By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Written by Rosalind Renshaw

The House of Lords has heard that the Government intends to continue with HIPs despite the recession.

Lord Dixon-Smith asked whether, in view of current housing market conditions, the Government would abandon the requirement for HIPs.

He said: “Seventy-four per cent of the people who buy houses – these are the Government’s figures – take no notice of Home Information Packs in their purchase deal and it is an inhibiting factor from the point of view of the vendor.”

He said that a flood of legislation had been passed in the last ten years assuming that prosperous times would continue, and that HIPs were a classic.

But CLG minister Baroness Andrews said that housing market conditions were caused by the economic downturn and had nothing to do with HIPs.

She insisted that HIPs had no effect on levels of house purchases and that abandoning HIPs would not help the housing market. She refused to consider aborting the April 6 changes to the HIPs regime.

She said: “Abandoning the forthcoming changes on HIPs, which are intended to consolidate the regulations and provide industry with certainty and stability, would not help that process. I am delighted to say that, despite the current difficulties facing the housing market, a recent survey of 16,000 transactions by a leading estate agent, Connells, showed that, where a HIP was available, exchanges were completed on average six days quicker.”

Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Hamwee asked if the Government had any evidence as to what would be the effect of requiring a HIP from the first day of marketing. She said she could not find any research.

Baroness Andrews replied that the research said that HIPs needed to be seen by consumers but that estate agents had not been showing them to buyers and sellers.


  • icon

    Overview – let’s take your points one at a time. I dispute “efficient”, I think most people regard it as grossly inefficient. The process was devised when housing market transactions and mortgages were not mainstream activities in which chains of sales arise. The chain problem is a bit better because of availability of shorthold rentals but to suggest people limit their transactions to unencumbered participants or only deal at auction is frankly nonsense. Remember we are talking about the mainstream market, not just the occasional oddity. So to suggest such radical changes would involve a far greater revolution in the process than HIPs ever do – after all HIPs simply shunt the information gathering process to a sensible point – the start. Yes, of course agents act for sellers but that doesn’t stop them doing their best to ease a process through for the benefit of all concerned – surely that’s acting in their client’s best interests? May I ask what “expensive bureaucratic solution” I am advocating? Forget the EPC – it’s a totally separate issue. Which other information required in a HIP wasn’t required under the old system? I assume that a home put on the market is for sale. Reasonable? So precisely where is this extra cost and bureaucracy? No doubt you agree a sale needs title evidence (£6 and 5 minutes online)? Searches? I accept they need sorting out - the transition to doing this properly is a pain I agree. PIQ? It’s only what’s reasonable to ask and most of it already goes into the seller’s information form; I agree there’s going to be some duplication there but again, it’s a transitional thing. Better to get that sort of information available before a deal is struck, surely? So maybe it’s the index or the sale statement you are complaining about? Big deal. I’m not defending Labour, I’m defending the start of a transition to a sensible basis for home transfer. Anyway I think we've flogged this as far as we can - I can see most of you guys are going to have a few years of pain whilst the blinkers are prised from your eyes.

    • 30 March 2009 11:57 AM
  • icon

    Nina, market forces have produced an efficient, relatively inexpensive system of property transaction in this country where the subject-to-contract sale enables people to move without having to take on a bridging loan or rented property between moves. The downside means that sales can fall through and there are chains of transactions. If people don't want chains, they can refuse to sell to encumbered buyers or buy from encumbered sellers, or even buy and sell by auction. The fact that agents act for vendors limits there ability to help buyer in the decision-making process. Most properties titles are straightforward, while you advocate an expensive bureaucratic solution applied to all to help the few. What's happened over the last twenty-five years is that more and more people lower down the social (and at risk of being non-PC, the intelligence scale) have been buying property and this government is trying to overcome their lack of understanding by introducing more nanny-state legislation. Their heart (and yours, I'm sure) is in the right place but how much more bureaucracy can a country afford? Answer, plenty in boomtimes but none in a recession. The public always get what it deserves and by voting for New Labour it got waste, bureaucracy and bankruptcy.

