Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
It is different this time

Most Brits Say Hips Are A Good Idea

Recommended Posts

Shocking! She won't be a happy bunny after reading this :lol:

http://www.aboutproperty.co.uk/news/buying...#036;476748.htm

Most Britons believe home information packs (Hips) are a good idea, research out today finds.

As much as 63 per cent of people believe the packs should have been introduced, a study from FindaProperty.com shows.

The introduction of the packs, which became compulsory those selling a homes with four or more bedrooms from today, was largely seen as botched job by the government. However, 85 per cent of Britons say the introduction of Hips could have been better managed.

Almost half of those surveyed said they thought the packs should be free, and a quarter wanted to see them cost less than £200. In terms of what they would most like to see added to Hips, eight in ten Britons said the council tax band should be included, and seven in ten opted for flood risk information being in Hips.

There was widespread awareness of energy performance certificates being included in the packs, 71 per cent rightly saying that Hips included home energy ratings.

However, the home condition report, which was ditched from the compulsory contents of the pack over a year ago, was wrongly thought to be in the packs by 59 per cent of Brits.

Mike Ockenden, director general of the Association of Home Information Pack Providers (Ahipp), said: "Hips are finally here and should be welcomed by consumers, environmentalists and industry alike."

He added: "The key message that appears to have been lost over the last year is that Hips are a good thing . . . they are here to help improve the house buying and selling process for all involved – bringing vital information to the front of the process that, in the long term, will save consumers money as well as aiding a faster and more transparent process."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Properly implemented they would be a superb idea. Imagine having a mortgage approval and being able to view houses with an estate agent knowing you could buy the house, put a deposit down and move in within a couple of weeks with all the searches and surveys already having been done.

Not much in that for the lawyers and the rest of the scum who make big fat profits from the drawn ouyt shambles of a process we have currently though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ockenden was blustering away on Radio Five yesterday in response to a report by the Torygraph's building expert, who had a HIP done on his house. The inspector failed to spot almost all the improvements and energy saving measures he'd installed, and wrote a final report saying that the house would cost almost three times as much to heat as it actually does. The interviewer pressed Ockenden quite hard about the apparent unreliability of the inspection process, but the latter doggedly refused to address the issue, repeatedly insisting that 'HIP inspectors are the most thoroughly trained tradespeople who will ever enter your home', that he 'can't discuss individual cases' and that there was a 'robust' appeals procedure (the Telegraph journalist was told that there was none).

It'll be interesting to see if the content of the HIPs gains a reputation for being not worth the paper it's written on, and how the market reacts in that scenario.

Edited by The Ayatollah Bugheri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ockenden was blustering away on Radio Five yesterday in response to a report by the Torygraph's building expert, who had a HIP done on his house. The inspector failed to spot almost all the improvements and energy saving measures he'd installed, and wrote a final report saying that the house would cost almost three times as much to heat as it actually does. The interviewer pressed Ockenden quite hard about the apparent unreliability of the inspection process, but the latter doggedly refused to address the issue, repeatedly insisting that 'HIP inspectors are the most thoroughly trained tradespeople who will ever enter your home', that he 'can't discuss individual cases' and that there was a 'robust' appeals procedure (the Telegraph journalist was told that there was none).

It'll be interesting to see if the content of the HIPs gains a reputation for being not worth the paper it's written on, and how the market reacts in that scenario.

This is the crux of it, they are useless muppets who have taken a short training course in box ticking. Buying a house is a business transaction between two consenting adults who should be operating under the principle of caveat emptor.

Why the hell do they need a state-sponsored busybody sticking their nose into the deal? Especially as they will be clueless about anything relevant. If I want to know about the structural integrity of a building I'll ask a qualified surveyor, thanks.

If you wanted to improve the health of the nation would you insist that everyone has a 30 minute consultation with a "health assessor" who had a few weeks training?

Isn't there some underlying reason for HIPs, something about Euro legislation that demands every property be assessed for energy efficiency? Isn't this HIPs nonsense not just a subterfuge to get it into place without actually mentioning the real reason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't there some underlying reason for HIPs, something about Euro legislation that demands every property be assessed for energy efficiency? Isn't this HIPs nonsense not just a subterfuge to get it into place without actually mentioning the real reason

Something like that. It;s a good way to get state sponsored busybodies into peoples houses too. History says that this kind of thing grows and grows, before you know it they'll be snooping through your drawers and reporting any deviant underwear or pornogrpahy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you wanted to improve the health of the nation would you insist that everyone has a 30 minute consultation with a "health assessor" who had a few weeks training?

Well, when 3 simple pieces of advice would transform the health of millions, why not?

(Don't smoke, eat less crud, run around occassionally you fat farker)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HIPS, as originally constituted were a good idea. Last year I lost well over a grand, through mortgage fees and surveys, on a house where it finally turned out:

1) The deeds had been lost (and to make matters worse it was on a private road, so access rights weren't clear).

