So, the National Trading Standards Estate and Letting Agency Team (NTSELAT) has now announced its latest guidance on improving the disclosure of upfront information in property listings.
The aim is to assist buyers, agents and ultimately conveyancers in making informed decisions on property purchase by way of greater transparency and to make clear what ‘material information’ means in the context of the Consumer Protection Regulations and what must not be omitted.
Part A, as it’s termed, was laid out in February last year and includes disclosure of tenure (leasehold/freehold), lease length and service charges, council tax banding and asking price (no more POA).
Part B and C were set out on Thursday 30th November and include for Part B, property type, property construction (brick, tile etc), rooms and measurements, utilities (including broadband speed and mobile phone signal strength) and parking.
In Part C, any flood risk, cladding issues, planning consents, accessibility adaptations, covenants and restrictions (TPOs, listed status and so on).
So, property buying is falling in line with just about every other major asset purchase process. After all, would you buy a business without looking at the books first, or an investment product without reading the small print before committing? No, so is it so hard for us to understand why committing to a home purchase should require transparency and disclosure early on?
There are two ways of looking at this latest guidance that the property industry must consider.
Some agents will respond pessimistically and see the regs as a chore. It’s more admin, more work and a ‘pain in the rse’. I suspect that this might be the view of a significant minority and I understand why agents feel put upon of late as they contend with an array of new compulsions across seller AML, buyer AML, redress membership, Renter Reform legislation and so on.
But wait, might the Trading Standards stipulations be an opportunity for UK estate agents? In fact, might there be several opportunities to benefit from?
If I may, I’ll set out my thoughts on why this seeming burden on the industry should be seen as a ‘glass half full’ moment.
The more information that is gathered at the beginning of a transaction i.e at the listing, the quicker the sale will complete and the faster the agent gets paid. Since the pandemic this period has now risen to 115 days on average yet conveyancers Thomas Legal spent a year piloting upfront information and found that the time between SSTC and exchange reduced by as much as 53 days.
Not only does this mean that agents receive their commission cheques two months sooner – aiding cash flow significantly at a critical time for the sector – but it also results in fall-through rates reducing by as much as 60%. I’ll leave you to work out how much more you would bank each year if six out of ten of your abortive sales didn’t collapse.
These are the fundamentals of an improved buying and selling process via the provision of better upfront information not to mention sellers and clients that end up feeling less stressed, happier and more appreciative of their agent.
But the other opportunity that may not yet be so obvious is that by gathering and publishing upfront information as a pack, you have a shot at a financial margin. If the industry were to charge a fee for their time and expertise in gathering this data, especially if done by a third-party, then why not charge sellers a small fee for that?
Why absorb the cost? There is absolutely no imperative for you to do so and I’d argue that sellers that have ‘skin in the game’ by investing their money in the transaction early on, are far more likely to be serious and motivated. Don’t you agree?
Now no doubt the wise owls in the comments section below will tell us why upfront information is a problematic endeavour and a waste of time – a chore, a pain, more damned admin, and so on.
My suggestion though is that before we all run to find the negatives in progress, we look at the rather obvious positives too.
Gemma Young is co-founder of Moverly
I am a solicitor advising a digital law practice.
These proposals are being applauded but only by those vested interested in dumbing down conveyancing. What’s more, these ideas will force estate agents to face two ways at once. Become ‘quasi-lawyers’.
The guidance notes are ridiculously long and estate agents will need lawyers to understand them!
The biggest opportunity arising from these poorly designed measures will be for insurers, as more agents face the prospect of higher claims for negligence from disgruntled sellers.
Agents cannot present data purchased from a third party as Part C-compliant. To pretend otherwise is naive and misleading. Data purged of context makes it just that for buyer- a word salad
In their rush to fragment conveyancing to protect buyers as ‘consumers’ National Trading Standards have forgotten that sellers are consumers too.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
A few of us are working towards fostering respect for the trades, industries, and professions that must collaborate to achieve better outcomes. No one in their right mind wants agents to become conveyancers. Rule 1 in lettings and management is clear: don’t let sales negotiators anywhere near lettings. The thought of those staff preparing a contract would give most agency bosses night sweats.
There needs to be stakeholder consensus on the changes that apply to everyone. This includes agents and their service suppliers, CRMs, portals, and MI suppliers, conveyancers and their suppliers, lenders, and removal firms. All of these parties need to come together, discussing a solution that considers each of their needs.