    • 30 March 2009 10:48 AM
  • icon

    Chancer, once again thanks for replying with such thought. Unfortunately the comments you make don’t seem to be representative of the view held by most of your colleagues who are vocal in this matter. I know there are some extremely good professional estate agents who have exactly the attitude you describe – thorough, caring and genuinely wanting to provide the best service to everyone concerned. I have known a few like that over the years and I imagine they are as frustrated as I am at the attitude and behaviour of some of the others. You have pretty well answered my two options correctly (in my view) since you evidently recognise the sheer common sense of it – a no-brainer. But it doesn’t say much for the rest of your “friends”. As you know there are a number of critical bits of information that anyone buying a home needs to have, whether through a lawyer or through their own resources. One house I bought a few years ago, I recall I picked up 2 fairly critical items that the lawyer had not reported on, simply because I was able to understand the title plan and the related words in the deeds. It needed someone who had actually seen the place – me (or maybe a surveyor, but that sort of stuff is usually outside their brief). You say there are reasons, no doubt legitimate due to the law, why agents provide minimal information, yet you also said I should be able to tell if the cottage is in a conservation area from the details. I think this misdescription act might do the consumer more harm than good and it’s something where your professional bodies should be handling it with best practice codes – that’s probably how the HIP should be done as well and from what I hear that’s the way the RICS want it to move. Is the NAEA of the same view or are their heads firmly in the sand? I could see that would be a way forward for Mr Shapps to evolve things next year. I like what you say about the commitment to the transaction on offer acceptance but it does mean getting all your ducks in a row including a mortgage offer - hence the HIP and pre-offer survey. And hence the obvious pressure for what they are calling exchange-ready HIPs. But it’s taking years! It was 1998 when all this was muted and I read somewhere that there have been numerous working groups for years before that who all concluded basically the same thing – the old system stinks and did the consumer a great big disservice. Half-assed HIPs don’t do them any favours either, that’s the real problem at the moment. I agree the EPC has hijacked the thing – ironically it wasn’t even heard of when Labour started out on this. The only really useful thing for a buyer to see - as against their lawyer, unless you’re me ;) - the survey, was kicked into the long grass. A bridge too far at this stage. That’s the trouble, it’s a change of mindset that’s needed as much as anything and if you have to do that over a long transitional period, you get all the rubbish in the meantime. Which is where we’re at. That’s pretty much the same problem Barack Obama has got, and Brown as well. Though theirs is on a slightly bigger scale.

    • 28 March 2009 09:42 AM
  • icon

    Nina – The information that you and many others would like is predictable and not unreasonable from a buyers perspective. Personally I would be quite happy for all property details, through legislation, to have to provide certain critical information. I fully appreciated where you were coming from and realise that your exasperation is born of poor service and mistrust, however not all agents are the same. Some take great pride in acquiring a deep knowledge of each property they market as well as an equally in depth understanding of each applicants requirements. My point about speaking to the agent is to provide the opportunity for this information exchange to occur which can be relayed in a manner and style to suit the recipient. You should also appreciate that the industry lives in fear of the Property Misdescription Acts and has become increasingly wary of providing information that could be delivered inaccurately exposing them to possible litigation and fine . This explains many agents reluctance to provide information even though they know it would helpful to the potential buyer. A less obvious reason for scant information is that many agents, particularly within the large corporate businesses, are charged with achieving viewing targets. They have a vested interest in ensuring that too much information does not deter the applicant from viewing. With regard to HIPs much of the industries opposition is because the HIP does not meet the objectives claimed by the government and instead was hijacked to become a carrier for the Energy Performance Certificate. I think you will find that the industry is very accommodating of change and in particular a move to a binding commitment once an offer is made and terms agreed as this is the only mechanism that would reduce the number of deals that fall apart. Some form of HIP implementation would be a prerequisite of this and which would go a long way to providing what you are after being aimed at decision support rather than conveyance ease. Had the current HIPs legislation had such a purpose in mind then the industry would have been more supportive of it.

