HIPs abolition to have top priority, says minister

Well said Robert May and Eric.

There is no hiding from the fact that over the last few months posts are geting longer and longer. Too many people are spouting off againgst other peoples views, getting too personal for my liking.

I haven't the time to wade through all the nonsense.

So please EAT keep up the good work, you are a valuable source of information BUT PLEASE limit the amount of text one can post. Maybe people will think twice and be constructive in helping each other.

• 20 May 2010 11:43 AM

It is strange then Neil that you bother to visit EAT, stranger still that you read EAT and really, really strange that you are compelled to add your 2 pennyworth.
Web sites allow everyone to have there own say, and the fact that EAT attracts such a healthy crop of advertisers is confirmation that Roz is doing exactly what she is paid to do.
The site administrators allow you to post what you like about the site but refrain from posting their thoughts about you.
You ought to be wondering which approach is more dignified.

• 20 May 2010 10:32 AM

Eric, I certainly won't be apologising to anyone! When I see headlines such as "HIPs abolition order is signed and ready" on a Monday morning which is actually a lie (subsequently confirmed by an MP that _nothing_ had been signed), then no wonder I regard EAT as no more than trash. Its not even crap journalism, its _not_ journalism. If EAT is here to provide ‘prophecies’, perhaps it could advise when all the pondlife will leave the estate agency industry- it'll be a quieter place and we won't have to put up with 1 in 3 fall-through rates caused by numpy sales staff. The same sort of numpty sales staff who didn't realise that HIPs could be used to secure sales, reduce fall-through rates, speed up conveyancing etc. I suppose educating sales staff requires training, yet another area that this industry does so poorly. HIPs are useful, I have certainly saved buyers and sellers many thousands of pounds by using them so far- a pity that the vast majority of agents- especially those led by the nose by the NAEA- could not see the positives. A strange reaction from salespeople, but then detail never was their strong point- taking us back to the cause of the 1 in 3 fall-through rate!

• 20 May 2010 09:50 AM

RIC - More likely to use the EPC not the HIP to base council tax. Higher CO2 emissions = higher tax band.

• 20 May 2010 09:33 AM

Well, I am sure you will all by now have heard the news stories claiming an announcement regarding HIPs will be made today by Eric Pickles and Kirsty Allsop. There is no point in my making any comment, what will be will be.

I would however urge those of you who wrote derogatory comments about this site and its Editor to apologise if the prophecy is indeed fulfilled. Alternatively, in the interests of fairness, you could always write to the BBC, the Express and the myriad of other media sources who have run the same story, albeit days later.

Its rather like Tariq Aziz in the Gulf War assuring the BBC "There are NO American Tanks in Baghdad" just as a couple rolled into shot behind him.

Sometimes, you just need to know when to quit when facts outweigh wishful thinking.

• 20 May 2010 09:29 AM

Breaking NEWS for This is Money

Hips 'were Labour plot to hike council tax'

Labour planned to use home information packs to push up council tax bills, the Tories claimed yesterday as they moved to scrap the controversial documents.



Under inspection: Hips are going to be scrapped.
WANT TO KNOW MORE?
Hips to be scrapped
Guide: Home information packs
Can I sell my home without a Hip?

Gordon Brown's ministers meant to collect details from the packs and add them to the state database used for calculating the tax, previously secret papers reveal.
The disclosure of the link came as the Government prepared moves likely to spell the end of Hips.

The packs were introduced in 2007 in the name of helping homebuyers. However, most of the information they were supposed to contain, such as the structural quality of the house, was stripped out in the arguments that surrounded their launch.

Now the most useful facts describe the energy rating of a home, and many sellers resent having to pay about £300 for an inspection and pack.

Papers released by Communities Secretary Eric Pickles show ministers intended to use the information to complete a database on 22m homes held by the Valuation Office Agency.

It updates the council tax banding of properties and has been preparing for a revaluation of homes in England that would generate bigger council tax bills for anyone whose home has risen in value over the past 20 years.

• 20 May 2010 08:48 AM

"I'd much rather read the masturbatory drivel spewing from the soiled keyboards of the few pathetic estate agents who post on this site"

You are on your own with that one mate, there isn't anything on Google about that particular fringe fantasy. Do you have a link or is this one you have invented yourself?