While a few desires might need to be sacrificed, only by accepting and adopting change will any of this be possible.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It’s much worse than a pain in the *rse, it’s HIPs v2.0 and a potential threat to the property market. Any purported reduction in timescale will simply be at the expense of delay at the front end in putting the property on the market, which some will be discouraged from doing in the first place, due to the expense of complying with the rules.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Its not that these regs/guidelines are a pain in the *rse per se as I do agree that the more info agents get in advance the better the chances of the agreed sale exchanging. However, its the ambiguity of the regs/guidelines I question.
It appears that it is rather like a game of “Scruples” where the answer generally is “Depends”.
I fear that it wont speed the process up just make it more complicated where the already overworks conveyancers will need to double check everything!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The Guidance is here and it looks like it is here to stay. Many of the firms who are members of the Bold Legal Group are already in conversation with, and even working with their local agents to find the best way forward for both of them and the buyer and seller. There are nearly700 firms in the BLG, if you can’t find a conveyancer near you who will take a proactive and positive approach to this initiative let me know via our website. No catch, no referral fee etc, just an intro if needed.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Our aim at Cooper Adams is collate as much information as possible for our Buyer Information Packs – this can be used in the draft contract and a perfect world would mean no enquiries raised. We collate this before we launch a property to market.
Why do we do this? Transparency, Security and Speed.
We are not lawyers, we do not offer legal advice you still need a lawyer to check the pack and to raise enquiries but, strangely, you get more info about a second-hand £1,000 car than most agents provide on a £500,000 house before committing to buy.
Check out Buyer Information Packs on our website. Gazeal help us on these.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Hi All.
As an agent of nearly 4 decades, and having seen all manner of changes, including the ‘half-baked’ idea that was HIPS, I’m now very concerned at this latest development.
It seems to me that the group who’ve concocted this latest batch of proposals, have absolutely no idea how buyers behave when seeking or purchasing a property – even less so, when there are certain issues which arise during the process, which both a good estate agent and a good conveyancer can often overcome, by working together and communicating with all parties.
The notion of providing all ‘material information’ upfront is inevitably going to reduce the number of prospective viewers, as they may be put off a property, before they even have a chance to visit, and take a view on a range of simple issues, which will potentially scare them off before they even shortlist suitable properties to visit. I suspect some buyers will think, “if the agent is pointing out that issue at this point, it must be serious”, and not even look any further.
It will also potentially remove the ‘speculative seller’, as they may have to employ the services of a surveyor or conveyancer before they begin, and many will be put off by this, not wanting to incur any expense. We can all remember a number of sales in our career, where someone put their property on their market ‘just to see what would happen’, and hey presto, they get a good offer and move on.
It was interesting to see the parties on the RM webinar talking about this, desperately trying to avoid answering any questions, with anything other than “it’s a tricky one and we recommend they contact a surveyor or conveyancer”. Agents who justifiably had concerns, were pitching various scenarios, and very few of the answers and suggestions involved anything other than getting a surveyor or conveyancer involved at the outset – which most vendors will not do.
The idea that this will speed up conveyancing is also unrealistic, as if certain information is having to be provided by third parties, it will inevitably have to be checked and double checked by the solicitors, which would be no different from what is already taking place. Also, as we all know, conveyancers can’t cope now, let alone with the additional workload these proposals will generate.
The concerning thing is that many people buy a property, even with certain issues because they like it, or see its potential after viewing, but I think much of that will be lost by people writing off potentially suitable properties, before they even have a chance to discuss it, following viewings.
The idea to provide so much information up front, and assuming that the buying public can’t make informed decisions, unless they are ‘spoon-fed it’ is ridiculous.
I fear that for example, by mentioning the dreaded ‘A’ word, the less dangerous asbestos in a pre 2000 property, could be offputting before someone either accepts the swirly artex, or decides to re-skim the ceilings, if they like other things about the property.
Likewise, someone may have loved that beautifully presented Victorian terrace, and swallowed the lack of parking, but may not even ‘darken the doorway’, when it’s pointed out there is no parking, and the property has no chance to weave its spell on them otherwise.
Of course, there is certain information a buyer should know before they commit to a purchase, but surely, that’s why they decide to instruct a surveyor, or investigate an issue, and if they wish to do this prior to offer, they can, just like they do in Scotland.