2) It turned out on survey that there had been previous major subsidence,

3) The insurance was iffy because the building society had arranged the insurance, and they had lost all records. So it wasn't clear anyone would take it on (what with the vague record of subsidence)

Under the original HIP proposal all of that would have been clear up-front, I would have run a mile before spending a penny.

The new version would still help a little in this case, as the dodgy deeds would have been apparent.

Interestingly the owner took it off the market after we pulled out from buying it, but it has just gone back on, in time to avoid the HIP deadline! I suspect he hasn't told the (new) agent of all the skeletons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Properly implemented they would be a superb idea. Imagine having a mortgage approval and being able to view houses with an estate agent knowing you could buy the house, put a deposit down and move in within a couple of weeks with all the searches and surveys already having been done.

Not much in that for the lawyers and the rest of the scum who make big fat profits from the drawn ouyt shambles of a process we have currently though.

Imagine putting on offer on a house and finding the HIP is four months old. Are the searches worth the paper they are written on?

No surveys are done. Why do you say with 'surveys already having been done'. Pure nonsense. Lenders told the government they would do their own valuations thanks. And there is no survey of the property in a HIP and, if there were, it would be being down by someone without the necessary qualifications and experience.

The concept is fundamentally flawed.

And most people don't need someone who has been on a two bob correspondence course to tick a box to point out the property is not double glazed and would be more energy efficient if it were.

A load of pure balls designed to comply with diktats from Brussels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HIPS, as originally constituted were a good idea. Last year I lost well over a grand, through mortgage fees and surveys, on a house where it finally turned out:

1) The deeds had been lost (and to make matters worse it was on a private road, so access rights weren't clear).

2) It turned out on survey that there had been previous major subsidence,

3) The insurance was iffy because the building society had arranged the insurance, and they had lost all records. So it wasn't clear anyone would take it on (what with the vague record of subsidence)

Under the original HIP proposal all of that would have been clear up-front, I would have run a mile before spending a penny.

The new version would still help a little in this case, as the dodgy deeds would have been apparent.

Interestingly the owner took it off the market after we pulled out from buying it, but it has just gone back on, in time to avoid the HIP deadline! I suspect he hasn't told the (new) agent of all the skeletons.

You should sue the vendor. You are required to disclose what has happened to the property on the Property Information Form which is part of the standard contract approved by the law society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the crux of it, they are useless muppets who have taken a short training course in box ticking. Buying a house is a business transaction between two consenting adults who should be operating under the principle of caveat emptor.

The biggest muppet are you as you do not know what you are talking about.

The "short course" is a year long course and the ABBE exam is quite thorough and difficult.

Do not talk about things you have no knowledge of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the crux of it, they are useless muppets who have taken a short training course in box ticking. Buying a house is a business transaction between two consenting adults who should be operating under the principle of caveat emptor.

I have seen this caveat emptor arguement run by a variety of people on various occassions.

I find it a surprising arguement because if people buy a car that turns out to be dangerous or deficient they demand that it be replaced or complain to Trading Standards. If they buy a financial service that turns out not to produce the returns promised thay complain to the FSA, if they face bank charges that are unfair thay complain to the Banking Ombudsman, if they are treated unfairly by an insurance company they complain to the Insurance Ombudsman. Yet when it comes to selling their own house they expect to NOT have to reveal or remedy any defects. It appears to me that HIPs has upset a lot of people only because thay are being forced to comply with rules and standards that they themselves would expect others to comply with if they were buyng a product or sevice from them. Now the boot is on the other foot and people do not like it.

I believe HIPs could be a good thing and that eventually they will be accepted by everyone and that indeed they will be eventually strengthened by requiring mandatory Home Inspection Reports. However, I do think that the HIPs should be put together by fully qualified surveyors though and I also think that Estate Agents who are selling a home should be required to either do the HIP or employ someone to do it for them and then be legally liable for any information in it that turns out to be faulty. Surely, that would put EAs on a par with other professionals and they really would be providing a service that really did deserve the fee thay charge.

HIPs could be good for professional EAs because it would drive cowboys out of the industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The biggest muppet are you as you do not know what you are talking about.

The "short course" is a year long course and the ABBE exam is quite thorough and difficult.

Do not talk about things you have no knowledge of.

I see. I have a question: how difficult and long is the course that Estate Agents have to do (and pass I presume)? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine putting on offer on a house and finding the HIP is four months old. Are the searches worth the paper they are written on?

I guess sellers will have to realistically price their property in order to sell quicker. Gone the days where overpriced properties can sit on the market for months without any cost. You want to sell it price it right or keep renewing the HIP and in the end if it is not sold & taken off the market it could cost the seller a couple thousands of pounds.

I believe that is the main reason why VI fight against HIPS. They want overpriced houses to sit on the market forever until it is sold or not without any restriction & cost to the seller but they won't have and eat their cake anymore

http://www.hip-inspection.co.uk/who-needs.htm

How long will the Home Information Pack be valid?