• 20 May 2010 08:33 AM

Oi Alex Skinner! which facts did you investigate and find to be untrue?
You have claimed that many of the EAT facts were wrong, please detail two.
I am a big fan of EAT and congratulate Roz for giving us all the opportunity of a free voice. The Egos and Connected might not like what gets posted on here but it is the only place where the rank and file have an opportuniy to speak.
If EAT is Sun jounalism I am blowed if I can find page 3.

• 20 May 2010 08:13 AM

Lin Jackson is spot on with her comments.
Although there were a number of cowboy search agents (some of them big outfits) roaming the local authority range prior to the advent of HIPs, they now constitute the majority. And just like the old Wild West, many are in cahoots with the supposed law enforcemnt officers!
The fundamental problem with personal searches being included in HIPs is that they are ultimately purchased by the vendor whose only concern is likely to be price rather than quality. Indeed, the less the search reveals about any prospective 'skeletons in the cupboard' the better! Under the old system (which I have my fingers & toes crossed we return to!), it was almost always the buyer who ordered the search and understandably sought the most comprehensive information available.
The reason a structural survey was omitted from the original HIPs concept was that it was felt a buyer couldn't trust one commissioned by the seller... quite why the same reasoning didn't apply to a personal local authority search escaped me at the time and still does!

• 20 May 2010 00:37 AM

In the spirit of reconciliation, I will ignore some of the total guff that is being spouted and add some of my own.

The HIP is dead - we need alternatives.

I propose 4 critical changes:

- a single (regional) property information repository containing real time search, environment, drainage & Land Reg data. What NLIS should have been before MDA & TM tried to turn it into a billion dollar money making scheme. If search results are available instantly, we don't need a pack or upfront payment and no-one is put off from entering the market. Managing the regional databases goes up for competitive tender every 3 years - councils can apply but should compete like everyone else. All property information becomes public domain but providers can make a reasonable amount for facilitating and storage, subject to annual review based on service levels.

- Prevent lenders from taking weeks to issue mortgage offers. Lenders should have 5 days to process from a complete application to an offer being issued in 99% of cases. If they fail, they pay huge penalties to the FSA and pay back any up front fees to the applicant.

- the creation of a Consumers Legal Charter - independent of The Law Society - to advocate for home buyers and sellers and remove human delays in the process. It would oversee the scrapping of the current protocol that allows lawyers to sit on their hands at various stages, HIP or no HIP. End self regulation of the legal profession and make lawyers step up and behave like 21st Century professionals.

- Incentives to sellers to pay for an up front HCR (not mandatory - just attractive). Make properties with a good HCR and valuation 'fast trackable' by lenders. No VAT on up front HCRs. Whatever. Just make vendors want to do it.

Job done.

• 19 May 2010 20:14 PM

We have 176 instructions. How many Hips were asked for / provided / downloaded? IN THE LAST 28 DAYS

NONE

Useful?

• 19 May 2010 18:26 PM

just get shut of hips.....lets have a clear decision.....and some fresh interesting news on EAT xx

• 19 May 2010 18:23 PM

No HIPs = no EAT. Yes!

• 19 May 2010 18:00 PM

“Miffed” – the general public should be asked once the facts are laid out. Not asked after either the vested interest from the Estate Agent or Solicitor/Conveyancer is expressed to the home owner/purchaser. The concept of the HIP is undeniable by anyone. “Upfront information to make a decision and upfront information to act on in getting the conveyancing completed quickly.”

“Lion-o” – you are 100% correct, why would you mind being paid your commission faster! Well you mind because this is dependant upon the Conveyancing actually including the HIP for its benefits and thus you would get paid faster. However currently you as the Estate Agent do not receive this benefit because the Solicitors/Conveyancers have not embraced the product and thus you see no benefit. I do not blame you in all this really.

Maybe a new law should be passed which forces Solicitors/Conveyancers in some way to accept the benefits of the HIP (or a newly revised HIP) and thus the benefits of the HIP would be felt by the public along with estate agents!

“Ric” – Section 162 is an emergency power. Therefore it must be an emergency in order to use the law. It has already been proven that the earlier emergency reasons are no longer valid. Therefore the only result logically will be to perform a consultation in order to get the true results. There will not be a suspension followed by a consultation because if the consultation then proves HIPs should never have been removed then the government will be sued for loss of earnings during the period for unlawfully using an emergency power.

• 19 May 2010 17:19 PM

Miles Robertson: No it doesnt. Read s162 of the 2004 Housing Act. Suspension doesn't even need to be approved by the House of Commons. Besides, they dont need to pass new laws, they can amend existing ones.

