Transactions taking nearly a third longer than pre-pandemic, study finds

The process of buying a home from instruction through to completion took nearly a third (28%) longer in 2022 than it did in 2019 prior to the pandemic, new data has revealed.

In a report authored by Landmark Information Group, Why are property transactions taking so long?, it’s revealed that the average time from instruction to completion on a purchase in 2022 was 133 days.

In 2019, this figure stood at just 104 days. Even more striking is that the process took just 75 days on average in 2007, which has since increased by 77%.

Similar figures are presented regarding the timeline between instruction and exchange: the 119-day wait in 2022 was 80% higher than the 66 days it took in 2007 and 29% higher than the time taken in 2019.

The picture with regards to sales reflects that of purchases, with the time between instruction and completion rising by 69% between 2007 and 2022.

Why is this the case?

It is unsurprising that, looking at Landmark’s data, enquiries seem to be a driving force behind this trend. In 2007, the average time between enquiries being raised and replies to those enquiries being received was 26 days. Now, this process takes 56 days – or nearly half of the total transaction timeline.

This is a 115% increase since 2007 and a 40% increase in just three years between 2019 and 2022.

It is also taking longer for enquiries to be raised in the first place, taking 35 days on average in 2022 compared with 18 days in 2007.

Mortgage offers are also taking longer to be received, increasing by 74% and 38% since 2007 and 2019 respectively, now sitting at 66 days. Mike Holden, Divisional Director, Landmark Information Group puts this down to the volume of sales when the market re-opened post-pandemic, which saw a high load on surveyors and subsequent delays. He does, however, suggest that, with sales slowing down, “there is [now] less bread and butter work for surveyors to do so they can complete valuations more quickly”.

Searches, on the other hand, have become quicker during this period, taking an average of 18 days to come back in 2007 compared with just 15 days in 2022.

The picture painted by the data is endorsed by Rob Gurney, Managing Director, Ochresoft, who is keen to dispel the “myth” that searches are what’s holding up the conveyancing process. Rather, he says, the back-and-forth enquiries process is to blame.

Gurney also says consumer behaviour has changed in a “click and buy” society, leading to more intense interaction between lawyers and consumers and a rise in complaints. “But, is this the full picture for lawyers?” asked Gurney:

“We know that a conveyancer’s remit is constantly shifting. As society evolves then risk levels need to adapt. For example, we hadn’t heard of Japanese knotweed 20 years ago – which is now a common line of questioning. How about solar panels? How about the – dare I say it – Building Safety Act?

When we add together this plethora of micro examples, they add up to a doubling of a conveyancer’s workload over the past 20 years. All the while, conveyancing fees certainly haven’t followed suit.

But it doesn’t stop there: the legal process itself has also changed. Lending requirements are constantly shifting with each player having their own unique framework. Since a conveyancer’s duty is to the lender too, they must also walk a careful path to protecting their panel status.”

On potential solutions, Gurney continued:

“A relatively straight forward change has the biggest potential for gains: the seller’s lawyer should be involved at the point of listing. Crucially, this means they’ll have a reasonable amount of time to complete the contract pack and remove the lengthy enquires process.

It’s worth noting that National Trading Standards (NTS) is changing the way properties are listed for sale. Part C of NTS’s Material Information roll-out will see the agent providing potential purchasers with details of any encumbrances on the property. At this stage, it’s likely that conveyancers will have to be instructed at the point of listing.”