The Government’s consultation on home buying and selling reform – available to view here – should clearly be of interest to all conveyancing stakeholders, not least because it purports to be focused on fixing long-standing issues in the process.
Much of what is proposed aligns with what the Conveyancing Association has campaigned for over many years, and we clearly welcome that. There is a wish to reduce delay, cut waste and place quality, reliable information at the start of the process.
But it must work in practice. It must work for our member firms who carry the real risk and who carry transactions across the line.
As soon as the consultation was published, we began engaging with our membership. We are already taking views on the detail and on where the gaps sit. We are doing the same on the separate material information consultation – available to view here.
These two pieces of work sit side by side. Many of the questions now under review raise issues that conveyancers see every day. So it is vital that the profession is heard before we submit our final responses. But we also need to ensure the changes provide a holistic improvement for all stakeholders and so we are planning a webinar with estate agent and mortgage adviser representatives to debate the proposals and where there may be gaps.
Below, I want to focus on some of the areas which are being consulted on, and to give some context on what is being proposed, whether we believe this can work, and the CA’s potential position.
First up, the consultation touches on binding offers. On the face of it, this sounds simple. But we all know many buyers at auction still commit without reading what is in front of them.
If we place a stronger duty on buyers to stand by an offer, they must be properly advised before they make it. If that does not happen, we will see more disputes. We will also see more stress placed on Local Authorities who already struggle to deal with matters linked to listed buildings, conservation areas, blocked rights of way, or encroachments. These problems arise because people commit without knowledge or advice on the legal title.
Maybe this is why, in Scotland, an offer is made by a conveyancing lawyer. That gives the buyer a clear view of the title and allows the lawyer to check the information that matters. It means the buyer knows what they can and cannot do with the land. It also gives the seller a better idea of the buyer’s true position. It takes heat out of the process. The Government may find this model offers the best blend of speed and safety.
Upfront information again sits at the heart of reform. The CA has long supported this. But the detail must be right. The current version of the TA6 no longer captures the material information set out by National Trading Standards. They have previously indicated that they will consider a Material Information form.
But Propertymark estate agents use a Property Information Questionnaire as well, so we risk duplication. That is why many in the sector feel the BASPI remains the clearest single source. It captures what matters and avoids overlap and is updated by every sector regularly through the Home Buying and Selling Council.
The consultation also refers to a condition report. Again, the question is who should prepare it? A newer home may only need a light touch. Older stock may need a more informed eye. We must avoid a system where untrained staff are expected to spot signs of damp, structural movement, or the need for specialist checks.
If good information is gathered at the start, it should not be lost. Digital property logbooks could hold title data, search results, documents, and reports. They could follow the life of the property.
That could cut effort, reduce repeat work, and avoid the loss of key documents. But logbooks must use common standards and must link to the UPRN. Without that, we will just create more systems that do not speak to each other.
There is one area missing from the consultation: title complexity. Leasehold reform, estate rent charges and managed freeholds all sit in a confused landscape. Rules are changing. New structures are emerging. Many owners have no idea what they hold or what they owe.
Commonhold could solve much of this. The concerns raised about commonhold in the past no longer stand up to scrutiny. Professional management can be used. The Law Commission has offered a route for mixed-use sites. We should not ignore this option if we want a simpler, more stable form of title.
The CA will continue to gather views from members over the coming weeks. These consultations matter as does our response to them. They will shape the way we work for years.
We want reform that lifts standards and removes waste, not reform that places new duties on firms already under pressure. With careful design, and with the profession at the centre of the process, we can reach a system that is quicker, safer, and far less draining for both firms and their clients.
So please have your say, click on those links and answer the questions which you feel strongly about. You do not need to answer all of the questions but do not lose the chance to have your say and to create a positive home moving process for all.
