Conveyancers have established a working group to deliver their response to the forthcoming ‘call for evidence’ on the home-buying process from the Department for Business Innovation and Skills.
There is still no sign of the call for evidence – dubbed son of HIPs – which was announced in the Budget over three months ago.
The Government said then that the call for evidence would be made “shortly”. However, there seems to have been considerable slippage in the timetable, and it also appears that the remit may have been expanded.
The Conveyancing Association says the call for evidence is now “due later in the year”. It plans to present its own White Paper and debate the call for evidence at its annual conference in December before delivering what it is describing as its initial response.
In its Budget statement back in March, the Government said it wanted to make the home-buying and selling process “better value for money and more consumer-friendly”.
It is thought that key proposals could be mandatory early provision of more information about the property and that when an offer is accepted, the deal becomes binding.
According to the Conveyancing Association, the call for evidence will “focus on all areas of the process in an attempt to cut down on the many thousands of abortive transactions that take place each year”.
It believes that BIS will be seeking information on how to increase transparency and certainty between all parties, cut down on unnecessary delays and costs, and to provide a smoother conveyancing process by potentially giving more information to potential purchasers up-front.
Beth Rudolf, director of delivery at the Conveyancing Association, said: “While political events and regulatory intervention have dominated the agenda for some time, we see the publication of its forthcoming ‘call for evidence’ by BIS as presenting a real opportunity for the conveyancing profession to establish what we would like to see change and happen within the process.
“Our ongoing campaigns will feed into this in areas such as tackling fraud, improving the leasehold process and working with lenders to cut down on delays between them and conveyancers.
“However, given the depth and breadth of this Government initiative, this represents the chance to draw a line in the sand and to help formulate and develop how the conveyancing process should look like in the future.”
She added: “This feels like a pivotal moment for how the home-buying process develops.”
Conveyancers have established a working group to deliver their response to the forthcoming ‘call for evidence’ the group hasn’t met up yet, they can’t agree a date.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It is good to see that the Conveyancing Association plans to present its own White Paper and debate the call for evidence at its annual conference in December before delivering what it is describing as its initial response. My concern is that the CA is made up (mainly) of the volume conveyancers and bigger players. Will their views, comments and suggestions be as relevant to the other firms who collectively conduct the other 80% of property transactions?
The CA have said:
“This feels like a pivotal moment for how the home-buying process develops and the CA is committed to ensuring the views of our members are fully represented and we are able to support the BIS in delivering on what are sure to be some wide-reaching aims and ambitions.”
The Bold Legal Group (420 member firms and growing, many of whom are also CA members) has similarly been working with the Department for Business Innovation and Skills and will also be responding to the ‘call for evidence’ when it comes. Maybe some joined up thinking (including estate agents and other stakeholders) at the outset would be a good idea.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Here we go again. Every body and association will jockey for position and influence. Each will be pushing their own agenda. Joined up thinking is a fine idea Mr H. But I will bet you a pound to a penny that it won’t happen.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
If I have anything to do with it AgencyInsider, we will have joined up thinking. I haven’t spent the last 40 years of my working life just to walk away and leave home buying and selling in a bigger mess than it was when I started in the mid 70s!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Perhaps if a few more actually deigned to speak to estate agents in the first place, the issue would not be as bad as it is currently
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Coveyencers are the worse to ask as many do not see a problem at the moment.
We cannot change attitudes of them.
Buyers pulling out are a problem to a degree.
We already have companies like TDS TPS why not make it a legal requirement for buyer to put down £500 deposit. Forfit if they pull out.
Would not solve all the problems but does help.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Been there before I am afraid Smileplease…. We agents who have been around a while, in my case 49 years in the profession, will recall that a couple of decades ago it was muted that both vendor and purchaser would put down a sizeable four figure deposit on acceptance of offer. If either party withdrew then they forfeited their deposit to the aggrieved party. Trouble was that in the final analysis once the lawyers got their hands on the proposal they put in so many caveats and ‘special case’ clauses allowing withdrawal that it became a toothless tiger and the idea failed to get off the ground. If you really want to speed the system up bring back HIPS. At least we as agents would be aware of the wobblies in title etc, rights of way etc., before they get to the lawyers/conveyancers many of whom nowadays who look at a problem and shrug their shoulders not knowing what to do next. As a rural agent with six offices I find my staff are acting more and more as conveyancers sorting out legal problems for which we get no additional recompense nor abortive fee if it all goes pear-shaped – unlike our legal cousins.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I feel your pain,
My staff also “Problem solve” but when trying to engage with a solicitor are seen as over stepping the mark.
HIP’s in essence was a good idea but was in my opinion totally flawed for various reasons.
Agents can help them themselves, they can obtain details of leases along with charges and if less that 80 years get the vendor to apply for a right to assign or at the very least get a cost for an extension. Baffles me why this is not done by all agents at the outset.
Problem is if we make it harder for people to put property on the market such as HIPs (more costings) many will not put theirs on in the first place, given in most parts of the UK there has been a drought of property coming onto the market (hence the rising house prices) this would make things worse still.
The attitudes of conveyancers and to get them to invest in staff numbers opening hours is the easiest overall solution but will never happen.
I do not think deposits from buyers would change a great deal but it is a step in the right direction, given we now have schemes set up to take deposits from tenants i would have thought the process is the easiest it ever has been.
What would you suggest to be added or exclude to a new style HIP?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I agree HIPS were not without their problems but at least we found that just as with EPCs, which might I add are totally useless to anyone, once a vendor was told they were a requirement they accepted the fact and just got on with it. If the cost prevented one or two ‘toe dippers’, who would probably have pulled out of any sale arranged, then all to the good.
