"Sellers pack"

EdInvestor

BobProperty wrote:

Howee "the government wants better and more accurate records of the country’s housing stock" - so that they can do the revaluations for council tax cheaply?

Like the sound of that one :rolleyes:

Jorgan and quoted by Howee "Many of the surveyors I have spoken to are training to give energy rating reports as they feel the home condition report will be abolished & the energy rating will replace it." If it goes in the direction implied by the preceding quote then surveyors will go on energy assessment courses, get a certificate and do the energy assessments along with their valuations. No need for HIP Inspectors...

The key is obviously to watch the behaviour of the surveyors. It's pretty clear that there is a perfectly OK fallback position in place if the political noise against the HIP try-on becomes LOUD ENOUGH


Howee: have you considered training to be a real surveyor?:T :beer:

BobProperty

zag2me wrote:

I still think these sellers packs are a great idea, I cant believe people are so quick to put down a new scheme because estate agents and mortgage companies are saying they dont want them.

This is supposed to make life easier for everyone, making it compulsary means that there will be a level playing field.

Yeah great idea. Everyone pays £800 + VAT upfront to avoid 4% of housing transactions failing.

BobProperty

Jorgan wrote:

BobProperty, 1 in 5 buyers don't have a survey, they have a mortgage valuation carried out by the lenders surveyor, this should not be confused with a survey.

Still, it's a job for a surveyor. You can call it a mortgage valuation, I'll call it a valuation survey.

Jorgan wrote:

In general, having to pay out £800 or so in advance will hurt a lot of sellers. Many don't have this free cash to spare when moving house, many HIP providers are looking to offer deferred payments on the HIP, entering into credit agreements with clients. So if somebody 'buys' a HIP with a credit agreement, then for no falut of their own, they have still to fund the HIP via the credit agreement. Any body see a mis selling scandal round the corner with this one or is it just me? Also, doesn't the law require a 14 day cooling off on consumer credit agreements? If so will a HIP provider wait for the 14 days to clear before starting work on preparing the HIP, delaying the marketing of a property even further?

One way around this was that the fee will be added to the estate agents fee, which is usually paid on completion. The vendor will still have to pay for it somehow, sometime and the interest on the cost too.
Hadn't thought about the credit implications and finance mis-selling. Even more risk for HIP Inspectors. Has anyone yet had a quote for Indemnity Insurance?

Ian_W

BobProperty wrote: Yeah great idea. Everyone pays £800 + VAT upfront to avoid 4% of housing transactions failing.

Bob, you really should read the links you post. From the ODPM one about the Bristol pilot:
Only two of the 65 sales where offers have been received have failed. This represents about three per cent of sellers pack transactions. Nationally, an estimated 28 per cent of transactions fail after an offer has been accepted.
That tallies with the figures I've seen most often quoted that a quarter of all transactions fail between offer and completion. I'm grateful for the link because it shows the trial took place in 1999/2000 so the EA interviewed as having used HIPs since then has given it a fair go, 5yrs+ - so when she says her agency's breakdown rate is down from 24 to 1% then to me it strengthens what she's saying. If there was only 4% breakdown rate I'd agree with you, but a quarter is a tremendous waste of time, money and effort for a lot of people.

You can call it a mortgage valuation, I'll call it a valuation survey.

Shame the RICS don't agree Bob, they say....
Mortgage valuations
A valuation isn’t a survey. It’s a limited check on the property that your mortgage lender carries out to ensure it’s worth the money they’re lending you. They’ll probably ask you to pay for the valuation. Many lenders provide a copy of the mortgage valuation to the buyer but it is unlikely to cover items of detail which would be picked up in a survey.
However, there may be structural problems in the property that would cost a huge amount to put right – and they won’t appear in the valuation report.
Maybe as the reps of surveyors they're just touting for business but the page is HERE if you want to read it yourself. So even the RICS say a valuation isn't a proper survey, perhaps they've been listening to 2 Jags!!

Just for those who think it isn't going to happen the timetable was published yesterday at:
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1164360

I don't think even a VERY loud noise will cancel it, but maybe a multi-£ million loan to New Labour would?

Ian_W

Interesting that all the professionals are agin it seems to be the message. Stumbled across THIS on the RICS site. Quite a positive view on HIPs from the professional body that represents Surveyors. They are not suggesting it will cause the market to crash, put up prices or have anything other than a positive impact on the buying and selling process.

