"Sellers pack"

EdInvestor

Another useful article in the Independent mentioning the EU energy directive and also how the HIPs overturn the principle of "buyer beware".

Well when you say "incompetence" by buyers it depends what you mean

Perhaps "inexperience" is a better word.

It seems unlikely that new builds will be involved in many of these failed sales, as there are not gazumping problems (as they tend to be sold with discounts) and nor are they likely to be withdrawn from the market or fail the survey.

Of course the existince of the HIP will not stop inexperienced buyers from losing money buying new build apartments because the market is glutted and they are overpriced.

But one can easily see that people might start thinking they should.

Misselling anyone? :rolleyes:

[Any news on the liability insurance yet, Howee?]

EdInvestor

Jorgan wrote:

EdInvestor wrote:

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


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.

Yes, it does look like a major over-reaction.

33 out of 100 sales fall through, and of the 33, 6 fall through as a result of the survey.

So only 6% of total sales are likely to be affected.

#BTW these days I would have thought a major reason for sales falling through was chains breaking down.

Yet that's not mentioned.

BobProperty

Ian_W wrote:

... Nationally, an estimated 28 per cent of transactions fail after an offer has been accepted.

That has now been answered. The anti-HIP brigade have always quoted 4% failing on survey which is about the only thing a HIP will have up front compared to the system now. Following the thread and the figure has been calculated at 6%. Still think it's a large hammer small nut situation.

Ian_W wrote:

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.

OK you got me on that. I was going to look it up, honest. I'm surprised that such a large proportion of buyers rely on it alone, then.

BobProperty

Ian_W wrote:

...and use non-inspection methods to determine valuations [drive-by, selling price research?] which should, or at least could, lead to them costing less.

Rightmove is working on this I think. That is, a database of sales figures which would allow an estimation of value without a survey. I don't know if it is still true but in the past there were tables of average house price indexes and lenders would use them for low LTV re-mortgages and second charge loans. (e.g. Borrowed 25k to buy 50k house in 1985. Want to raise 20k now as 5 year secured loan. Look up table which says house should be worth 125k, borrower provides income details, loan deal done.)

lesandflynny

lynzpower wrote:

I cant wait for them to come in and Im thinking, actually, maybe Ill wait for selling till that time in any case. I certainly dont want to be going through the rigmarrol that my parents did repeatedly in my childhood of seeing property, liking it, spending ££s on a survey to find major probs, then finding another property, more surveys more ££s and suddenly youve spent a few K with nothing to show for it.
As a seller ( yes theres a few minor issues with my place) I only need to pay for it once then avoid the traipsing of surveyors time after time ( potentially) I think it makes for a much more transparent system and that can only be a good thing.
Do people really put properties on the market when theyve got no intention of selling? It costs ££s to pay estate agents?!

Yes as most estage agents work on a no sale no fee basis............ put your house up with them, put punters off, don't sell and therefore no fee!

Diane

sheffield_lad

BobProperty wrote:

Rightmove is working on this I think. That is, a database of sales figures which would allow an estimation of value without a survey. I don't know if it is still true but in the past there were tables of average house price indexes and lenders would use them for low LTV re-mortgages and second charge loans. (e.g. Borrowed 25k to buy 50k house in 1985. Want to raise 20k now as 5 year secured loan. Look up table which says house should be worth 125k, borrower provides income details, loan deal done.)

This is why the mortgage lenders will recognize HIP's, why send someone out to value a property when you could have the details in electronic format on your desktop at the touch of a mouse?

EDINVESTOR wrote:

[Any news on the liability insurance yet, Howee?]

No not as yet, to be honest I am not too worried at the moment as I have the training/revision/test's to get past yet. I have heard there has been some headway made and the insurance premium could be based on turnover. If true a big step forward.

Ian_W

BobProperty wrote: The anti-HIP brigade have always quoted 4% failing on survey which is about the only thing a HIP will have up front compared to the system now.