    • 27 March 2009 21:30 PM
  • icon

    Chancer, thanks for listening but you've got the wrong end of the stick. I think agents should be more involved with their potential buyers, not less, by providing a service that eases the buyer through their decision making process. I appreciate they have to act in their own clients' best interests but hey, surely that means smoothing a sale through. Sure enough, I'm bright enough to know what I need to know & I accept a lot of people maybe don't understand the process - but that's largely because it's all kept as a sort of myth that only the professionals can understand, which is a load of b******s. You are joking aren't you, about Listed Building, Conservation Areas & rights of way being shown on agents' details? There might be a reference to Listed Buildings but you certainly can't rely on it. I could have included a lot more things in my list that no way are ever on the details, but the post was already way too long. As for asking the agent - er, I'm sorry honey but I just don't have the confidence in them, putting it politely. And I don't think they'll get those answers as quickly as I can with my laptop, say like 30 seconds? I just don't get why there is all this resistance. Please answer this - which is better for everyone involved? 1. sellers & buyers agree terms & enter a transaction process & chain subject to obtaining essential information which might cause the buyer to withdraw or attempt to renegotiate; or might cause delays which are not readily explicable say 4 points down or up the chain; or 2. sellers & buyers agree terms & enter a transaction process & chain with in almost all cases, all the relevant information having been available to them both, prior to agreeing terms. I believe it is option 2 but I'd really like to hear some valid arguments pout forward for option 1. HIPs seem to me to be just the start of moving towards a far more efficient way of doing this. To me, and I do have a lot of experience of the problems that can arise in the old system, it's just so obvious I find it incomprehensible that agents think otherwise. The only grouse seems to be that it's government interference - nothing related to whether the concept is actually sensible! And the only reason the government did interfere, & I agree made a total hash of it, was because the "professionals" just wouldn't take on board universal improvements without the big stick of legislation.

    • 27 March 2009 19:03 PM
  • icon

    new wave nina – The listed building status and conservation area should be declared on the agents details and are generally considered positive points for most buyers, although not for all. Equally where there is right of way across the property or a shared driveway then this also should be made clear in the agent’s details. HIPs does provide some of the information but not in a summarised format which I concede would be useful for key points of interest. Beyond this why don’t you just ask the agent? Most agents will already have the information or at least be able to get an answer quickly. Most buyers do not involve their solicitor at pre offer stage simply because of the costs and estate agents are not qualified to offer advice other than in their opinion and to provide information in good faith. It seems to me that you, and others, would like to have no interaction with your agent other than for them arrange viewings once they have made the property available through marketing. This is the future “supermarketing” of property which the industry is keen to resist and ultimately I believe both buyers and sellers will regret.