• 19 May 2010 17:11 PM

passing laws in parliament takes years to actually do so no quick change on HIPs.. the Government's hands are tied.

• 19 May 2010 16:59 PM

Let's remember a few points as we lament the passing of HIPs

1) The previous government tried, very badly, to improve things in the home buying world.

2) RICS opposed the changes in England and Wales because it meant people who they didn't control would be able to carry out surveys. They supported the changes in Scotland because those changes would mean more work for their members, not less. The Scottish version of a HIP can cost £1,000+ and they’re not scrapping those!

3) The CML opposed HIPs because they did not work in the interest of their members as the HCR would undermine their cosy relationships with corporate estate agents.

4) AHIPP were ineffective in ensuring that HIP quality standards were established

5) The law society opposed the use of personal searches and offered no positive contribution to the debate whatsoever

5) Estate agents were the only ones to make any money out of HIPs, many being happy to charge their clients the earth whilst sourcing their HIPs from disreputable providers.

6) Solicitors were slow to make use of the information available in HIPs preferring to stick to the old ways and order another search at additional cost.

7) And the impact on the housing market has been negligible. The crash had nothing to do with the introduction of HIPs and any recovery will have nothing to do with their demise.

No-one comes up smelling of roses in all this and you have to ask yourself. Were HIPs just a ploy to get us all to look the other way whilst the bankers ran off with everyone’s money?

And finally, what on earth is everyone going to get hot under the collar about now?

• 19 May 2010 16:47 PM

Yawn -another 'vested interest' jibe as you point out estate agents are sales people -so why would we object to something that means we could get our money any faster? If HIPs did what they were supposed to no-one would kick off about them would they?

• 19 May 2010 16:31 PM

Yawn - it has always been possible and more than 20 years before the introduction of HIPs regulations to obtain the CON29 data at many local authorities and county councils. It was simply a matter of making the enquiry from the relevant authority. Until the use of personal searches got out of hand that is – somewhere after 1993. Thereafter, for many reasons the personal search got a bad name but mainly because there were a lot of buyers and estate agents who put pressure on conveyancers to supply a search AT ANY PRICE. Sadly the system was badly abused, especially by many newcomers to the industry and many made a good living from it whilst providing a remarkably 'thin' product with the use of phrases such as 'None registered at land charges' which for anyone with the first inkling of a local search is utter cobblers and a well known euphemism for - 'actually we don't know'. Then some clever dick fell on the idea of providing 'Search insurance for 'un-available data' and search agents carried on making shed loads of money whilst making even less effort to get replies. Then in 2007, HIPs regulations required that 'unavailable data' insurance could only be used where the council did not have the information available. Search agents around the country flagrantly ignored this little detail, having decided that the data was un-available. That was the most scandalous part played by search providers within HIPs - because in many cases the data was available but they were of course reluctant to pay for the data. Sadly, this culture continued and spread into the latest HIPs regulations to the extent that some companies rely on databases (some of which they apparently sell to other parties). Add a bit of pressure from the newly formed HIP industry which was going to 'bring down the cost of conveyancing' and don't be surprised to hear that we are where we are.

• 19 May 2010 15:53 PM

7 years they consulted - but not once did they listen. I recall them having to back track on whole market in favour of just 4 bed houses at the 11th hour such was their deafness. The one good element was the HCR - but this was pulled too. No wonder the Country is screwed.

• 19 May 2010 15:43 PM

Yawn ..... and it took you now to see this, How about the 7 years consultation prior to HIP's being implemented.

If AHIPPS want to say it doesn't cause any problems "in working" I for one are more than prepared to stand up at court and tell them "why it doesn't". Many HIP's are illegal or inaccurate for starters.

Good riddance to them.

The delay is probaly that civil servant who wans't kicked out when labour were!

• 19 May 2010 15:31 PM

Miffed - i think you mean 'without the vendors knowledge'

But I agree. The industry has profited from compulsory imposition of a useless product and now comes the reckoning.

Good riddance. We never took a penny from HIPs providers because we would be obliged to declare it and felt that vendors would be less than happy.

• 19 May 2010 15:24 PM

NICK: "Do the job properly, give a good service and ask for a fair price."

How is it a fair price when the HIP provider pays the agent £100+ for a phone so as to generate market share? This is effectively money paid by the vendor to the agent with the vendors knowledge - this is unlawful.