Ermm, one of the arguments of the anti-HIP brigade is, people won't put their house on sale 'cos it'll cost them £800 up front .... But ... the 29% breakdown "after the vendor withdrew it from sale" won't be reduced by HIPs?
Ah right, so people won't spend the money to put it on sale but they'll be quite happy once they've spent it to lose it by withdrawing their property from the market. Sounds quite logical to me!! :rotfl:
If you accept that catagory will also be affected because the seller will have made a financial commitment to the process then just under 50% of the reasons for breakdowns could well be influenced by the introduction of HIP's. In round terms if, as Jorgan says, there are 1.2 million property sales per year that's about 200,000 failed transactions where buyers [predominently] lose money. Still a small nut?
If you read the background papers and research inc the Bristol pilot there is every reason to think that HIPs will impact on other areas of breakdown too. They do contain a great deal more than simply the Home Inspection Report and as the ODPM site points out:
The home information pack is only one part of a package of measures to tackle problems with the current home buying and selling process. Other aspects are being pursued on a voluntary basis and do not require legislation. These include:
* better preparation by buyers (e.g. obtaining in principle mortgage offers before making an offer on a property);
* faster mortgage offers and faster local authority searches;
* better use of technology to speed up the process;
* the introduction of e-conveyancing;
* action by lenders to provide title deeds quickly;
* action by insurers to develop further and market more widely insurance to protect buyers and sellers from gazumping and other problems.
I'm personally no supporter of this government but it's gross stupidity to set your face against everything they do, simply because it's them doing it. I thought the idea had merit when first mooted and having done a lot more reading about it I'm now convinced it has. I would like, and maybe it will happen in time, offers and acceptance to become binding much sooner in the process, like they are in Scotland. This, IMO, is a step towards that.

BobProperty

howee wrote:

This is why the mortgage lenders will recognize HIP's, why send someone out to value a property when you could have the details in electronic format on your desktop at the touch of a mouse?...

Where do HIPs come into that process? Rightmove has a database and lenders pay to look it up. Saves some valuations. Nowt to do with HIPs.

BobProperty

Ian_W wrote:

Ermm, one of the arguments of the anti-HIP brigade is, people won't put their house on sale 'cos it'll cost them £800 up front .... But ... the 29% breakdown "after the vendor withdrew it from sale" won't be reduced by HIPs?

We don't have a breakdown of the "vendor withdrew from sale". It might be because they have decided not to get divorced after all. There's a lot more than one reason there. I have said previously that this is an advantage of HIPs in that the "try and see what it will sell for" brigade will be put off.

Ian_W wrote:

If you accept that catagory will also be affected because the seller will have made a financial commitment to the process then just under 50% of the reasons for breakdowns could well be influenced by the introduction of HIP's. In round terms if, as Jorgan says, there are 1.2 million property sales per year that's about 200,000 failed transactions where buyers [predominently] lose money. Still a small nut?

If you accept that the "29% breakdown "after the vendor withdrew it from sale" all come from "see what we can get for it" then the market is going to shrink quite noticably.

Ian_W wrote:

...the ODPM site points out:
The home information pack is only one part of a package of measures to tackle problems with the current home buying and selling process. Other aspects are being pursued on a voluntary basis and do not require legislation....

Haven't seem TwoJags doing much in this direction though. The only thing he must comply with is the EU directive on energy, included in HIPs.

Ian_W wrote:

I'm personally no supporter of this government but it's gross stupidity to set your face against everything they do, simply because it's them doing it. I thought the idea had merit when first mooted and having done a lot more reading about it I'm now convinced it has. I would like, and maybe it will happen in time, offers and acceptance to become binding much sooner in the process, like they are in Scotland. This, IMO, is a step towards that.

I'm not against this because of the politics of the government. I'm very doubtful of the benefits compared to the cost. We could have a system more like Scotland, but that too has it's faults. We could have, as you say "offers and acceptance to become binding much sooner in the process", but where are HIPs needed in that improvement? Isn't it France where making an offer is almost binding? I'm going to try and come up with an outline of a better system and I'll start a new thread on it.

Ian_W

BobProperty wrote: We don't have a breakdown of the "vendor withdrew from sale". It might be because they have decided not to get divorced after all.

Awww, that would be nice if it were the case, you must like a happy ending, you old romantic, you. :kisses2:

We could have a system more like Scotland, but that too has it's faults.

One of which is that each prospective buyer pays for a survey before they offer - whereas HIPs provide a survey paid for by the seller for all prospective buyers.

I'm going to try and come up with an outline of a better system and I'll start a new thread on it.

Look forward to it Bob, but I don't think 2 jags is an MSE forums man meself!