    • 27 March 2009 13:45 PM
  • icon

    Buying a home – it’s a garbled mix of head, heart and bankroll. Selling a home – it’s a lottery. Whichever and we’re mostly doing both,. it’s adversarial, it’s frustrating, expensive, trauma-inducing, time-consuming, disappointing. You know the clichés. So, I see a few homes I’d be interested in living in. I’ve got them down to 3 or 4 possibilities. From what I can see they seem to “tick the boxes” I think that’s the current idiom. There’s a cottage, a modern semi and a couple of apartments. I come with baggage – don’t we all, all different shapes and sizes? Now I’m not unusual – I’m not an estate agent and never have been a lawyer. But I’m also not an ignorant sillybitch. I’ve been around y’know. I’ve been there, done that. Enough clichés. I know that it’s not just the boxes I can see that need ticking. Head, heart and bankroll, it’s always a compromise. And I’m prepared to spend an evening on the laptop to delve a bit more before I pull that railroad out of the station. Sure, some of the stuff is a bit legal but hey it’s in English and some of the print is a bit small but hey I can zoom the pdf. So, yeah, before I set that railroad steaming I’d like to know if the cottage is a Listed Building, I’d like to know if it’s in a Conservation Area (it’s a bit small and a dormer in the roof would do the trick – I just love it though – the heart). The Home Condition Report says the roof needs urgent attention but the seller’s got a couple of quotes and I’m easy with that – good to know in advance though. I’d rather know that before I get up a head of steam and the seller ain’t gonna be fed up with me later if I’d tried to lower the price. The semi – well it’s bland but fit for purpose except the title says there’s a covenant that I can’t park my caravan on the front drive. Hmm. I was thinking about giving it up but not sure yet – useful to know – I’ll leave that box unticked for the moment. And there’s a funny little bit in the back garden which looks like it doesn’t really belong, just used for tipping rubbish – but even I can see that it’s clearly part of the property on the title plan. No worries there then. And I see next door has a right of way down the side, it’s clear on the plan and it says so in the Land Registry title thingy. It’s good to see in the questionnaire that it’s not flooded (and there’s been no insurance claim) even though the enviro search says it’s within 500 metres of a floodplain. It’s also good to know there won’t be any hassle about the new windows – there’s a guarantee from a FENSA contractor. (It’s really great when people have the sense to put this stuff in, even though they don’t have to – every little helps). I’m really not worried about the color of the bathroom carpet – they’re always crap anyway. But the house is fit for purpose and I can see from the HCR it’s all up together – the head. The apartments – well they’re much of a muchness but CHEAP! But one of them they haven’t got the lease – no way am I going to flaff around for weeks waiting for that – I might lose my own buyer. The other one is OK but I’ll want to renew the boiler – the EPC says it’s rubbish & I do like my creature comforts. I can see in the lease schedule (written in English words – I can understand them) that I can’t play my cello after 8 pm – but I can bring my pussy along - that’s something I was rather anxious about and so the box is ticked. If I can negotiate a bit off for the new boiler I’m rather tempted – bankroll calling. But I do love the cottage. Don’t worry I’ll make up my mind very soon and stick to it, because I know as much as I can about these places. It’s a shame that people don’t seem to understand that relying on the ignorance of so many people isn’t really justification for keeping heads in sands and being rather lazy. But they do need to sort out how to make sure those searches are bang up to date and maybe they could filter the information I them through an electronic sieve, rather like the HCR condition ratings, so we just see what we need to see. And leave the rest to the conveyancer to check out. I’ll go with that. Oh and my son, a first time buyer once he kicks the duvet off, just loves the idea of not having to fork out on this stuff, but he says why can’t they give us a little leaflet of FAQs for what we need to ask? Maybe someone has – I must Google it.

    • 27 March 2009 08:50 AM
  • icon

    new wave nina – You see a property you like, it fulfils all your criteria, you really like the location and you have taken into account its condition as is relevant to you. Why don’t you tell us just what other information, assuming that it’s a freehold title, you would like to know and that would genuinely influence you making an offer?

    • 26 March 2009 22:08 PM
  • icon

    I am not a Conveyancer, or an Estate Agent or a HIP provider or a Personal Search Provider. I am a concerned Tax Payer who can clearly see that the HIP is not beneficial to Buyers and the only reason this Government went ahead and introduced it, knowing full well, that is was not satisfactory, is so they could raise the VAT revenue. Yet another stealth tax from this Government and the inability to hold their hands up and say "sorry we got it wrong". Hopefully any party but labour will get in at the next election and these useless HIPS are scrapped.

    • 26 March 2009 21:39 PM
  • icon

    Open your eyes please! This is a government that collaborated false information to invade a sovereign country, that doesn't serve us but rather imposes its will on us. Churchill will be turning in his grave.

    • 26 March 2009 19:43 PM
  • icon

    The buyer usually employs a conveyancer to do this for them, buyers are generally not worried or interested in the legal aspects and would rather delegate this to a hired professional. Thats been my experience for the last 20 years.

    • 26 March 2009 19:39 PM
  • icon

    Someone tell me this please - is there any information that can go into a HIP, whether required or authorised, that you believe it would be helpful to have available to a buyer before they make an offer, if necessary with the ability to ask for advice on legal aspects that they might not understand?

    • 26 March 2009 19:01 PM
  • icon

    RW, Nick is quite right. If the research were done to inform the industry where is a copy available? I put it to you that the research was done at the bequest of and in willing collaboration with the CLG. How else would Baroness Andrews be able to quote from it and credit the source by name when the industry has yet to see any evidence of the research and the validity of the base data? Perhaps the NAEA has been sent a copy and are preparing their conclusions for publication.

