Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Callum
    • By MSE Callum 9th Apr 18, 3:44 PM
    • 213Posts
    • 94Thanks
    MSE Callum
    MSE News: Government announces new measures to clean up the house-buying market
    • #1
    • 9th Apr 18, 3:44 PM
    MSE News: Government announces new measures to clean up the house-buying market 9th Apr 18 at 3:44 PM
    Estate agents in England will be required to hold a professional qualification as part of new measures to clean up the house-buying market, the Government has announced...
    Read the full story:
    'Government announces new measures to clean up the house-buying market'

    Click reply below to discuss. If you havenít already, join the forum to reply.
    Last edited by MSE Luke; 10-04-2018 at 2:49 PM.
    Read the latest MSE News
    Flag up a news story: news@moneysavingexpert.com
    Get the Free Martin's Money Tips E-mail
Page 1
    • Cardew
    • By Cardew 9th Apr 18, 4:53 PM
    • 27,324 Posts
    • 13,376 Thanks
    Cardew
    • #2
    • 9th Apr 18, 4:53 PM
    • #2
    • 9th Apr 18, 4:53 PM
    Is this a joke?

    What 'professional qualification' will be required. Chartered Surveyor would be useful but overkill.

    Some institutions will jump on the bandwagon and set up courses that for a few hundred pounds will give 'students' a set of meaningless letters after their name.

    https://www.propertypersonnel.co.uk/blog/do-i-need-a-qualification-to-become-an-estate-agent/
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 9th Apr 18, 5:12 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    • #3
    • 9th Apr 18, 5:12 PM
    • #3
    • 9th Apr 18, 5:12 PM
    Won`t be hard to get a certificate, how does this clean anything up? Best way to clean it up is to get them rates up!
    • ProDave
    • By ProDave 9th Apr 18, 5:36 PM
    • 844 Posts
    • 959 Thanks
    ProDave
    • #4
    • 9th Apr 18, 5:36 PM
    • #4
    • 9th Apr 18, 5:36 PM
    And exactly how will this stop the vendor puling out the day before exchange?
    • Heng Leng
    • By Heng Leng 9th Apr 18, 7:02 PM
    • 4,524 Posts
    • 1,416 Thanks
    Heng Leng
    • #5
    • 9th Apr 18, 7:02 PM
    • #5
    • 9th Apr 18, 7:02 PM
    And exactly how will this stop the vendor puling out the day before exchange?
    Originally posted by ProDave
    I guess that what the deposit part is for.

    You could also exchange earlier in the process - like the Scottish system of missives.
    • smipsy
    • By smipsy 9th Apr 18, 11:06 PM
    • 23 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    smipsy
    • #6
    • 9th Apr 18, 11:06 PM
    • #6
    • 9th Apr 18, 11:06 PM
    maybe they should finish with their letting fees ban before they invent new "measures" to "help"
    • Cardew
    • By Cardew 9th Apr 18, 11:30 PM
    • 27,324 Posts
    • 13,376 Thanks
    Cardew
    • #7
    • 9th Apr 18, 11:30 PM
    • #7
    • 9th Apr 18, 11:30 PM
    Most people seem to think something has to change.
    Change has got to start somewhere.
    You can refine it later.
    Originally posted by Quizzical Squirrel
    An Estate Agent is simply a salesman.(salesperson)

    They firstly have to sell their firm's services to the property owner, then sell/rent the property to prospective buyers/tenants.

    The price is largely determined by the area - a 3 bed terraced house in South Shields will sell/rent for less than a similar property in Mayfair!

    Legislation introduced a few years ago means sales particulars have to be accurate, or include a disclaimer.

    So what professional qualifications will clean up the property market?
    • googler
    • By googler 10th Apr 18, 1:15 AM
    • 14,777 Posts
    • 9,691 Thanks
    googler
    • #8
    • 10th Apr 18, 1:15 AM
    • #8
    • 10th Apr 18, 1:15 AM
    "Estate agents will now be required to hold a professional qualification"

    Which ones? Everyone in the EA's office? Valuers, negotiators, admin staff? Cleaners? Or just the business owner?

    "Housing Secretary Sajid Javid said: Buying a home is one of the biggest and most important purchases someone will make in their life. But for far too long buyers and sellers have been trapped in a stressful system full of delays and uncertainty.

    (To which my response is - "change the system", but ... )

    So we are going to put the consumers back in the driving seat. We will require estate agents to hold a qualification so that people are no longer at risk from a minority of rogue agents and can trust the process when buying or selling their home."

    To my mind, the solution doesn't match the problem...
    • ValiantSon
    • By ValiantSon 10th Apr 18, 1:19 AM
    • 1,844 Posts
    • 1,703 Thanks
    ValiantSon
    • #9
    • 10th Apr 18, 1:19 AM
    • #9
    • 10th Apr 18, 1:19 AM
    And exactly how will this stop the vendor puling out the day before exchange?
    Originally posted by ProDave
    I guess that what the deposit part is for.