The searches must be no more than 3 months old at the time the Home Information Pack is created. If the property is withdrawn from the market for more than 28 days a new HIP must be created. A Home Condition Report is valid for 6 months after it has been undertaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine putting on offer on a house and finding the HIP is four months old. Are the searches worth the paper they are written on?

No surveys are done. Why do you say with 'surveys already having been done'. Pure nonsense. Lenders told the government they would do their own valuations thanks. And there is no survey of the property in a HIP and, if there were, it would be being down by someone without the necessary qualifications and experience.

The concept is fundamentally flawed.

And most people don't need someone who has been on a two bob correspondence course to tick a box to point out the property is not double glazed and would be more energy efficient if it were.

A load of pure balls designed to comply with diktats from Brussels.

Hold on a second, I did include the caveat 'properly implemented'.

Imagine putting an offer in to buy a car THEN getting it checked over for defects, or opening a bank account before finding out the rate of ineterest it offers, or getting a builder in before making some attempt to check their references.

Only a numpty would do this. So why is it we are expected to almost fully commit to buying a house prior to having it checked over thoroughly?

Like I said, implemented properly they're a good idea. Seller is responsible for all searches and surveys prior to the house going on the market and said paperwork is valid for 12 months (why only 3 :unsure: ). No paperwork = illegal to be advertised for sale.

I walk into an EA, pick out a house I like, see the paperwork, check out the house, put a deposit down and move in. Bish bash bosh. No messing, no gazumping, no bull5shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You should sue the vendor. You are required to disclose what has happened to the property on the Property Information Form which is part of the standard contract approved by the law society.

But you only have to provide this before exchanging contracts, not before marketing the property. There's plenty of opportunity for the buyer to spend money before the property information form has been filled in. Perhaps a wise buyer would insist on seeing this paperwork before proceeding to survey...

There are two sides to the coin:

- buyers shouldn't have to spend money on assessing/trying to buy a house that turns out to have hidden fatal flaws

- sellers shouldn't have to spend money on having tick boxes checked to say (as a previous poster pointed out) that there is no double glazing

Sadly, HIPs as it stands fails to address either of these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have seen this caveat emptor arguement run by a variety of people on various occassions.

I find it a surprising arguement because if people buy a car that turns out to be dangerous or deficient they demand that it be replaced or complain to Trading Standards. If they buy a financial service that turns out not to produce the returns promised thay complain to the FSA, if they face bank charges that are unfair thay complain to the Banking Ombudsman, if they are treated unfairly by an insurance company they complain to the Insurance Ombudsman.

The sale of a house is generally an agreement between two private individuals. If I sell you my second hand car can you report me to trading standards if you aren't happy? I don't think so.

What caveat emptor implies is that it is your responsibility to make sure you know what you are buying. That is why you employ a qualified lawyer to look after the legal side (and you can sue him if he messes up), that is why you employ a qualified surveyor to assess the value and/or structural integrity of the house.

Why on earth do you need somebody who knows bugger all walking around the place ticking boxes and potentially devaluing your property due to their ill informed opinions on matters which are rather subjective? Why do you want Yvette Cooper/Ruth Kelly/whoever holding your hand through this process? Would you not prefer to employ a professional for his opinion and enjoy the benefits of his training and professional indemnity insurance?

This is just another means of gathering information on the populace for means yet to be disclosed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have seen this caveat emptor arguement run by a variety of people on various occassions.

I find it a surprising arguement because if people buy a car that turns out to be dangerous or deficient they demand that it be replaced or complain to Trading Standards...

Not if they buy the car from a private individual. Even professional traders can mark goods "sold as seen" meaning caveat emptor.

If I am certain I want to buy my neighbours house (or car for that matter), and he is certain he wishes to sell it to me, why should the state get involved apart from collecting tax and registering the transfer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I am certain I want to buy my neighbours house (or car for that matter), and he is certain he wishes to sell it to me, why should the state get involved apart from collecting tax and registering the transfer?

Because if anything goes wrong, who do you (i.e. everyone) normally run to for help at their first point of call? Yep, the state. (i.e. help paid for by taxes, i.e. taxes paid for by the people).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you only have to provide this before exchanging contracts, not before marketing the property. There's plenty of opportunity for the buyer to spend money before the property information form has been filled in. Perhaps a wise buyer would insist on seeing this paperwork before proceeding to survey...

I never waste money on any sort of survey - valuation or otherwise - until I have seen the Information Pack from the vendor / vendor's solicitor.

After I have checked the title, looked at restrictive covenants, checked out boundaries, disputes, rights of way, wayleaves, checked the searches etc etc - only then will I commission a survey.

If the searches are more than 6 weeks old I would get my solicitor to do them again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see. I have a question: how difficult and long is the course that Estate Agents have to do (and pass I presume)? :unsure:

I have no idea.

But the ABBe Home inspector exam is not easy. Idiots never pass it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 355 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.