I have endured a barrage of HIPs providers offering 'back handers'encouraging me to sell on the HIP at 'Whatever you can get away with' And I mean - encouraging on the basis 'everyone does it'.

Its a disgrace.

• 19 May 2010 15:21 PM

Nick - then please explain here right now, why the majority of searches carried out for HIPS are £22.00 personal searches - and before you ask, the majority do NOT pay for CON29 data. Some data is freely available, but much is not [building control, unserved notices from health, planning and county councils spring to mind for starters and in your position you will be aware of the intricacies of the CON29]. A lot of people are making it up or either have or would have us believe that they have an insider at the council who they can call. Yes this can work a few times, but hardly a satisfactory or reliable ‘source of ‘information’ for a search’*. PCCB inspected search agents continue to give dodgy replies with dodgy sources of information - read the in detail and they should make you laugh. The Birmingham research proved very little. Various Trading Standards who have been contacted mostly don't have the resources and when they look into it throw their hands up in despair because of their lack of knowledge. What is undeniable is if you analyse the local authority's own income fees and where they came from – available under FIO. The majority are for £22.00 with a very small up take of CON29 data. For whatever reasons that might be (some directly attributable to less than efficient councils) the end result is that the personal search is not a reliable product by any stretch of the imagination. The official search whilst not being without fault, in our experience is more reliable because it deals specifically with subsisting matters, the meaning of which most search agents need to look up in a dictionary and then choose to ignore.

*Maybe the agents who blag information or have an insider could add that this to their ‘source of information’ - that would probably be more credible than the other sources they allegedly rely on. For those in doubt, blagging is a practice used to obtain information without declaring your interest or true identity. The Information Commissioner looks dimly upon this practice!

• 19 May 2010 15:09 PM

Yawn - an accurate prelude to your article - if industry is the wrong source of information - who should be asked? Greengrocers?

Or perhaps the Sellers who don't want them or the buyers you cant give a HIP to as they dont want them?

• 19 May 2010 15:07 PM

To be clear all the anti-HIP supporters justify their argument using the wrong sources.

Before HIPs, the general public consistently reported poor service levels during the property transaction process. The general public were upset they had to buy information just to find out they no longer wanted the property and were upset it took so looooong to process anything!

SO……

HIPs were introduced to solve a conveyancing problem. The solution was to prepare information upfront ready for the conveyancing to start. A secondary benefit was that the information was now also available upfront and in a transparent manner for the buyer. Some would say two birds with one stone!

Estate Agents are upset with HIPs because they have been burdened with a conveyancing problem. I am not surprised all Estate Agents are upset they must sell a product they have no interest in (ie for the conveyancing) and provides no direct benefit. If anything, the Estate Agent is a Sales person, Sales is a method of hiding the bad and promoting the good, now with the HIP transparent information is available to the buyer which makes selling a bad product harder! So, no promotion for the HIP here.

Conveyancers and Solicitors are upset with HIPs because they will lose a revenue stream if they use the HIP properly. The HIP consists of conveyancing documents and should reduce the conveyancing cost. Without market pressure from Estate Agents this will not happen and so they Conveyancers and Solicitors will blame the HIP for additional costs when they in-fact cause the additional costs in order to maintain their margin. So, no promotion for the HIP here.

All considered, deciding whether HIPs are beneficial can not be decided by Estate Agents OR Conveyancers/Solicitors. Both these parties would prefer HIPs to go as they are interested more in themselves than the benefit to the general public. The HIP was designed for the general public and the intent was that the industry would embrace the new process. Unfortunately with such a fractured market this has not worked. Any statistics which are anti-HIP from Estate Agents, Solicitors or Conveyancers are null and void as you are the wrong parties to ask.

• 19 May 2010 15:02 PM

It would be interesting to know how many duplicated searches throw up different answers (of relevance or interest)and how many searches generally throw up answers of real relevance or interest?

• 19 May 2010 14:45 PM

These pleas from those in the HIPs industry and those agents who took secret fees from their vendors without declaring them are the only voices in favour of keeping HIPs.

They are like a man falling from a cliff screaming HEEELP! Understandable, but pointless.

Its going to happen. Get off this website and go to jobsite.co.uk - its more productive.

I do feel for you, but during recession when agent could sell anything, our salaries plummeted and redundancies flowed, properties still went on the market and HIPs companies still had income. Life is tough.