    You could also exchange earlier in the process - like the Scottish system of missives.
    Originally posted by Heng Leng
    How will a buyer's non-refundable deposit prevent a vendor from pulling out?

    The buyer paying a non-refundable deposit will not prevent gazumping, as it isn't the buyer who allows this to occur, but rather the vendor.

    And I haven't even started on the stupidity of requiring a buyer to put down a non-refundable deposit before they've seen the results of local searches or a survey.
    • Heng Leng
    • By Heng Leng 10th Apr 18, 3:19 AM
    • 4,524 Posts
    • 1,416 Thanks
    Heng Leng
    How will a buyer's non-refundable deposit prevent a vendor from pulling out?

    The buyer paying a non-refundable deposit will not prevent gazumping, as it isn't the buyer who allows this to occur, but rather the vendor.

    And I haven't even started on the stupidity of requiring a buyer to put down a non-refundable deposit before they've seen the results of local searches or a survey.
    Originally posted by ValiantSon
    Foreign legal systems do have many idiosyncrasies
    • ViolaLass
    • By ViolaLass 10th Apr 18, 8:46 AM
    • 5,353 Posts
    • 7,401 Thanks
    ViolaLass
    Most people seem to think something has to change.
    Change has got to start somewhere.
    You can refine it later.
    Originally posted by Quizzical Squirrel
    Fixing the system is laudable but starting with the premise that "Something has to change so change something. Decide later whether it was helpful" seems to me to be the wrong way round.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 10th Apr 18, 9:04 AM
    • 7,641 Posts
    • 7,773 Thanks
    davidmcn
    And I haven't even started on the stupidity of requiring a buyer to put down a non-refundable deposit before they've seen the results of local searches or a survey.
    Originally posted by ValiantSon
    No reason in principle why you can't conclude a contract conditional on (objectively) satisfactory search results being available at a later date - that's what we do in Scotland.

    I think the main problems will be how you deal with the buyer wanting satisfactory survey results / mortgage offer / contract concluded for their own sale.
    • ShadowPuma
    • By ShadowPuma 10th Apr 18, 9:40 AM
    • 139 Posts
    • 103 Thanks
    ShadowPuma
    Many times the buyer pulls out is also because of issues with the house or the title and legal paperwork - these changes do nothing to prevent those occurring and instead just punish the buyers for daring to want things to be right, the house not to be falling apart and the legal paperwork to be properly in order.

    Or to not have a management company for a flat/building which utterly fails in their job too - I pulled out of one purchase because not only were the management company not fixing the issues they had failed to produce the leasehold pack after nearly 12 weeks and were holding up the purchase - just how bad would they be to live in a building they owned...? In that situation I would have lost money because these changes painted me as the unreliable one and not the seller or the management company who needed to pull their finger out and do their job.

    And the time limit on local authority searches is all well and good but won't change the time that an oversubscribed council takes to reply. Oh, it will allow government to blame them more but won't change a thing in reality unless it comes with extra budget and resources to provide staff in oversubscribed areas with an above average property movement rate.

    As for professional qualifications comments already covered that - it doesn't mean anything at all if you aren't specific and enforcement of such things is a joke in highly regulated industries let alone in the fast moving housing market. Those seeking enforcement will have lost out on their sale or purchase months before by the time any enforcement is able to be done.
    • Cardew
    • By Cardew 10th Apr 18, 10:01 AM
    • 27,324 Posts
    • 13,376 Thanks
    Cardew
    To answer the question, we have to ask how do we think it needs cleaning up?
    What do you think is wrong with it?
    Originally posted by Quizzical Squirrel
    That IMO isn't the issue. We all have opinions on how the house purchase system is flawed. Obviously that the owner or buyer can withdraw from the sale at the last minute is a major concern.