Mentioning easements and covenents etc, at the outset is going to be potentially damaging to any sale, as buyers will become ‘amateur conveyancers’, and read the worst into certain scenarios, with no real knowledge, and which in the normal course of events, would be explained properly by their solicitor.
I’m not sure how all this is going to end, but prepare yourselves for less volume of sales, as this seems an inevitable result, and small agents, without the mega-budgets and oodles of staff, are going to be the cannon fodder here.
The people proposing this, admitted they are trying to get vendors to use bigger and more professional companies, but size is not necessarily a good barometer of quality, when it comes to estate agents! – experience and professionalism is, and this can and does come in all shapes and sizes.
Good luck everyone!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Bald Eagle Not sure why you don’t use your real name but… When people want to move they will move, they won’t stay put due to upfront information. Transparency and clarity is ethically correct, withholding information to suck in a buyer for them to find out four months later and withdraw is madness
30% of sales falling through may be your business model but for me it wastes money.
Imagine a world of a buyer reading the info, making an offer, no enquiries raised and ready to exchange contracts in a month, that is feasible and so much better than the awful system we currently have.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Shaun
Bald Eagle is on the money.
In fact he has made the best comments so far.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
so you enjoy our current broken system?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
False dichotomy Shaun. Your comments seem to miss the point regarding MI. I can’t recall a single example of a seller deliberately concealing information from a buyer because as you have said they will likely find out anyway in due course, so what would be the point?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I can!!
Back when I started we used to use tape measures.
Once an owner offered to help hold the far end of the tape measure for me and I watched as he added 12 inches to the room.
The introduction of sonic then laser tape measures couldn’t have come fast enough for me!!!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I have to agree with Shaun Adams here, the issue is not “Is it right to provide this information” because transparency is vital to making an informed decision with most things in life, the issue is “How is it easily collated and communicated to the buyers pre-viewing” and then “How is it used in the transaction?” to potentially reduce the time taken to reach exchange. Shaun knows the answer because he has used this process for over 3 years and I agree that it is not about how big you are it’s about how good you are. It’s not about the size of your dog in the fight, it’s about the size of the fight in your dog, as the saying goes.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Very well put, particularly the bit about referring to who knows what they are talking about with someone’s industry and implementing a regime that actually creates more issues than they are trying to address. I think they call it ‘Woke agenda’?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Estate Agents advertise properties, they do not sell any property. The conveyancer sells the property.
The woke agenda is out of control, trying to force requirements into an area it should not be involved in. All in the name of consumer protection. You cannot possible cover every eventuality pre contract. The list of variables is endless and has to be considered on a case by case study of what the seller AND the buyer wants/expects.
Buyer beware! That still exists with the new codes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You have an idea that actually is counter productive, unworkable and a hinderance in many situations …. for the consumer (buyer). If you do not understand what those situations are ….. you are not working in estate agency and shouldn’t be making demands on estate agents as you have no idea what you are talking about other than a perfect minute world.
Agents advertise, conveyancers search and advice on legal matters and do the sale. Period. Stop coming up with alternatives based on ‘ideology’ that actually hinder. Basics information by estate agents should not be turned into ‘war and peace’.
Point in question…….. Only in the last decade have we seen a deterioration of time it takes to complete a sale and that is with all the fancy IT and organisations saying they can do it better. It was far quicker with the exact same legal process in the last century.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
In Australia the buyer pack is read before the buyer offers, 2 weeks after the offer is accepted contracts exchange and 2 weeks later completion.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
We are not in Australia. US has a similar system with 28 days, however due to chains … rarely happens. Wouldn’t it be so nice if it was that simple. These requirements will not reduce completions times. Good and bad points to need for idea.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
So if a more comprehensive draft contract pack was ready when a sale is agreed and no further enquiries needed you feel this would not significantly speed up the transaction process?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Did it work when HIP’s were around? No. Solicitors will still want to go over the file 20 times and raise enquiries a day before planned exchange.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Yes it did for us. Our HIP business produced (by working with conveyancers) an exchange ready HIP, well as exchange ready as was possible. Think auction pack. Yes, the buyer’s conveyancer would go through the documents in it, as they would an auction no pack, but fewer enquires were then raised and reaching the point of exchange was quicker. We just need to do something similar now.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
And no chains in Australia….