I also agree that agents should be able to get all the Lease details before marketing. We will not put a property to the market unless we have those details. However most vendors don’t have the lease copy and refer us to solicitors who take an age to unearth them from their archives. Likewise we use a Property Information Questionnaire which does give us more information that many vendors will volunteer about previous problems etc., and we can then market the property from a position of strength – usually.
I think you have hit the nail on the head with their being too few conveyancing staff in general. I detest the large ‘factory’ conveyancers and will actively persuade my clients and purchasers from using them as they just become a number and you never speak to the same person twice. However rural solicitors do not help themselves when they close for lunch and shut the office at 5pm. Putting in a few more hours a week, as do we agents, would clear their ‘backlog’ quite quickly and go along way to shortening the transaction time. Also if they would only speak to each other on the phone rather than send a letter every time a query is raised that would help time wise as well.
Why we cannot in this country complete a property sale within a week or two as they do in the USA to my personal knowledge beats me. I suspect it is the legal profession making the whole transaction seem somewhat mystical and over complicating things.
I totally agree with LocalLens (see below) the number of times that everyone thinks they are nearing exchange only to have the buyers solicitor come up with a new raft of questions is unbelievable. I would go so far as to say it is now the norm rather than the exception. We too have suffered from all the problems LocalLens notes.
Finally I think it is high time RICS, NAEA NFOPP etc got together and commenced a concerted effort to get our very antiquated systems changed but only if they speak to those of us at the coal-face and to what the problems are and how we would solve them. If we don’t grasp this nettle as a profession then some MP or other will take up to cudgels that are brandished from time to time by the likes of the press and consumer organisations and we will get reform but in totally the wrong and an ill-informed way.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Great post.
I agree with all and especially the last paragraph.
The two things i am passionate for and would like to see reformed / shaped for today’s industry is
1. Conveyancers, as seen above.
2. A fit for purpose “Trade Body”
To help improve our industry be it improve service, expedite times, protect good agents, remove poor agents, clamp down on misleading adverts. And to help forge true working relationships with other professional bodies such as solicitors, financial services, surveyors. We need a body that has teeth and we can all get behind. At the moment the bodies available are only into self promotion and profit.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Well said. Industry led ideas for reform is definitely the way forward. Politicians rarely seem to have a grasp of how the system currently works and could work, whilst consumer organisations seem to start from a very negative ‘bash the agents’ position
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Well, all I can say is that after over 25 years of estate agency, delays and problems with conveyancing are the worst I can remember. Just a couple of recent cases:-
1) Our vendors had a nightmare purchase, with so many problems, including their vendor’s solicitor ignoring letters, sending incomplete forms and paperwork, sending attachments to email relating to another property, sending an EPA over twice without it being correctly certified, etc. etc. Final insult, did not get Transfer document signed by an executor living abroad, meaning one week later our vendors had not received the balance of monies due to them (some £100,000). The whole process was considerably delayed by this purchase at the top of the chain, and without the input from the agents I do not think the small chain would have held never mind progressed.
2) Our lovely single lady vendor’s solicitor made a mistake on the form transferring completion monies over for her related purchase. Everyone spent all afternoon trying to locate the money and eventually she was told at 5.30 she could not move in! Our suggestion of her moving in under licence was not judged to be acceptable. Fortunately she was able stay with a friend, but of course the removal company wanted more money from her the next day – and would not start until she got the cash for them, saying they would charge 20% extra is she paid by cheque. She is going to try and recoup that extra expense from her solicitor, but I am not holding my breath.
Generally speaking there is an increasing trend of the file only being really thoroughly checked right at the end of the transaction, with an increasing number of instances of requests for information and paperwork (often already provided) involving a lot of ‘panic stations’. Still finding that solicitors do not deal with exchange deposits very thoroughly either, sometimes not explaining to their clients if more funds will be needed (and how they need to be paid) until the last minute, and having a discussion between solicitors as to what percentage of deposit is accepted right at the last minute again. As agents, as usual we are damned if we do and damned if we don’t – if we mention it we are trying to do their job, if we don’t there are often delays
Sorry to go on, have had a real headache recently with some much sales progression, it is getting well and truly beyond a joke.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Can i just say how nice it is to see some less prevalent posters commenting on this story and how welcome their thoughts are. Not shouty, not looking to pick a fight. Just trying to help highlight issues and shape our industry.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I’m all for constructive discussion with anyone, so why don’t we get the ball rolling? smile please, Locallens, easternagent, AgencyInsider and others, email me now (rh@boldgroup.co.uk) in strict confidence and let’s see if we can set up an initial meeting/discussion.
I guarantee that no identities or names will be revealed without consent.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I’d never even heard of the Conveyancing Association until fairly recently.
Perhaps the first step is to identify the real issues that affect the system/process rather than concentrating on personalised commentary which whilst valid may not be a widespread impediment to successful working.
Of course, these days, estate agents could establish an Alternative Business Structure and register with the SRA or establish an entity as Licensed Conveyancers and undertake the conveyancing process. Thereafter, having established a successful model, the rest of the industry can be instructed on how to be better.
Maybe the truth is that sometimes things do go wrong in the buying/selling process but that the vast majority of transactions proceed effectively. Greater speed might not even be the answer. It might be greater accuracy or faster decisions by lenders. The answer might be ensuring those who enter the process can’t “change their minds”, but the problem is that people do, some for legitimate reasons.
For every issue there is an explanation. For every solution a reason why it won’t work. Maybe the process is what it is.
Proper research analysis of why sales/purchases don’t proceed would be a good starting point.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register