    However that is a matter for regulation, and isn't the subject of this thread. The issue is how a professional qualification for an estate agent will 'clean up the house buying market'.
    • victoriavictorious
    • By victoriavictorious 10th Apr 18, 10:02 AM
    • 196 Posts
    • 274 Thanks
    victoriavictorious
    I actually don't think estate agents and their qualifications (or lack of) are the major problem. I'm not a fan of the shenanigans that some of them get up to, but if anything, the agent can often save the sale and be the glue that holds the whole fragile chain together.
    I think the new proposals are barking up the wrong tree and just like before with the HIPS fiasco, are using sellotape to prop up a collapsing building.
    It's the wrong remedy.
    The entire process is needlessly slow, stressful, uncertain, Medieval and needs to go the way of the stocks and sticking heads on spikes on London Bridge.
    They could start by taking a look at how just about every country, apart from England & Wales, manages to sustain a fair, workable system with far less delay, stress and more certainty for all parties involved.
    By all means keep any offer subject to survey and contract as is the case now, but with stiff penalities for gazumping / gazundering and any party pulling out on a whim *just because they can* would be a starter. Of course life happens, and the penalty could be waivered in the case of illness, bereavement, etc.
    These penalities would discourage timewasting buyers (eg those who make an offer then continue to view other properties in case they find something better) and flaky sellers (eg those just testing the market with no intention of moving.)
    There would then be no need for buyer deposits.
    If anyone needs kicking into touch and having a rocket placed under their backsides, it's the army of slow conveyancers and mortgage lenders. The process just doesn't need to take that long.
    But even they could almost be tolerated if more certainty was introduced into the process and people knew that once having made/accepted an offer, the transaction would be going ahead.
    It's totally wrong to have a system that forces people to live in limbo, with their lives on hold, not knowing where they stand for anything from two months to a year or more.
    That's what REALLY needs to be tackled, but imo it never will be, because the system as it stands is a very lucrative cash cow for a whole army of so-called property professionals who stand to gain from each failed transaction.
    EDIT
    Ironically, the estate agent is about the only so-called professional in the entire process, who does not stand to gain from each failed transaction!
    Last edited by victoriavictorious; 10-04-2018 at 10:37 AM.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 10th Apr 18, 10:18 AM
    • 7,641 Posts
    • 7,773 Thanks
    davidmcn
    And the time limit on local authority searches is all well and good but won't change the time that an oversubscribed council takes to reply.
    Originally posted by ShadowPuma
    And as I've said elsewhere, there's no reason why you need to get your searches from the council. There seems to be a lack of motivation from the industry to use other providers (possibly because it's useful to point at someone else in the process who is even less efficient than yourself).
    • HornetSaver
    • By HornetSaver 11th Apr 18, 6:19 AM
    • 2,347 Posts
    • 3,775 Thanks
    HornetSaver
    A "non-refundable deposit" before money has been spent is unworkable, because a truly non-refundable deposit would fix the price before the buyer has sufficient information on the condition of the property. The reason exchange comes so late in the process is because if as a buyer you exchange without knowing everything you need to about the property, then more fool you.

    I strongly support the idea of the buyer being committed to the property at the agreed price at an earlier stage subject to it being as advertised. But this in turn puts more importance on the property information report (in effect making "don't know" an unacceptable answer), and would require a relatively detailed and costly contract being drawn up specifying what rights the buyer has in the event of the property not meeting the expected standard (for instance boiler needs replacing, damp not disclosed, etc etc). Rectification paid for by seller? Right to withdraw penalty free? Right to be reimbursed their survey costs? Right to a price drop?

    And in my opinion - as a homeowner - if we're going down the route of committing to the transaction earlier, the seller should be required to either take out withdrawal insurance (or if they prefer, put up cash of their own) so that the buyer can be compensated in the event that the seller wishes to take the house off the market.
    I'm standing by my pre-referendum prediction: "Brexit will lead to a recession"

    forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=70662330
    • the_quick
    • By the_quick 11th Apr 18, 9:41 AM
    • 59 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    the_quick
    This can be worked out together with survey that is done by the seller before he/she put the house on the market - so potential buyer can see what is wrong with the house on the paper, before committing to buy , than you can have non-refundable deposit. Otherwise you might be buying potato without knowing.
    • wantonnoodle
    • By wantonnoodle 11th Apr 18, 11:33 AM
    • 248 Posts
    • 171 Thanks
    wantonnoodle
    Maybe there should be some sort of mandatory insurance that both parties have to take out, so that if the other party pulls out before exchange, you recover the costs you have laid out. This could also be claimed by the buyer if it is found that for example a purchase falls through due to mortgages not being issued should the cause of the declined mortgage be due to the survey results or legal paperwork not being correct. Claims would not be payable if, for example, the sale fell through because the buyer simply got cold feet, or some other similar reason.

    This would encourage sales through to completion as well as allow people room to back out of a purchase with confidence if there are significant issues, rather than being penalised.

    I would suspect that the costs of payouts on this sort of insurance would be covered by the number of people taking the insurance out and not needing to claim as they have proceeded through to a successful completion.
    • victoriavictorious
    • By victoriavictorious 11th Apr 18, 5:12 PM
    • 196 Posts
    • 274 Thanks
    victoriavictorious
    This can be worked out together with survey that is done by the seller before he/she put the house on the market - so potential buyer can see what is wrong with the house on the paper, before committing to buy , than you can have non-refundable deposit. Otherwise you might be buying potato without knowing.
    Originally posted by the_quick
    That was going to be part of the original HIPS, but the idea was dropped, partly because it was thought that buyers would likely mistrust any survey commissioned by the vendor, and would wish to carry out their own inspection.
    Even if conflict of interest had not been a potential issue, a vendor having a survey ready would not necessarily have saved time, as the buyer may not have intended to get a more detailed survey done (as apparently many do not) and would therefore have needed to wait for their mortgage valuation / offer anyway.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

132Posts Today

1,309Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • It's the start of mini MSE's half term. In order to be the best daddy possible, Im stopping work and going off line? https://t.co/kwjvtd75YU

  • RT @shellsince1982: @MartinSLewis thanx to your email I have just saved myself £222 by taking a SIM only deal for £7.50 a month and keeping?

  • Today's Friday twitter poll: An important question, building on yesterday's important discussions: Which is the best bit of the pizza...

  • Follow Martin