Home Information Packs - gone!

Dolph · 20 May 2010 at 12:53

frakker said:
Well let the facts speak for themselves then:

1. Average time to exchange of contracts from acceptance of offer has reduced from 82 days to 52 days since HIPs were introduced.
2. Transaction failure (between acceptance of offer and exchange of contract) has reduced from 28% to 9%
3. Consumers are being saved an annualised £150 million in aborted transaction costs (I concede the figure I gave previously was too high)
4. In addition to this the inclusion of searches in HIPs has resulted in an annualised saving of over £25 million for consumers (and this takes account of ‘double searching’ in a minority 25% of purchase conveyancing cases).
5. ‘Exchange ready’ packs of which over 30,000 have been issued have resulted in average time to exchange of 35 days.
6. EPCs in HIPs have resulted in real carbon emission reductions according to the NES report issued in late 2009. If there is no formal framework for the EPC (such as the HIP) evidence suggests non-compliance will soar and carbon emission reductions will be lost.

In which case, if they are that beneficial, the market will keep them without legislation. If they vanish, then they are not as useful to most as you are pretending...

Taziir · 20 May 2010 at 12:57

Bought before HIPs came in, not selling until they are gone. Colour me happy

Dolph · 20 May 2010 at 13:10

frakker said:
Do you not see it as a political stunt of a reaction from the government? A way of saying: "look! we can get rid of whatever we want!"

I consider their implementation to be a political stunt, and their removal a natural response to such a thing

The problem with them (as I've said countless times), was that the public were too ill-informed about what a HIP is and the benefits, and that is a fault of the previous government. The public saw it as a waste of £200 and would sooner risk the sale going through, potentially wasting £350+ in solicitor's fees.

Because of this, people are only too happy to see the back of them. They haven't got a clue what they are and what purpose they serve. I'm pretty sure if we were about yonks ago when conveyancing first came about, people moaned about those too, but they're now standard fair.

Typically Joe Public is more concerned with his wallet, than looking at the bigger picture. But hey ho, I concede that I'm fighting a losing battle here to persuade anyone, but just remember when you come to buy another property and it all falls through, you could have saved yourself a wad of money if HIPs had been retained.

Or alternatively, if it all goes smoothly (as the majority do) I could have been forced to waste a load of money if HIPs had been retained...

daz · 20 May 2010 at 13:13

If they're so good for selling houses, estate agents will be advising home sellers "Pay for a voluntary HIP, you'll complete on the house much faster and have much lower chance of the sale falling through". They'll effectively sell themselves in which case the legislation isn't required to support the industry.

Home sellers will then have a choice over whether to get HIP done, whether they see it as a benefit to them selling the house or whether they would rather have the few hundred pounds in their pocket.
As opposed to being forced by legislation.

krooton · 20 May 2010 at 13:16

Dolph said:
Or alternatively, if it all goes smoothly (as the majority do) I could have been forced to waste a load of money if HIPs had been retained...

Surely this could easily be sorted by calculating losses made on failed purchases without HIPs against losses made on HIPs where purchased went perfectly for the same period of time.

Cookie12 · 20 May 2010 at 17:35

frakker said:
Typically Joe Public is more concerned with his wallet, than looking at the bigger picture. But hey ho, I concede that I'm fighting a losing battle here to persuade anyone, but just remember when you come to buy another property and it all falls through, you could have saved yourself a wad of money if HIPs had been retained.

The thing is though in some / a lot of cases a HIPs pack is useless, they don't stop a house sale falling through. Also why don't they include a survey in a HIPs pack if it supposedly helps to sell the house.

We are currently in the process of selling our house, and after the HIPs pack the buyer had to have a survey done, the house came up fine but the bank wanted an electrical survey, and we now need to replace the consumer box. Which is fine if needs doing it needs doing, but this could have potentially made the whole deal collapse, especially if the house needed a re-wire.

If this survey was part of the HIP's pack i could see the point in them, but at they stand i don't see the point at all, they have definately not benefited us. I know it may be a minority but our buyer didn't even know what the HIPs pack said and they weren't bothered about it.

P.S - Our HIPs pack was only done 4 weeks ago, can i get a refund

Dolph · 20 May 2010 at 17:40

Cookie12 said:
The thing is though in some / a lot of cases a HIPs pack is useless, they don't stop a house sale falling through. Also why don't they include a survey in a HIPs pack if it supposedly helps to sell the house.

We are currently in the process of selling our house, and after the HIPs pack the buyer had to have a survey done, the house came up fine but the bank wanted an electrical survey, and we now need to replace the consumer box. Which is fine if needs doing it needs doing, but this could have potentially made the whole deal collapse, especially if the house needed a re-wire.

If this survey was part of the HIP's pack i could see the point in them, but at they stand i don't see the point at all, they have definately not benefited us. I know it may be a minority but our buyer didn't even know what the HIPs pack said and they weren't bothered about it.

P.S - Our HIPs pack was only done 4 weeks ago, can i get a refund

The whole point of the survey though is that it is a service for the buyer, not the seller. Surveyors working for the buyer are likely to be cautious due to competitive pressure. Surveyors working for the seller are likely to be optimistic due to competitive pressure.

Having the seller choose the surveyor is a terrible idea.

Dolph · 20 May 2010 at 17:40

krooton said:
Surely this could easily be sorted by calculating losses made on failed purchases without HIPs against losses made on HIPs where purchased went perfectly for the same period of time.

It could be, but I guarantee Frakker won't produce those figures...

MrMoonX · 20 May 2010 at 17:41

digital economy bill next hopefully

Citizen420 · 20 May 2010 at 18:11

MrMoonX said:
digital economy bill next hopefully

+1

Cookie12 · 20 May 2010 at 20:17

Dolph said:
The whole point of the survey though is that it is a service for the buyer, not the seller. Surveyors working for the buyer are likely to be cautious due to competitive pressure. Surveyors working for the seller are likely to be optimistic due to competitive pressure.

Having the seller choose the surveyor is a terrible idea.

I understand that, and i agree letting the seller organise it just opens the systems up to abuse. Couldn't they make the process all independant somehow. The bank / solicitor could possibly do it?