Also there are some research papers suggesting lenders might in future accept Home Inspection reports as indicators of the condition of the property and use non-inspection methods to determine valuations [drive-by, selling price research?] which should, or at least could, lead to them costing less.

lynzpower

As my comments earlier were thought to have been "naive", I was always of the opinion that I could not see the government wading in to a process that would not be accepted by lenders, solicitors or other parties. I have seen and been part of legislative pilots by the government and they have been excellently run and the blips idenfied by participants have always been ironed out well. I have never heard of a pilot ( in my area of work anyway) that has run over or failed.

These are EXACTLY the points Ian that I believed, and to be honest, I had NEVER heard that solicitors wouldnt accept what was in the packs, particularly the searches ,which were the most time consuming for me. From experience of a FTB as I was buying my flat, It was 7.5 months for me to get in. A hip might have pulled this down to a more acceptable 3. I almost pulled out of the hideous process but I couldnt bear to watch the money go down the bog. ( circa 2k) I was nearl6y one oif these one in four breakdowns. And there was nothing structurally wrong with the place!
as with every change in legislative practice, you have to think about your own real life situations, and compare what is being proposed to your own experiences. I am no expert, but a HIP would have saved me,when I was buying as A FTB with a new build, time, money, and a lot of stress.
I can only presume that those who are seriously against it have homes that they know they are going to struggle to get shot of.

EdInvestor

Interesting survey ( of the other kind )reported in today's Grauniad:


One in three prospective buyers has had a property purchase fall through.But who's causing this problem, the buyers or the sellers?


37% of people due to gazumping (you can't have one without the other)
29% after the vendor withdrew it from sale
19% after receiving the survey results.
5% due to failure to get a mortgage

11% buy a property without viewing it :eek:
35% bought a house after only one viewing
20% bought the first property they looked at.
66% spent 30 minutes or less on the viewing.


At the moment, there is a cost constraint on gazumping for the buyer because he will usually have to pay for a survey.If this info is available immediately in the HIP for free, won't this encourage gazumping?

Won't the HIPs also encourage even more incompetence as above by buyers, if they don't have to make any effort at all to check out what they are buying?

Jorgan_2

Found this press release this morning, sorry don't know how to post a link in so I have copied it.

(The RICS expressed concerns as follows: - ‘RICS has consistently supported the principles of HIPs, but has become increasingly concerned at the approach being taken by ODPM regarding implementation. We were not consulted on the timeline published today and having a timeline will not guarantee programme success.
‘As a public interest body we are committed to working with Government and other stakeholders to help provide a better home buying experience for consumers. Government and industry need to work together to deliver these reforms, but Government has not yet provided the environment within which this can happen. The industry cannot be expected to develop a framework to qualify and regulate professionals to work in this field while the rules of the game are continually changing, particularly when these are emerging without proper consultation and agreement.’)

lynzpower

EdInvestor wrote:

Interesting survey ( of the other kind )reported in today's Grauniad:


One in three prospective buyers has had a property purchase fall through.But who's causing this problem, the buyers or the sellers?


37% of people due to gazumping (you can't have one without the other)
29% after the vendor withdrew it from sale
19% after receiving the survey results.
5% due to failure to get a mortgage

11% buy a property without viewing it :eek:
35% bought a house after only one viewing
20% bought the first property they looked at.
66% spent 30 minutes or less on the viewing.


At the moment, there is a cost constraint on gazumping for the buyer because he will usually have to pay for a survey.If this info is available immediately in the HIP for free, won't this encourage gazumping?

Won't the HIPs also encourage even more incompetence as above by buyers, if they don't have to make any effort at all to check out what they are buying?

Well when you say "incompetence" by buyers it depends what you mean. Bear in mind, many many properties being sold are new build, and thus really there isnt much to view. I viewed twice for about half an hour when I bought mine, but its a new build with a 10 year NHBC and it was empty. Fair to say, you look at the size of the rooms and then you are out of there! I bought the first property I looked at as it was in the area that I wanted ( perfect location, better than id ever dreamed of) and a brand new SO flat. So, statistics dont always bear out.

Jorgan_2

EdInvestor wrote:

Interesting survey ( of the other kind )reported in today's Grauniad:


One in three prospective buyers has had a property purchase fall through.But who's causing this problem, the buyers or the sellers?


37% of people due to gazumping (you can't have one without the other)
29% after the vendor withdrew it from sale
19% after receiving the survey results.
5% due to failure to get a mortgage

So according to this survey HIPs won't have a big result in preventing a sale falling thru as only about 20% fall thru due to the results of a survey.