion questioning the effectiveness of the NAEA and the realisation that the Housing Act 2004 may well infringe civil liberties and specifically that of freedom of expression.
The NAEA five point plan is a collection of soft and well worn options easily ignored by government with only the helping of people to stay in their homes having any real impact on the market by preventing repossessions. As ludicrous as HIPs are they have had little real impact on the market and in theory are cost neutral. That they may have deterred speculative sellers is a positive thing in the current market. The last thing that is needed is more unsold stock on the market. Raising liquidity in banks will have no effect on lending without confidence that the bottoming out of values has been reached and this is not going to happen when we are only at the start of a recession, and quite possibly a depression, that has yet to unleash its worst.
Where I believe that we have gone wrong in the past is to petition government as an industry. The approach should be to engage directly with the public and ensure that they are fully aware of their loss of right to declare their property for sale without fear of penalty or threat from the state. I believe that the legislation contravenes the Human Rights Act 1998 which clearly sets out occurrences where it is legitimate for freedom of expression to be curtailed. Simply to support a law is most definitely not one of them!
What the NAEA could be doing is launching a campaign pack for agents to communicate the “erosion of civil liberty” directly to the public to both ignite and use their outrage to challenge government. This could comprise a set of templates from which ready to sign letters could be prepared on behalf of each householder. One for their local MP asking them to explain how is it that they can no longer freely and unconditionally declare their house for sale without fear or threat of penalty from the state. It might also ask whether the MP voted for or against the legislation. The other letter should be to the local Trading Standards office requesting an explanation of the law and, without ambiguity, the precise circumstances under which they could be issued a penalty fine. Whilst orchestrated by the industry it is key that the responses are a public one and not that of the industry. There is no better opportunity for agents to win public support and ensure that the government is put on the spot through the public and MPs forcing a denial or admission - either of which is a victory. Well done to SPLINTA for picking up on probably the most important aspect of HIPs and attempting to bite back!
If all the nerds who always want to knock NAEA, they and SPLINTA are working harder to try and convince the government of the error of their ways, but HMG don't actually want to listen!
Imagine a private sector business consulting their customers and gaining a 99% NO to their idea and then insisting they buy the product.... They would be bankrupt in hours..why does labour not have to play by the same rules? Complete disrespect for tax payers money.
I would march but when you think 1,000,000 people couldn't stop an illegal war, i dont think a few thousand agents could do anything.
Just ignore the packs and boycott them. If you have any values you will do it. That is real safety in numbers.
The pack providers would last a few weeks and be gone and we can concentrate on selling houses again.
Remember those days??
i totally agree with BigG.
Any agent complying with these restrictions on civil liberty will be even more idiotic than the waste of spacers who dreamt up this pathetic policy. Marketing will commence with or WITHOUT a HIP...it's all a load of nonsense.
The only way the housing minsister is gping to listen is if i take my for sale board stick where the sun does not shine.It seems this country is run be royal a-holes. Eveything is falling apart and what do they do to sort things out- introduce more bullshit red type! You see their pokets are not not yet feeling pinch in the way mine our. My kids are out begging as the write this! oh how i wish i had listen the wise and become a wanker..i mean a banker!!
This is all part of labours masterplan to destroy the wealth creating private sector in favour of a totalitarian regime we are all dependent on our masters.
Am I missing something? The Government seem determined to wreck the housing market. Hips have already significantly redcued the amount of property on the market. Speculative sellers have all but disappeared and these previously accounted for about 1/3 of property sales. I was hoping they would have seen the drop in Stamp Duty revenue and that would be a clear enough sign for them to scrap Hips, however they are actually making them even more arduous whilst causing a delay in marketing so even more people won't want the hassle and so won't sell. Neither sellers nor buyers are interested in them. The information is out of date by the time a sale is agreed and so costs are duplicated. The only thing they might achieve is ensuring a lot of people vote Tory at the next election and then we will hopefully see them scrapped once and for all.
Government Housing Ministers lack so much common sense it is truly frightening. M
We are up for a march to Downing Street, I'm pissed off with this Government and it's crazy legislation. Personally we should just ignore this PIQ, get the vendor to put a cross on it. And start marking the property straightway, after payment taken for the HIP
Good for you Nick..Well said......anyone up for a march to Downing St just to prove how crazy all this legislation is....AND HOW HOPELESSLY DEVOID OF INTELLIGENCE THIS GOVERNMENT IS...
I wonder whether Nick Salmon has consulted counsel on whether an approach could be made to the European Court of Human Rights on this issue? However, according to Golden Brown we are allowed to apprise applicants of a forthcoming new instruction provided we don't reveal its address - by saying this is he allowing us a little latitude or is it incompetence which is going to lead to abuse, grey areas and undermine the whole legislation?