• 19 May 2010 14:33 PM

Hi Simon, Just about to launch it? Too late Pali have had it for months.
Lin.
Well known by who? I have been in the search industry since 1999 and I only know one company that uses its own stored data.
The survey by Birmingham Trading Standards showed that searches from companies operating the search code were better than local authority searches. The cheap ones were ess aich one tee. Make your choice.
The posts on here are always going on about no one asking for or looking at the Hips.
You don’t have to ask just go on to Hipview.co.uk and look. It is not for the seller or the buyer it is for the buyers solicitor, and trust me on this, if you ain’t got a Hip you ain’t got a buyer.
The cost of the searches at £100? Just like the poor old DEA some companies have tried to drive down the price of searches to maximise their own profits, no names please. Some search agents have bent to this pressure and reduced their prices. More fool them. Do the job properly, give a good service and ask for a fair price.
I don’t know what you all think is going to happen post Hip. The seller will save about £150 but will have to pay that for the new house. The first time buyer will now have to pay for the searches which they didn’t with Hips and the EPC will still be there for the Estate Agent to organise.
Nick

• 19 May 2010 14:09 PM

Ah, but you voted for the manifesto didn't you and this is a cheap and easy way to claim that the pledges are being met (by Tory and Lib) in time for a nice sunny weekend...

• 19 May 2010 13:46 PM

As a Tory voter I do wonder why such thing are top of the agenda, hardly critical to sorting out Labours mess is it!? Just to bin without anything new or positive does not seem great, inspired leadership.

• 19 May 2010 13:01 PM

I think HIPs are rubbish - they dont work, they were a watered down compromise doomed to fail.

They don't speed up the conveyancing process which is usually hindered by lawyers going home early, not making back from lunch or having another holiday.

Connells claimed they improved transaction times by 5 working days, 2 of which are lost by getting the HIP in the first place.

To speed up the conveyancing process, ban HIPs and ban holidays for Lawyers.

• 19 May 2010 12:48 PM

HIPS was well intended but is fatally flawed at the most basic level because some of the content of most of the personal searches contained in a HIP cannot be relied upon. It is well known that many search agents continue to cut corners and use databases to complete searches. They are under ridiculous pressure to complete a local authority search and water search for under £100 as for instance HIPs 2 Go require. The net cost of an official water search in the Thames area is £44.00. That leaves very little to carry out a local authority search and pay the council's fees for completing not just a compliant search but also one which conveyancers can have confidence in. The net result is that that the content of the HIP rightly or wrongly is damned before it is compiled. The search agents breaching the regulations on a daily basis and HIP providers know who they are. If conveyancers, the law society and others in the industry cannot trust the origin of the information contained in the pack, they will re-order a search either from the local authority or from their personal search agent who they have faith in to produce a reliable product. The additional cost involved is probably more than the cost of the personal search contained in the HIP but at least it can be relied upon. One of the claims made by the HIP industry is that they brought down the cost of conveyancing. Sadly, they achieved this by passing on a faulty product which was nominally approved by a largely clueless PCCB whose code is owned by COPSO which is a search industry lobby organisation.[Some people's sense of smell is far more developed than mine but when you then throw in a bit of AHIPP even I can pick up a scent].What the industry will not tell you is that a responsible conveyancer will duplicate the search and apart from the added time, there is a hidden cost of a new search of which the HIP industry does not acknowledge. Let's hope there won't be too many claims in years to come.

• 19 May 2010 12:42 PM

Well I just really dont know how I managed in this business for the first 35 years of my career before the wonderful HIP, so what will we do without it!!

• 19 May 2010 12:33 PM

Ray - I agree. HIP Matters is about to launch it!

• 19 May 2010 12:30 PM

Here we go again......
So here I go again.....
Until convayancers are no longer required in the selling process it would seem to make sense that all legal work and documentation is done under one roof. Make it compulsory for them to be instructed on day one and to have the legal responsibility to obtain all the information required by a prospective buyer within a specified time say 7/14 days......
I do not expect everyone to agree!

• 19 May 2010 12:21 PM

@ericgreenhalgh surely a 'Good Agent' Should know his patch and would know of any problmes in his/her area? Or do you just not know your area well enough and would like all the vendors to pay to make your job easier? I would say thats a little more tunnel vision or passing the buck!! And yes solicitors do look at the information in the HIPS pack just as they shove it to the back of the file and just before ordering more searches etc at the buyers expense!!