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
What do they say? – “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Also the older one is, the wiser and more experienced one becomes. Lol.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I spent 25 years as an estate agent. A few observations…
1. Through no fault of their own, most (first-time) buyers don’t really understand very much about properties.
2. Very few people know that buying a “leasehold property” actually means that you bought a piece of paper which give you the right to live in someone else’s property.
3. More viewings does not necessarily lead to a better sale or a higher price.
4. Giving potential viewers too much information to read on their sofa at 9pm is a waste of time – either they will not read it because the market is on fire and they just need to buy a property, or the market is bad and they are just looking for an excuse not to buy a property because they are scared to make a mistake.
5. Not giving buyers enough information leads to fall throughs that waste everyone’s time and money.
Personally, I think that upfront information is essential. I won’t even buy anything for £5 online without reading reviews first and investigating the company/ product at least a little bit. Expecting a potential buyer to gamble £2,000 legal and survey fees just to find out that the property they have fallen in love with is not fit for purpose is insanity.
I think the right thing to do is to make the information available in advance, but not force it upon them until they want to make an offer. At offer stage they must confirm that they have read and understood the information.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Yup
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 with that. At least they haven’t been put off viewing before they begin, and then can digest any pertinent information and obtain any advice, prior to offer.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Noone suggested withholding information from the buyers which is vital to know, such as price, lease details and charges etc, but the Part A information is, in my view sufficient.
Much of the Part B & C information is what conveyancers and solicitors and surveyors are there to investigate, advise on and ultimately discuss with the buyers, at which point they will make an informed decision, having gained all the facts, and not made uninformed decisions based upon a ‘soundbite’, with no detailed information.
We, as agents act for our vendor client, and it is the perogative of a buyer to decide whether to make an offer and proceed to purchase a property, after having had the necessary advice and information from surveyors, conveyancers etc, who are the professionals in their field.
As has been previously mentioned, we agents are a conduit between the vendor and the purchaser, by means of marketing and communication.
We do not sell the property – we merely put the means together to have a potential buyer look at a potential buy. Any property will sell on its merits, and buyers know this and have known this since year dot.
The worry is that uninformed potential buyers will make decisions not to view, or buy, based on minimal negative information, which could otherwise be overcome, by further investigation by said professionals.
Already, we agents do far more than we should, and getting dangerously involved in the legal stuff, which solicitors are trained and paid to do, is potentially going to cause difficulties, and putting obstacles in the way, before you begin, is not really acting in our client’s best interests.
I appreciate that we should not mislead any buyers at all, but marketing and negotiation, liaising and communicating are our strengths, and the structural integrity and detailed knowledge of buildings are the strengths of surveyors, and all legal things relating to the transaction of a property from one party to another, are the supposed strengths of the conveyancers.
Experience in the industry has made us all a bit of a ‘jack of all trades’, but when it comes to things being heavily regulated, this could potentially become a real issue for many agents, and I think Caveat Emptor for buyers is still relevant, even though those making regulatory decisions seem to disagree, and seem intent on burdening estate agents with more and more responsibility and potential ‘banana skins’.
As mentioned before, vendors are also consumers, and they don’t deserve the worry, hassle and cost, which is likely to come their way, and they certainly won’t agree that things they don’t see as an issue to them, will need to be ‘flagged up’ at the start, incurring them in potential cost and certain delay, particularly if they don’t want to lose their dream property they’ve just viewed, and want to secure it.
The people in the RM webinar seemed to suggest vendors should overcome certain issues, before they go to market. How many of us agents could really see Mr & Mrs Average forking out 000’s to remedy certain things in their property, prior to marketing – even if they were able to pursuade a reputable tradesperson to work for them, within 6 months or so. Goodbye dream property, goodbye vendor, goodbye income!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
All well and good and that’s why 30% of sales fall through wasting £1000s per buyer.
Imagine buying a car and instructing a solicitor to find out the number of owners, service history etc and waiting three months then after reading the info pulling out. You still have a sols bill.
Not my idea of a swift, secure and transparent purchase.
Agents need to be trusted and open not concealing information.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Even the HBSG estimates that the fall-through rate is 24%, though the consensus amongst conveyancers seems to be that this figure does not reflect reality. Out of the transactions that do fall through, many of them will have done so at a very early stage, prior to either party incurring significant costs, if any costs at all.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
You can’t use the second hand car analogy.
