With a general election looming, the Conservatives are consulting various interested parties on what to do about HIPs - abolish then, improve them or leave them as they are?
My view is that, if done properly, a HIP can be a very good way of speeding up the house buying and selling process. The problem is that most sellers get a HIP because they must, and buy as cheaply as they can, instead of buying the best they can.
HIPs should be tightened up, not watered down
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Absolutely agree 100%. Would we really want to go back to not doing anything until a buyer is found with all the attendant delays, frustrations & lack of transparency that can so often cause chains of sales to fail?
ReplyDeleteThe Conservatives' argument that a voluntary HIP would be successful if the market considers it beneficial completely misses the point that it is the professionals, not consumers, that need to drive the reform to achieve up-front information & that the technical/legal aspects of most of the information needed are matters for the professionals to debate, advise upon & deliver, not consumers. It's otherwise tantamount to asking car owners to decide in what order & with what equipment the garage should undertake the checks needed in an MoT test.
They know that most consumers are apathetic or lack knowledge about HIPs. Sadly the same seems to be true of many in the stakeholder professions.
So long as the benefits of HIPs (including the Home Condition Report survey) are not appreciated & therefore adopted, a voluntary system would forever be dogged by the absence of universality, which can so easily wreck the process wherever there are chains of connected transactions.