• 19 May 2010 12:21 PM

Thanks for that Ric, you've just demonstrated in a couple of lines how single-minded you are! The point is that through Searches, Drainage and Land Registery reports, you can find useful information and as a good agent you should be highlighting any information which is important. Or is selling a property at any cost much more important. Signing off now, can't be doing with tunnel vision!

• 19 May 2010 12:13 PM

Ric - why do you still not get the point? HIPs ARE viewed/used by the buyers solicitor all the time. It helps speed up the sale, which was part of the original purpose. HIPs are not perfect and could be so much more valuable to both the buyer & conveyancer, but preferring to scrap rather than adapt shows a remarkably short sighted obstinance.

• 19 May 2010 12:11 PM

HIps may help with the off monastery - but that are sod all use in Docklands!!

• 19 May 2010 12:06 PM

Ric's comment typifies. Should a good Estate Agent have some awareness on what information can be obtained by a Vendor which will help when making an offer? We recently dealt with a detached property that was on the land of a former monestry. The tree's surrounding the property had TPO's attached to it and would have prevented the property being extended. What use is finding this out at Conveyancing?

• 19 May 2010 12:04 PM

ericgreenhalgh congratualtions im impressed one example out of how many instructions?? I have done close to 1000 HIPS and never ever had any reason to stop a sale going ahead. Can you tell me the lottery numbers for tonight???

• 19 May 2010 12:04 PM

ericgreenhalgh - a bankrupt who gets to keep their house? That's a novelty

• 19 May 2010 12:04 PM

Yes Burf I can! We have recently dealt with a property that was trying to be sold by someone who was Bankrupt. This showed up on the Land Registry details which post-HIP'S will only be found at Conveyancing. Finding this problem before someone puts a property on the market is a real plus, not only for the prospective buyers but for Agents fees. The property was not marketed.

• 19 May 2010 11:54 AM

We have 300 instructions. We registered 1074 applicants last month. How many Hips were asked for / provided / downloaded?

FOUR - from which one one sale was agreed.

Useful?

• 19 May 2010 11:51 AM

@ ericgreenhalgh. you comment on other people being shortsighted yet you comment in such a shortsighted way!! Its only £250!! to some people £250 is a lot of money and the reason the housing market has come to such a grinding halt over the last 3 days is because these people would rather spend the £250 on bills than a HIP, which is defiantely going to be abolished and from the start has been a complete and utter waste of time. Can you honestly say that of any houses you have sold that anybody made there mind up to by it based on ANY of the information in the HIP, thats if the actually asked to see it before buying it?????

• 19 May 2010 11:47 AM

Well done Estate Agent Today another example of shoddy journalism with unsubstantiated facts - I have been checking your claims and many have simply proved to be untrue. Yes HIPs are for the chop but we don't need your style of sun newspaper journalism - remember these are peoples lives, businesses and families you are affecting-be balanced and get your facts straight

• 19 May 2010 11:45 AM

@ ericgreenhalgh I think you're on the wrong site; you're not allowed to talk sense on www.estateagenttoday.co.uk

I'd much rather read the masturbatory drivel spewing from the soiled keyboards of the few pathetic estate agents who post on this site. To them HIPs are the cause of all their problems. Not the fact that they are utterly incapable of running a successful business. If your agencies are failing. it's your fault, not HIPs.

• 19 May 2010 11:42 AM

As a HIP provider and Agent, I cannot believe the short-sighted comments made by some people. There are hundreds of properties already on the market and have been for a while, so how can HIP's be blamed for the stagnation. I believe that the priority should be to get the market moving financially rather than highlighting HIP's as major problem. The abolition of HIP's is not going to be a 'fix all' in the housing market and I think that some people are using HIP's to cover up their own failings. For the sake of £250, the idea of having further information to help make a decision on making an offer on a property is logical. As a family, we have already said that if we were making an offer on a property ourselves, post HIP's, we would definitely want to see the Land Registry details to make sure the Vendor entitled to sell the property and the Council searches to inform of any Land charges, tree preservation orders or planned major schemes that could affect us in the future. What's the point of finding this information out once you've made an offer and you’re in a chain of two or three others. This would lead to massive disappointment and financial loss for many. HIP's are obviously not perfect but with some tweaking and maybe an agreement with the Law Society, that within reason, the searches and drainage details could be used for conveyancing at the end, the HIP could be useful and reduce the all round cost of selling a property.