The car dealers do not advertise the fact it may have 2 bald tyres, a blowing exhaust and a broken taillight. Those things only become apparent at a visit and/or test drive, at which point a buyer has the opportunity to walk away, or negotiate a reduced figure. Also a car purchase can take at worst about 2 hours, once agreed.
The car dealer has not tried to scupper the test drive before it is even requested.
I’ve never suggested anyone withholds important information from a genuinely interested buyer, wishing to proceed – just that I don’t think it’s in anyone’s interest to blow out a potential deal before it begins.
On the subject of fall-throughs – those of us who’ve been in the industry a long time, and know how to deal with issues, people and professionals, invariably have a low fall through rate – mine around 5%, and during the worst of covid when certain agents and conveyancers decided to ‘hibernate and wait until winter was over’, my entire sales pipeline went through to successful completion, when many agents kissed goodbye to over 30% of theirs – it meant doing a lot of other people’s jobs for them, but that’s what you do, when you have a client and buyer who wants the deal done.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Less than 60% of the industry currently comply with sticking the price, tenure, lease details council tax band and EPC on the portals or their own website.
The problem is not that agents are not wanting to comply but only 22% of data feeds currently cope with Part A. Some CRM supplier will not be making their systems comply, will not be making any changes to the data feeds as a deliberate commercial decision to force agents off legacy systems that are difficult to support or no longer supported
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Early days still
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It isn’t early days for Part A the CRM/ data feeders had 18 months prep for Part A, 18 months later about 560 feeds are not compliant.
Someone asked a question at the property data trust framework meeting last week, that’s where those trying to implement the practical changes meet to drive things forward; If they’re not complying with Part A what is the hope of compliance with Parts B&C?
There are 200 ish MI fields to shoehorn into 13 new fields on one of the portals and 700 data feeders who’ve got to get their systems compliant for themselves or their customers.
Agents can compile PDTF compliant data tomorrow on every home they list, their problem will be getting the MI to display on their own websites or the portals.
Ask Alex and Adam
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The issue is policing it, agents all need to be licenced and regular checks made.
I am putting together my own compliance checklist for everything for agents as I cannot find or buy one anywhere.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Isn’t all of this a bit academic now? Surely the discussion should be how can agents comply and how can conveyancers assist?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Spot on
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Sadly, this does seem to be the issue we have all got to deal with.
In many cases, particularly large ‘bucket-shop’ conveyancers, can’t even communicate with their own clients, let alone agents trying to confirm some information.
I can’t see many vendors being very willing to spend a lot of money at the outset, and many, particularly small agents, won’t have the wherewithall to cover the costs either.
The guidance provided is so woolly it’s crazy and even the experts couldn’t give a straight answer on pretty much any of it.
Some of the Part B & C stuff is not too difficult to comply with, but so much is open to public interpretation, which is dangerous, and that even with full compliance, some buyers are inevitably going to be put off even viewing, with no real chance of the property ‘selling itself’ to the viewers.
One quick question – how does one establish the mobile coverage when there are several different network suppliers?. Not all networks offer the same coverage, so you can’t really be accurate, and I think that if someone really liked a property enough, and one network didn’t work as well as another, a buyer may well look to change network supplier anyway.
This really hasn’t been properly thought through, and is so biased towards the buying consumer, that no thought has been given to the selling consumer – ie our vendor clients, who are the ones going to be most affected by this.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Agreed
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Me being the owner of a single branch agency is just sick to the back teeth of the incessant compliance being put upon us. It just doesn’t stop. I have to pay out so much money to be members of this and that. HMRC Anti money laundering, TPO, ISO, Safe Agent, PI insurance, ROPA to come in, Trading Standards, Council fees, it goes on and on. It’s hard to make a living. Now this. How pray tell is an agent supposed to know what is a covenant in a lease or a property which is onerous. Someone else mentioned here that even if you employed a third party to do this, this may not exempt the agent from being sued by the buyer if something crops up down the line. Where are the lines that need to be drawn going to be? I’m just totally f**ked off with the whole thing TBH.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
There are already a number of (alleged) solutions out there. In fact, I had a very promising one demoed to me earlier today that could obtain all of the required information in about an hour. It also provided the possibility of “exempting the agent from being sued by the buyer.”
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I hope these solutions can be provided either FOC or with negligable cost, and have an iron-clad indemnity for the agent.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The value of long tail of data that’s due to the agent who won the instruction should not be ignored or underestimated.