    • 26 March 2009 18:01 PM
  • icon

    Thanks to RW for responding. He tells us that the Connells 'research' was done 'purely to inform the industry'. That being the case there is bound to be a full and robust statistical report available for the industry to scrutinise, isn't there? I therefore repeat my question. Where can we get a copy?

    • 26 March 2009 16:49 PM
  • icon

    CLG minister Baroness Andrews has used unverified evidence in defence of HIPs and therefore knowingly misled the House. This government has a history of using unsubstantiated information as if it were fact and perhaps the NAEA would like to request an apology, clarification or perhaps an amendment. Furthermore the information comes from an agent instrumental in progressing the implementation of HIPs and therefore the objectivity must be considered doubtful. Simon is quite right to suggest that coincidence may well account for the statistics if they are accurate. A factor not mentioned is that the timescale for local authority searches has been dramatically improved to allow for the introduction of HIPs. It is highly probable therefore that those properties with a HIP would have moved to exchange in much the same time. What Connells have not provided is the number of properties where the searches in the HIP were not accepted and had to be re-ordered and whether these are included – which they shouldn’t be. This information would prove the point as to whether the HIP had any real bearing on the time to exchange.

    • 26 March 2009 16:29 PM
  • icon

    I am not an estate agent nor do I represent a HIP company so I have no PIQ axe to grind ( sorry could not help myself ) , I am in fact a property lawyer. I agree with Nick’s comment about the survey figures from Connells. It is well worth seeing how they have based their figures, but to a certain extent it is a red herring ( or Salmon.. as the case may be ). 16,000 properties is absolutely nothing to base a conclusion. Furthermore, there are significant other factors that could have resulted in speeding up the transaction times which are not directly related to Home Information Packs at all. Let me suggest a few:
    1. A number of the properties at Connells may well be properties that were owned by mortgagees in possession. As such, we all know that the banks impose a very strict deadline.
    2. The market itself has dictated that with lawyers have less files. As such, there is a distinct possibility that, even between days at the golf course, that they are able to get the transactions through quicker.
    3. Sellers may well be applying a lot of pressure on their lawyer to drive the transaction through, especially as they will be safe in the knowledge that as every week goes by the property is losing value.
    4. Estate agents inevitably have more time on their hands and therefore are applying much greater pressure on the purchaser and the lawyers involved.
    Even if Connells’s figures are true, and they can credit the transaction as a direct result of the HIP, it still does not necessarily justify all the pain, suffering and upheaval most parties in the transaction have to suffer. If one were to give their sellers a choice of their transaction speeded up by six days or the £400 that the HIP has cost them, what do you think the seller would say?

    • 26 March 2009 14:36 PM
  • icon

    Apologies for not replying sooner nina I have had some real work to do. As monkey tennis kindly helped you show ignorance by making those comments with an obvious lack of understanding that HIPs are completely unecessary for everyone involved. Please also consider estate agents make money out of HIPs and we still don't want them.
    Have you ever actually seen a HIP? and if so did it make the slightest difference to you buying the property or not?

    • 26 March 2009 14:11 PM
  • icon

    Oh and don't hide behind the good for consumer bull. Consumers don't want them either.

    • 26 March 2009 12:12 PM
  • icon

    'New Wave Nina' I'll explain why you are ignorant. You are not an estate agent, yet seem to be the authority on how we do our jobs, not only do you have the sheer arrogance to interfere with our practices but you do it in a snotty patronising way that can only alienate you from the majority of this readership.

    • 26 March 2009 12:03 PM
  • icon

    So estate agents are so overworked they haven't the time to chase up delinquent HIP providers? The poor dears. Maybe they should use their brains and use someone who doesn't need chasing up?
    Have they thought through the logical progression if HIPs were used properly? Evidently not. It shouldn't take more than 5-10 minutes to place an order. If it does, change the source. If a HIP provides information up-front perhaps they won't have so much chasing up to do & appeasing angry, bewildered & frustrated clients in the period between offer acceptance & contracts being exchanged? I suggest there'll be more time saved there & less scope for last minutes hitches if HIPs were used properly. It seems that every argument coming from anti-HIP estate agents is to justify complacency & a "couldn't give a damn about the consumer" attitude. It really is pathetic. Still waiting to hear Yorkshire Agent explain why I'm ignorant.