• 19 May 2010 11:32 AM

Just checking in to read the crap pretending to be "news" and the comments that follow in EAT. Here we go again.
Nothing more than unsubstantiated rumours and misinformation designed to create more confusion for everyone involved and drive up the site stats. Nice job for someone.
It’s already been said, until you see a Minister on the telly……
This is the very last place you want to be if you’re keeping an eye on the news.
At least the information contained within a HIP is generally correct.

• 19 May 2010 11:30 AM

Hear Hear Mr Kurz.
All this talk of vested interests is interesting! The facts are this site is not just full of HIP providers with vested interest, it also is full of estate agents all of which looking to make that extra quick buck due to additional supply in the market – again another vested interest. Rather than looking at the big picture, they see there bank balances is a bit squeezed after a tough 18months, and there 2 week holiday to Barbados is going to have to be trimmed down to 10days instead of the usual, 14!
So come on agents tighten your belts like the rest of the general public and let’s get real. Information up front when going through a property transaction is only beneficial to the consumer. With HIPS the intent is correct the policy is wrong. Let the industry speak and in the words of our New PM “Make real change!”. Because lets be honest pushing all the emphasis back onto solicitors will be like turning back the clock to a time a long time ago.

• 19 May 2010 11:30 AM

Just imagine if all the anti-HIP individuals had put as much effort into getting the Estate Agent industry properly regulated and licensed? No, that wasn't worthwhile was it when the status quo was 'just about satisfactory'. In the meantime, the industry remains heavily populated with the unprofessional, the uneducated, the short-term thinkers, the corrupt and just occasionally- a good agent! This industry deserves its shambolic reputation!

• 19 May 2010 10:55 AM

This website is beyond a joke! Throwing these stories out there with no backing or credibility, literally throwing the industry into turmoil! Ridiculous!

• 19 May 2010 10:40 AM

Why do some say the EPC is PART of a HIP? It is a stand alone product and is just INCLUDED in the HIP.
Rental properties are already required to have one without having a HIP.
HIP's RIP!

• 19 May 2010 10:38 AM

apart from a new government determined to sort out an unholy mess...

• 19 May 2010 10:29 AM

HIP HIP, hooray

• 19 May 2010 10:28 AM

This site has become a free-for-all of 'I know bests'... Please sort it out and separate the fact from the fiction! Nothing yet has changed from this time last year.

• 19 May 2010 10:25 AM

Slightly surprised by all this talk over 'consultation'. Consultation with whom? The previous Government certainly didn't consult well with the most important stakeholders, the property industry itself? So who would be consulted on abolition? Seems a pointless exercise to me when the new Govt have made several pledges in opposition that HIPs are to go.
In legal terms, it is not for judges to overturn Parliamentary made law. Whatever next...?? AHIPP can chance their arm I suppose but again, pointless.
There was a sunset clause written in to the Housing Act regs which allows HIPs to fall by the way side if the Sec of State sees fit. They can be done away with easily therefore, notwithstanding introducing new regs that stipulate when and how the EPCs are commissioned in the process.
just get on with is and let the market breathe again....

• 19 May 2010 10:14 AM

I cannot help pointing out that Hip2go were the only entrant in the Hip provider of the century award and they only just won.

• 19 May 2010 10:13 AM

Can someone convince AHIPP not to challenge this? I'm looking forward to HIPs being gone, and don't want to have to keep checking how their foolish lawsuit is progressing every month or so.

• 19 May 2010 10:12 AM

I HAVE HAD NEWS JUST THIS MORNING from close to the top (not from CLG press spokespeople)that The Secretary of State is aware of the problems caused by the current uncertainty (see my letter at www.homeinformationpacks.com) and 'suspension' is imminent and once the Order is laid it will come into force THE NEXT DAY.
Keep an eye on this site today. Best wishes to all
HIPhaters, Big T

• 19 May 2010 10:07 AM

Didn't EAT report the other day that the HIP abolishion document had "been signed". What kind of "voice of the industry" is this ?? I think you would have been better suited to politics, Rosalind, where making stuff up to sound good seems to be compulsory.

• 19 May 2010 10:05 AM

Just to put the record straight. Pali / Hipview are still offering deferred payment. No Sale No Fee and card payment on line. Paul Walker was misquoted and vested interests are sending out misinformation. My advice? Until you see a Minister on the news saying “as from midnight tonight Hips are voluntary or suspended” don’t take any notice of all the rumours.
Nick.