I know a PDTF supplier who is keen to help you comply and to partner with you on that revenue stream
This isn’t a sales pitch for me but for one of the firms I’ve vetted as doing right by agents and because they meet the criteria established by all of those with a commercial interest in providing data provenance you will not get better.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Dave, I hear you.
Why do agents who never do or have held any money or deal with client’s money get roped into dealing with AML?
My AML compliance is so ‘belt and braces’ now, as small agents particularly can’t afford to be even slightly off the pace.
Why are we having to do so much compliance stuff, when these things are and have been dealt with by solicitors, conveyancers and financial advisers? Answer – agents are an easy target and are expendable, particularly if they are a small outfit. Our clients and buyers are even questioning why they have to go through the same or similar processes several times during the same transaction.
I know many good agents who’ve had a complete bellyful of it all and have gone off to pastures new, but that’s not so easy for those of us in the twilights of our careers, so “ours is not to reason why; ours is but to do and die”
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Yeh agree with everything you say. A buyer of ours was asking why we needed to see source of funds. Saying her solicitor has asked for this, so why are we. Had to fight her for 3 days on it, before she gave me what I needed.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
AML isn’t about clients’ cash Eagle it’s about the cleansing of cash through property. People who’ve come by cash that hasn’t been declared as income, savings that exceed inheritance tax thresholds and cash that’s migrated here from abroad. HMRC have lost track of quite a lot of the money they’ve printed, they’re keen to find out where its hiding.
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 fully aware of all that and the reasons behind it. What I can’t really understand is why it is the agent who has to deal with this, as well as the solicitors, financial advisers etc.
Just because inept agencies and extremely leaky systems have made it easy for undesirable characters to launder cash, why estate agents have to bear the brunt of trying to bail out the system, seems pretty unfair.
Anyway, even though we ‘gnash our teeth’, we’ve all fully got behind it and do everything in our power to prove Mrs Irene Jones in her small semi-detached bungalow is no international drug smuggler.
The systems in place for this are now thankfully pretty straightforward, and my hope is that these new requirements will prove to be relatively easily dealt with.
I agree with the person who said that the CRM’s have to ‘step up to the plate’ here too, as we can all do everything we need to, but if it doesn’t get to where it needs to be – ie RM et al, it’s all pretty immaterial, and as he said, the comparitively simple Part A stuff is still not being fully implemented by those that are tasked with adding our data to the portals and websites.
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 very clear there are two opinions on this subject, (a) compliance, issues relating to liability, time and costs associated for a business and (b) What is perceived to be a good idea to save time (or not) and better informed consumer when buying.
What is glaring missing is that the codes actually may not be legally compliant for estate agents to operate?
The information is entering into the realms of a ‘warranty’ at point of advertising and taken agents down the road of beyond their remit within the Estate Agency Act and professional realm. Conveyancing and issues must remain with the lawyers, that is how the law in this country is structured with buying property.
The can of worms in trying to give information from non legally qualified individuals (Estate Agents and staff), that is not advertising as instructed by the vendor, can backfire with all the opposing reasons why they should give the information and it goes wrong. You can bet the buyer and lawyers will have a field day with compensation claims and maybe someone should be asking the insurance industry who provide PI cover for agents, what they think!
Agents will need one massive indemnity clause? Which may not be legal? Far too much information, far too many differing scenarios entering into non-estate agency practices.
“Caveat Emptor” , buyer beware is and has always been there for a very good reason.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Completely agree – there are many different facets to this issue, but the one which is being completely forgotten is that the agents are once again in the firing line.
Even though we’re not the ones really qualified to produce much of this new information, and when ‘joe public’ contact us to request further information on a particular complicated point, they have seen on RM etc, we’re not really going to be able to explain some of this as well as a conveyancer etc, who should be the ones dealing with it anyway, and have always done so.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Agents will disclose this and a buyer decides whether to view or make an offer.
You are overthinking it.
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 not overthinking it.
I wish those who’ve come up with this idea had actually really thought about the wider implications at all.
The potential for prospective viewers or buyers to be ‘scared off’ by tiny snippets of information online, is very real.
Some people may decide not to view something, they previously would have, and what may now deter them, would perhaps not have been a big issue previously, once actually discussed with the agent, their conveyancer or surveyor. The vendors are undoubtedly going to lose out here, and my previous suggestion of ‘flagging up’ possible issues, but promoting a ‘Please contact Agent for more Information’ box, would at least enable that early contact, and a decent agent would then discuss the situation, and if necessary suggest contact with a conveyancer or surveyor.