    • 26 March 2009 11:50 AM
  • icon

    The only power left is the industry to boycott the whole debacle. This needs leadership from the NAEA, Law Society, CML & RICS. HIPs would then be abandoned. You can go on huffing & puffing, the Government are not lsitening, period.

    • 26 March 2009 11:04 AM
  • icon

    The likes of 'New Wave Nina' clearly aren't estate agents. They fail to understand the amount of man-hours required to get these new hIPS operational on every new instruction, chasing them up and talking through with buyers and sellers. The average agent takes on 20 to 30 properties a month. Effectively this means that they will have to employ somebody specifically for hIPS maintenance. The public are not going to pay any more for estate agents fees and the whole industry is losing money right now even without the hIP issue. If followed to the letter the new hIPS legislation will bankrupt the majority of agents in the country, this is why Agents don't want it. NuLabours objective was to make the homebuying process simpler and faster but all they have done is made the process far more expensive and created another load of non-jobs in the process.Only 1-in 8 properties in my area are being sold. Over 80% of hIPS will end up in the bin and never be utilised. Its a farce and will be no surprise if a high proportion of agents take short-cuts for their own survival.

    • 26 March 2009 10:06 AM
  • icon

    Well pointed out Roger, you should have mentioned that the research was done between August 07 & Oct 08 so hardly when solicitors were all twiddling thumbs. And before anyone was really making much use of HIPs properly. That's the whole point, if they were used properly, and were closer to being exchange-ready, they'd make a hell of a difference. Nick, shame you don't keep up to date with the industry news (but not keeping up to date says it all about your campaign really doesn't it). The Connell research was widely reported back in the fall. (Sorry can't seem to get back that far on the archives here)

    • 25 March 2009 16:41 PM
  • icon

    Our research at Connells was done by comparing turnaround times on transactions proceeding in the same time period between vendors with HIPs, and vendors without HIPs... therefore if Solicitors had more time on their hands, they would be faster on both! HIP items such as the drainage search and local search did help speed up the due diligence carried out by lawyers. We did this research purely to inform the industry.

    • 25 March 2009 15:52 PM
  • icon

    well I'm happy to be associated with lie back & enjoy it. You make uncanny common sense, but I think you are unwise to use big words like epitome round here. It might be mistaken for lobotomy, a much more commonly known experience I imagine.

    • 25 March 2009 15:17 PM
  • icon

    "Yorkshire Agent" says my "comments show a level of ignorance". Please Yorkshire Agent, tell me precisely what I am ignorant of, unless it is the full extent of complacency in the estate agency. Please tell me why I am ignorant in expecting to be given useful advice during selling or buying by the so-called professionals. And don't try to fob me off with "you don't understand the market", or "you don't understand the way things are done". I understand these things very well indeed & I can see how there is so much room for improvement if this head in the sands attitude was dispensed with. How do you justify head in the sands Yorkshire Agent? Because that's as sure as hell what you're doing.

    • 25 March 2009 15:12 PM
  • icon

    You guys all completely miss the point. The Hips are not intended for Joe Public, they are for the buyers solicitor who would have some idea of what the contents mean. Also if a property is on a lease, not registerd, common hold, shared ownership, requiring an epitome of title or any one of a dozen other documents which can take up to three months to locate, the idea is that these are provided before a potential buyer is found and therefore do not delay the transaction. Doh!

    • 25 March 2009 15:08 PM
  • icon

    Nina & Voice of reason what can i say but 100% agree your never going to change their opinion on it though... Victor Meldrews of the property Market

    • 25 March 2009 14:55 PM
  • icon

    Nina and the voice of reason, your comments show a level of ignorance only matched by this government of ours. As agents we would not be doing our profession justice if we did not criticise and stand against a piece of legislation which no body directly involved in the industry wanted or recommended. As voters do we just lie down and accept every piece of legislation dished out?

