So is this "delay until August" announcement really going to be the end of HIPS?
Would you trust any survey provided at the sellers expense, be it 'condition' or 'energy'? Would you accept local authority searches that could in many cases be 6 months old? I certainly wouldn't.
IMHO it's more legislation introduced probably by the well intentioned but hugely naive politicians.
AWEM
Big boiling vats of fudge. With luck it will be allowed quietly to die, as it should.
Certainly not. Moreover, I don't believe for one moment that anybody is going to make a purchasing decision based on an energy report.
Job creation scheme for the unqualified. Of course RICS would mount a legal challenge because this results in less business for their members.
Certainly there is large naivete when somebody attempts to enact legislation that defies normal commercial principle which is that the buyer should satisfy himself regarding the suitability of the purchase.
The trouble is that we, as taxpayers, have paid for these boiling vats of fudge.
All too common, though - just see all the government-inspired "IT"-based projects which have cost *us* a fortune and have just been abandoned.
When these projects are allowed to die do heads roll? The *same* IT contractors are awarded milch-cow contracts for the next c*ck-up...
Is there really any mileage in complaining to anyone, or do we just accept that our money is there to be wasted?
I would expect the "process of review and monitoring" that will follow will result in a "temporary suspension" at some point a few months after for "assessment and reworking", then it will be allowed to die. ;-)
again.
By fluke, I was standing in the office of an estate agent (one of our consultancy clients) today when this new broke.
We watched the BBC parliament coverage.
Its fair to say the agents was pretty pissed off as well! Not because they had any affection for the whole concept, but they have had to pay significant amounts of money out to train people on them. Just to add insult to injury, the last minute nature of the climb down means much of the big HIP launch publicity and advertising campaign that has already been booked and paid for is now going to be wasted.
Or "us" a fortune when we buy and sell houses in the future.
follow
intentioned
One of the reviews I saw on the BBC the other day said that the fine for not HIPPING was £200 and the cost a minimum of £300 so it seems a no brainer what to do if they actually do come into force !
AWEM
The government believes that what matters is INSULATION, INSULATION, INSULATION.
So why was that woman MP saying it was only £100 on Radio 4 last night? Can't remember her name.
Mary
On Wed, 23 May 2007 10:51:10 +0100 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-
Perhaps because she is a party politician and thus should not be trusted unless vouched for by a respectable member of society.
On Tue, 22 May 2007 23:18:55 +0100 someone who may be Andy Hall wrote this:-
Especially one produced in the simplistic way that is intended.
No 'perhaps' about it!
Mary
>
I think you have to separate the EPC and the rest of the pack contents. The EPC is going to happen in some form or other as it's required by EC legislation.
As for the rest, ISTM not unreasonable to require vendors to put together all the key paperwork before putting a property on sale. If the vendor of a flat can't get a copy of their lease, service charge statement or confirmation of insurance without waiting weeks, then let them wait, rather than the hapless buyer who is left in limbo. If you don't want to rely on a search that is not 100% up to date, there is nothing to stop you getting your own; equally if you look at the one in the sellers pack at the EA and it has something bad in, you haven't wasted any money on solicitor's or search fees as would be the case currently.
I have bought a couple off off-plan Australian flats and they have a combined sellers pack/contract - plans of the property, search, planning permissions, service charges etc etc. It makes buying a property as easy as buying a car.
I noticed in one report the "inspectors" carefully noting that the property had CFL's in the conventional light fittings and being marked up accordingly - what are the odds of them still being there when the buyer moves in?
well that is not far off the truth by and large in most cases.
The trouble is, they neglect to sas that a woolly jumper is the most cost effective insulant there is..apart from thermal underwear that is.
What we need is government grants for the elderly to replace their ageing and inefficient cardigans and V necked pullovers.
The pasty^W politician who explained the 'pragmatic' reason for delaying the introduction of mandatory HIP until August also said it would be phased in and initially apply only to four bedroomed houses ...... Watch out for three bedroom houses with study; box-room; laundry room; storage rooms; dressing rooms ... and whatever else you can imagine ...!
Fisher"
delaying the
If the entire house owning public put a one line advert in their local free paper offering their house for sale before the deadline, then no HIP is needed ever unless they 'withdraw the house from the market' - sounds like a good way forward in my book
AWEM
is that a lofty ideal ?
I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The problem came when the government started telling us that this pack would save the buyers money ... I remember the big building societies and banks issuing immediate statements saying that they would *not* approve a mortgage based on infomation provided by the vendor, which effectively torpedoed the HIPs below the waterline, as the "save homebuyers money" arguement went out the window.
At that point, a sensible government which was actually serious about speeding up housebuying and preventing gazumping should have gone back the drawing board and thought again.
e.g. they could have insisted that the HIPs had compulsory insurance attached, to indemnify the vendors and purchasers in the event of a faulty survey.
The fact they didn't, and ploughed on is just a very public display of the arrogance of politicians, and why they have no public respect.
On Wed, 23 May 2007 13:03:50 +0100 someone who may be Peter Parry wrote this:-
I was looking at the Scottish version of all this earlier today. They can't even be bothered to include orientation of rooms in the thing, despite solar gain being important (especially in energy efficient buildings).
I suppose dumbing things down in this way is the only way that they can get the army of urchins who know bugger all about building engineering to issue these stupid pieces of paper.
Well you have to admit that it will make a nice change from estate agents counting rooms as bedrooms that aren't big enough to take a bed.
Somehow I don't think this is going to happen: AIUI most people initially now find houses through websites and the agents listing them will have to decide how many bedrooms the house has. If they say '3' then anyone searching for a 4-bed may overlook them.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.