This way applicants would view, without being put off, and agents would have a chance to do what we do best, which is discuss, assist and promote further communication with the professionals, if necessary or requested.
This barely thought-out legislation will not speed anything up, as conveyancers will still need to pore over everything with a fine-toothed comb, and this will also introduce delays for vendors wishing to market swiftly, and then runs the risk of reducing the numbers of potential actual viewers – which helps no one.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It’s not barely thought out – it has been discussed over a long time from many people in the industry. Any changes will always be frowned on by some.
Everyone has their opinion and they think they are right.
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 not against changes that are in the interest of all parties, but it seems to me that this has been looked at largely from the perspective of the legal profession, and large service-provision companies, and those who are intent on watering down the ‘excitement and surprise’ of home purchase which often involves viewing properties, which turn out not to be suitable, but then leads to concentrating on what’s most important, before the ultimate rush of securing your dream home – Think Location Location Location.
It would be interesting to see just how many prospective vendors, not yet on the market, in various states of urgency, and experienced agents, have actually been consulted during the research for this legislation.
This legislation is seeking to remove some of that uncertainty for some buyers, but after nearly 40 years in the business, the old adage ‘buyers are liars’ has a lot of truth in it, as people often end up buying something they weren’t originally seeking, just because they like it, or it had the ‘right feel’, or potential to be made into their ideal home – and invariably they only went to view, after persuasion by a good estate agent, who could ‘read’ the buyer and said “what have you got to lose, by looking at it?”
Progress is good, but only when it works for all, and no one party is negatively affected – here you have two parties negatively affected ….. the sellers and the agents, who as many posting on this forum, seem to agree, that this has not been considered from a wide enough perspective.
Sadly, many buyers will lose out too, as some will disregard some properties, which could work for them, without viewing, based on some labelling on RM and others, and potentially miss out on the ‘uncertainty and excitement’, which underlines property purchase.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Maybe estate agency of the future isn’t for you anymore? Embrace change, don’t fight it. I’ve been in agency for over 30 years and I love change. Most people that leave comments on forums are negative. Gone are the days of hiding the truth. Upfront information with transparency and honesty is what estate agency needs. Not a traditional slick estate agent telling people what they want to hear.
Things like this will improve the reputation of good agents even more and leave the dinosaurs out in the cold.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I am totally with you Shaun. Change is always difficult for everyone, especially when you don’t create or implement it yourself. I can’t remember the number times things change on my phone, with my emails, MailChimp, SendGrid etc and I curse out loud and struggle for while, but eventually I realise that not only will I understand the changes but I will appreciate them. These MI changes are much larger, and without doubt, the most radical I have seen in my soon to be 50 year conveyancing career. In fact, I almost wish that I was back at the coal face and could meet up with my agent contacts to find the best way forward for them, me and the consumer. Doing that would give me an advantage over my competitors. People shouldn’t look for problems or difficulties, they look for solutions and opportunities. And please don’t believe some of the paranoia that some posters are spreading here, there are no dark forces at work. Rightly or wrongly, and only time will tell, these changes are consumer focused and have been created without wishing to harm any of the stakeholders, be they agents or conveyancers etc. Maybe someone should try to arrange a Zoom, a physical meet, or even a conference which all parties can attend to try to establish the best way forward.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Thank you Rob, I have implemented a plan with my team and we will now be rolling out the new changes, of course we won’t get it perfect first time but all our properties marketed will benefit from the extra info we will need to add. Sellers and buyers will ask questions and yes some sellers won’t like upfront truth. We are an ethical agency who crave faster, more secure transactions. That’s why we already provide Buyer Information Packs for a potential buyer to get the whole picture before they offer, as well as Law Society approved Reservation Agreements on most sales to stop either side pulling out on a whim.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Change can be a good thing, if implemented correctly.
Technology and more reliance on software and IT systems has been the order of the day for a long time, but strangely, the conveyancing process is now actually taking longer than it used to – go figure.
Relying upon tech and portals has meant that agents have now had to swallow exhorbitant costs, in the interests of shareholders, and the ‘personal’ element of this industry is gradually being eroded – which is sad.
