The recent MORI research (Home Information Pack Area Trials – Research Report, March 2008) is a good example of how badly government has dealt with the roll-out of HIPs.  Here we are in March 2008 and the government is only just releasing information based on the trials of HIPs between November 2006 and April 2007.  Surely – or one might say especially - because of the delay in the start of the legislation, it would have been useful to have these results earlier.  That is what a trial period is for.  The results could then have been disseminated and the product adjusted accordingly.

 

The timing is one issue, but the industry has been in absolute uproar about the way the government has handled the release.  Clearly desperate to say something positive, the government have concentrated on the seller’s perception of the HIP.  ‘Eight out of ten felt that it contained everything they expected’ – well I would hope so, it is after all their house!  Is this really as positive as it gets? Nowhere did the press release concentrate on the buyers.  After all, the legislation was actually brought out for the benefit of the buyer in order to give them up-front information about the property they are looking to buy.  Perhaps they were ignored because the results were too dire?  A more detailed reading of the report, itself, indicates that this may be the case.  Whilst only 29% of sellers who actually sold a property with a HIP felt that it made the process more efficient.  As far as Buyers were concerned,  just 50%  thought the HIP answered their questions about the property.  The report goes on to say that only 20% felt that the HIP sped up the buying process and 41% of buyers thought that a HIP made the buying process more difficult.  Perhaps one of the most telling figures was that 76% said that the HIP had no effect on their decision to buy!

 

The report also claims that few buyers saw the HIP during the trials.  In the release, the blame for this is laid squarely at the agent’s door.  However, when we conducted our own research into HIPs - much more recently than the MORI research - we asked agents how many requests they had received to date to view the content of a HIP by a prospective purchaser.  68% replied that they’ve had no requests at all!  Perhaps more tellingly, only 4% have received more than 10 requests.  As the MORI research shows an 85% awareness of HIPs, I can only surmise that this is due to serious disinterest.

 

Another issue is that the report suggests that ‘the majority of HIPs are being provided in 14 working days’ however, a large number of our members are telling me that it is far longer.  In fact, I had an email yesterday from someone who is still waiting for a HIP after five weeks!  It is difficult to see a use in a report when a house could have been marketed and sold in the time it takes to get a HIP.  This of course is why first day marketing must be maintained.  Indeed, it would be interesting to see if the positive reaction of the sellers dwindled if the, often already lengthy, time taken to sell their home was dragged out by a further two weeks or more by the procedure.

 

As an industry it is important that we engage with government.  However, it is very difficult to expiate such a determined attempt to slur the reputation of agents.  It is extremely negative of the government to bring out this research now - based on trials – when we are all grappling with finding ways of making this legislation work.  And, finally, it is terribly wrong to destroy what little regard is left for HIPs by blaming agents for all the problems of the HIPs roll-out, when the government has bull-dozed HIPs through despite repeated concerns and warnings from the industry.  It looks like we continue to have a fight on our hands.