    • 25 March 2009 14:49 PM
  • icon

    Well done Nina, at last a sensible opinion. The amount of agents over the past few months on these pages who have made reference to the fact that buyers are not ASKING to see a HIP and are not ASKING what its content means, the fact is they shouldn't have to ASK. If an agent is doing a professional job, whether or not they agree with the concept of a HIP they should be providing it without the buyer having to ask. It doesnt cost you anything to send an email so don't argue the point about printing costs. You are all missing the point, talking about marching on parliament and bemoaning the fact that HIPs are a pain, so what, its legislation, its law, its becoming more so with the advent of first day marketing and we are stuck with it. I have no vested interest in HIPs and I am not an estate agent but I have been in the property industry for 20 years and remember the advent of financial services regulation and its transition into mortgage regulation. You are right, the government don't understand the demographics of the industry but they also don't particularly care. Whether or not you try and vote in a new government or take part in some pointless protest you will not change the fact that this industry will be regulated as we go forwards and HIPs are just one small step in that process. Either deal with it, or walk away, its your choice folks.

    • 25 March 2009 14:40 PM
  • icon

    If I were selling my house or buying another one I'd expect the estate agent involved to do a professional job. It seems that it's just too much trouble for most of you bunch to provide a decent service. There are things in the HIP that my solicitor needs to know, whether I'm buying or selling. If she knows them before I make an offer or accept an offer, it's going to save me more hassle down the line. Why can't you lot just wake up to the fact that more than the HIP, not less, is needed & if you took the trouble to do your job half properly, like talking a buyer through the HIP before they make an offer, like making sure that they understand what's in it & what they should talk to a lawyer about, then you'd be appreciated rather more. Grow up, some of you. Or go back to stacking shelves & leave it to the people who know how to provide a decent service.

    • 25 March 2009 14:07 PM
  • icon

    The govt dont know anything about our industry. I am not going to wait for a pack if I can sell a house and pay the rent.

    They are relying on Estate Agents being professional. Why should we? The govt lets people sell their houses privatly so has no respect for us.

    Goodbye details , hello phone calls to my hot buyers who wont care if a house has a pretty graph on it or not.

    • 25 March 2009 13:42 PM
  • icon

    The only answer to HIPS is for everyone to totally ignore them.
    They would be rendered redundant within a couple of months, That's what the French would do!

    • 25 March 2009 12:40 PM
  • icon

    6 whole days quicker. Of course no mention of the fact that the property going on the market will be delayed by about 6 days. So this is not a time-saving process! Labour can stick their new legislation.

    • 25 March 2009 12:24 PM
  • icon

    Connells forgot to mention that quicker completions are down to conveyancers having a reduced work load thereby being more effecient, nothing to do with the rubbish, out of date information in a HIP!

    • 25 March 2009 11:27 AM
  • icon

    Remembering back to the poll tax days when the public just refused to pay ....... the government need the housing market to gather momentum ........ maybe it's just time to say 'stuff it'

    • 25 March 2009 11:09 AM
  • icon

    wow, that means on average a vendor pays £50 for every day they save on moving house.I know which they'd choose if the govt. actually gave people a choice in their dictatorship regime.

    Connells have exploited Hips so that vendors have to stay with them when they sign their misleading 'free hips' deal.

    How gullible are labour?

    • 25 March 2009 11:01 AM
  • icon

    I take it all back, 6 whole days quicker for £300 odd quid, wow these HIPs are sensational. Baroness Andrews please recommend some more pointless legislation, how about something along the lines of delaying marketing until a HIP is in place, that will make all the transactions 'appear' to be quicker still, and whilst you are at it please could I pay you to come and visit my company as a consultant because you clearly no so much more about the industry than us qualified estate agents with 20 years plus experience.

    • 25 March 2009 10:59 AM
  • icon

    Had Connells the pleasure of operating in Cornwall they would find that Hips makes no difference our average transaction time remains at 3 months some improvement!

    • 25 March 2009 10:49 AM
  • icon

    Nick - Perhaps you would be kind enough to tell us what SPLINTA have actually acheived in the last few years??? Haven't you got a branch to run?

    • 25 March 2009 10:30 AM
  • icon

    Perhaps someone from Connells would be kind enough to tell us where this 'survey' is available for scrutiny?

    • 25 March 2009 08:55 AM
  • icon

    Yet another nail in the Governments Coffin.

    • 25 March 2009 08:08 AM