Change can be good, but is not always, particularly when it is connected to computer systems, software and similar – look at the catastrophic issues currently being experienced by many, who’ve had failed exchanges and completions, for the last couple of weeks, due to cyber attacks on the mega provider in the background, leaving solicitors unable to access the most important systems to complete the transactions.
Everyone said that reliance on software would make everyone’s life simpler, and in some respects it has, but they said transactions would speed up, but that has just not happened.
The property industry is, and always should be a ‘people business’, with some systems assisting, but watering down the potential contact with the ‘people’, there to explain, encourage, and make the process a pleasure, rather than an online transaction, is wrong, in my opinion.
I respect your opinion, and those coming from the same side of the discussion, but you shouldn’t discount the view of other so called ‘negative posters’, who happen to hold a different opinion, based on decades of experience in this profession, and who are more than a little concerned, at the direction this is all heading, to say nothing of the extra responsibility and costs being put at the doors of the agents – in the name of progress.
Good luck to all, and let’s hope that those ‘steering’ this industry know something we don’t – but I very much doubt it, as they seem to be looking at it from one simple standpoint, and those of us who’ve been doing this a long time, know the property industry is anything but simple.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Not sure how this will work with the new guidance etc:
I have just been to a nearly new bungalow which is built on the site of a former Victorian School and Church. The School has been converted and the church has gone.
This is funny – There is a covenent from way back when, saying “no immoral practices must take place” – is this material information?
Also the deed has a covenent where our property uses a shared accessway, which then leads to a driveway to the converted school. It says the owner of our property must “make a reasonable contribution for the repairs of the accessway when necessary” – what does that mean, as there is no percentage or amount?
Crazy
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
You can only disclose this info. Nothing more.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
As Shakespeare would say:
‘Aye, there’s the rub.’
What some commentators have failed to appreciate, is that NTS has included ‘sweeper’ liabilities in the volumes of guidance notes published by that body, putting liability for getting MI wrong squarely on the shoulders of the agents.
So agents are ‘mandated’ to look three ways at once in terms of potential litigation: the provider of selective legal data; the buyer relying on MI and the seller. This unholy trinity is a mess, created by those with an agenda which is not in the public interest
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Bald Eagle re your reply above on DECEMBER 8, 2023 AT 09:55 (for some reason I cannot reply to that comment). You talk a lot of sense and seem to be very level headed. Well done. As an agent myself for nearly 35 years, its good to hear that not everyone that doesn’t embrace every change and every bit of tech on the planet, is not treated with disdain and think they are dinosaurs.
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 Dave G
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Just a thought – This could have prevented some of the issues concerning the worry that prospective buyers may disregard a property before they even view:
Why not highlight reference to various issues, but have Contact Agent for more information?
That way, we could speak to possible viewers and talk them through any possible concerns they may have, in the same way we already do in many cases.
It would mean there would be a reference to a possible issue of interest, but would promote direct contact, rather than no contact having ever been made, and a viewing blown out before a constructive discussion could be had, discussing various compromises etc.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Requiring upfront information will of course require serious adjustments. As some have stated, those who are on the front foot here are already adapting. If this is well managed, the benefits for everyone; agent, seller, buyer, conveyancer are clear.
The way we’re approaching this shift at Moverly is to be the bridge between agents and conveyancers. It seems hard to consider, with the requirements, that there’s a way of complying to NTS requirements without searches (which are needed for part c). We’re gathering everything required for the agent digitally (meaning they actually don’t have to do anything). We’re then preparing a comprehensive legal pack that can be handed to conveyancers (also saving them hours and days of their time). We’re seeing this as a new area of ‘pre-conveyancing’ and something which can really streamline processes.
What others above have also rightly mentioned is how the information is presented to buyers – clumsily handing over all of the information on, for example, a restriction is unlikely to improve the experience – but what if that restriction can be summarised explained ahead of that? What if legal Enquiries can actually be resolved ahead of time? What if a property can be close to contract ready soon after it’s marketed?
The overall result of all of this shifting will surely be fewer fall throughs and more revenue for everyone.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
But sadly Gemma a bridge too far in terms of increased liabilities for agents especially in the context of negligence claims by angry sellers.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Where the liability sits is an important point. The data itself needs to be provenanced from its source. Is the vendor providing it? HMLR? A search provider? A conveyancer looking at the case? As long as the provenance is captured and stored – the liability won’t shift over to the agent. Upfront information can be collected by those specialising in its collection – and much like many agents get third parties to provide ID and AML services.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register