• 19 May 2010 10:03 AM

Agents and vendors are in flux. We now need a clear message from the Housing Minister as to when HIPs and what will remain, ie the EPC (and if anything else, ie PIQ). Also what will the legal side be if a HIP is deferred payment and no longer legal tender. No doubt agents will get grief from angry deferred vendors receiving invoices. Clarity is now needed.

• 19 May 2010 09:39 AM

Actually EPC is required under separate UK legislation - Energy Performance of Buildings Regs 2007 (was effective October 2008?) so don't even worry about having to rely on EU law, we already have our own legislation that requires an EPC. We also have EPD2 (in EU law) which requires us to put EPCs in house sales particulars - we have 18 months to pass legislation to bring ourselves into line with that EU law. It's all there...

• 19 May 2010 09:34 AM

Willjack - S162 Suspension of duties under sections 155 to 159. These sections only cover 'duty to have' 'duty to provide' 'Imposition of Conditions' 'Authenticity' and 'Duties of an Estate Agent'. They make no reference to EPC's which is EU Law.

• 19 May 2010 09:25 AM

Ros is correct and with respect, you are arguing over semantics. My local MP is in the DCLG and confirms it is a priority to abolish HIPs. They will be suspended under s162 and this is the draft order to which EA Today refers. I understand that now Parliament has reconvened, an announcement is imminent, though it may be made after the Queens Speech. Any promised consultation will take place after suspension.

Frankly, I am past caring about HIPs. A huge number of agents in London have just stopped adhering to first day marketing

• 19 May 2010 09:19 AM

1. Grant Shapps is in with his legal team as I write.

2. No order to suspend HIPs has been signed.

3. Grant Shapps and his legal team are discussing the possibility of suspending HIPs. Although, as the EPC is contained within the HIP regulations, any suspension of HIPs would also mean a suspension (for the time being) of EPCs. And as this would obviously create a bigger EPBD problem from the Government.

4. Grant Shapps is looking for a way to suspend HIPs, but keep the EPC, which is why there has been no official announcement.

5. I hear that we should know more on Friday.

• 19 May 2010 09:08 AM

"You are scaremongering home owners, industry professionals and HIP providers for your web visit stats, shame on you. "

Button it you sanctimonious tit.

• 19 May 2010 08:49 AM

@Colin - get real.

@AHIPP members - your shareholders won't thank you for p1ssing more money away into a fighting fund that will be depleted by greedy barristers in about a week, all to pay for a fruitless legal challenge that will do nothing more than appeal to Mike Ockenden and Ashley King's vanity.

@estate agents - at this point, arranging HIPs is not only pointless but will almost certainly result in your not being paid your referral fee. Your clients wont thank you if you take their money and the HIP provider folds before the HIP is delivered. You would be better referring clients back to your local solicitors again and hope they don't hold a grudge.

As soon as any announcement is made, HIP providers' cash flow and credit facilities will dry up with every search provider and sundry creditor trying to get paid. Shareholders will raid any cash surplus and transfer assets off their balance sheets before the inevitable happens. Ockenden will have about a week to showboat his proven track record of delicate diplomacy before the HIP industry is bankrupt. It will be a train wreck.

Grab your popcorn and pull up a chair.

• 19 May 2010 08:38 AM

Please note, the post which are for HIPs are generally HIP providers. No Estate Agent or Vendor in their right mind would welcome something which has not worked. If the government want to get the economy moving they need to do the RIGHT thing abolsih HIPs and maybe keeps the EPC part to keep the DEA's in a job

• 19 May 2010 08:37 AM

The report is how it is, vendors are holding on until this goes through. Why would you pay £300-400 for a HIP when you may just need an EPC which costs £30

• 19 May 2010 08:31 AM

Yet you reported that they were suspended on Monday. Do you check any facts?

It appears as if you are pandering to what you think your readership want, forgeting about factual reporting.

You are scaremongering home owners, industry professionals and HIP providers for your web visit stats, shame on you.

• 19 May 2010 08:21 AM

Yet you don't mention that the CLG have denied categorically that any suspension order has been signed.
Deferred payments have NOT been withdrawn and the majority of the world is carrying on with the Law.
You really need to start checking the facts behind your sources!

• 19 May 2010 08:01 AM