From paper to portal

With a government consultation on improving the home-buying process currently underway, Maria Shahid takes a look at the proposed reforms, whether they will streamline the process and the potential pitfalls

The current home-buying process is both frustrating and long-winded – that much all parties involved can agree on. A system that works on the basis of caveat emptor, or ‘buyer beware’, requires a thorough investigation of title, which can only take place once an offer is accepted. Hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds may then be spent on surveys, as well as other title searches and checks, which can ultimately lead to the whole transaction being aborted, if underlying issues are discovered.

Data published by Landmark Information Group shows that the average transaction time, from instruction to completion, was around 160 days in 2024 – an increase of 60% since 2007. Furthermore, around one in three transactions failed.

Research published by Santander in its Fixing the Broken Chain report described the home-buying process as “outdated, inefficient and a barrier to Labour’s commitment to resolving the housing crisis”. This is costing consumers £560m annually in failed transactions, and 28% of people were less likely to move after their last experience.

A smooth homebuying process is central to the government’s ‘Plan for Change’, which promises to deliver 1.5m homes in this Parliament. In October the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) launched a consultation to modernise the conveyancing process and “make it fit for the 21st century”. An efficient process underpins both the housing market and the wider economy, contributing around £100bn a year, and employing 1.2m people.

A key reason for the current inefficiencies in the process, according to the consultation paper, is the lack of access to the right information at the right time, along with a lack of digitalisation. Technology should underpin the whole process, with ‘consistent, trusted data and digital tools’ allowing consumers to complete tasks and track the progress of a transaction ‘in real time’.

Beth Rudolf, director of delivery at the Conveyancing Association, welcomes the report, noting that providing more information upfront will benefit both consumers and the industry as a whole. “These reforms have the ability both to enable conveyancing lawyers to be proactive, and to support estate agents to comply with the law. We would urge the regulation of property agents as a further step, so they know what, and how, to deliver in this area,” she adds.

Victoria Williams, a Chartered Legal Executive at Nexa Law, is broadly in favour of reform: “It’s positive that we are having these conversations, but the proposals must respect legal accuracy and liability boundaries as well. The reason conveyancing takes a long time at the moment is because it is a really complex process and there are many moving parts. When you get it wrong, the costs are high. So, while digitisation may well be the answer, it’s got to be done while respecting that legal accuracy remains of utmost importance.”

Upfront information

A requirement for upfront information is one of the recommendations made in the consultation paper, with sellers working with conveyancers and surveyors to carry out searches as well as a property condition assessment before a property is listed for sale.

In addition to information already required under the material information rules, such as property type, energy performance certificate rating and council tax band, the paper recommends the inclusion of legal and transactional information such as title information, seller ID verification, leasehold terms and building safety data. Standard searches and property information, such as that included in a TA6 form, could also be included.

The paper recognises the concerns of conveyancers, who point to the failed home information packs (HIPs), introduced in the Housing Act 2004. “What we don’t want is HIPs part two,” says Ms Williams. “I think there are a lot of issues in terms of who is going to certify accuracy and where liability is going to land.”

“The paper recognises the concerns of conveyancers, who point to the failed home information packs introduced in the Housing Act 2004” 

HIPs were ultimately abolished in 2010, shortly after the change in government, due to concerns about the onus and cost they placed on sellers to provide upfront information, as well as worries about the reliability of that information, as title searches could be outdated by the time of exchange. The consultation paper addresses these issues by recommending an approach which draws on “data from trusted sources, underpinned by clear standards, and updated as needed”. It also includes proposals to leverage real-time sources and free refreshes from search providers.

The paper cites Optimus Accelerate, a service provided by the Landmark Information Group, which allows property searches to be ordered as soon as lawyers are instructed by both parties, rather than waiting until draft contracts are received, as is currently the case.

Yanthé Richardson, the immediate past CILEX President and partner at national firm Foot Anstey, sits on the Land Registry Advisory Committee and the Digital Property Market Steering Group.

“While I understand the concerns of practitioners about their clients’ ability to provide this information upfront, I would reiterate that this is why we need estate agents to be encouraging consumers or clients to be coming to us earlier in the process, taking advice on what they are putting into the likes of the TA6 form,” she says. “The challenge is getting consumers to be willing to pay for that advice before they are even on the market.”

The government has simultaneously published a Material Information in Property Listings consultation paper, which seeks views on how government guidance can support estate agents with their legal responsibility to provide buyers with material information during a property purchase.

Digital property logbooks

The MHCLG consultation paper advocates for the introduction of digital property logbooks, which it says will enable homeowners to take control of their data and reduce “transaction risk by verifying its provenance”. Property professionals will also be able to proceed with transactions more quickly, and give consumers access to digital property information so that “they have what they need before offer”.

The paper acknowledges the security concerns raised by numerous practitioners about the sensitive information held in these packs and the need for “robust” security and data privacy standards.

The paper acknowledges the security concerns raised by numerous practitioners

While many practitioners remain concerned about where liability falls should information held in logbooks not be accurate or up-to-date, Ms Richardson believes their introduction is to be welcomed: “It feels to me like we are constantly looking at the negatives, and we don’t look at the opportunities. I am not sure that a digital logbook is that different to what we currently do. Do we have any less liability when we give our clients information and documents post-completion to keep hold of for when they sell one day?”

The government is seeking views on whether it should legislate to require their use and will in the meantime work to encourage adoption through self-regulation.

To support consistency and confidence, the government is exploring whether a standardised core data set for all digital packs would need to be mandated, linked to their Unique Property Reference Number and Land Registry records.

Conditional contracts

Gazumping or gazundering remains prevalent in house buying, with 37% of buyers saying they have experienced it at least once over the last decade. While either party is free to withdraw from a sale or purchase before offer and acceptance and the exchange of contracts, it can leave the other party dealing with significant costs.

The consultation paper explores the introduction of conditional contracts to make transactions binding at an early stage, with withdrawal after this incurring a financial penalty, such as the loss of the buyer’s deposit.

Increasing consumer education and transparency

Buying or selling a home can often be the first time that consumers deal with a conveyancer, and the paper acknowledges that the amount of information presented to them can be overwhelming. Similarly, assessing whether a particular conveyancer or estate agent meets their needs can be difficult, and the report recommends “exploring options for publishing transparent information on estate agents and conveyancers”, indicating their professional expertise, performance and process (such as whether they support digital practice).

While it proposes the introduction of a “charter that sets out the simple steps property professionals and consumers can follow”, some practitioners are questioning its value.

“The Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) is our charter at the moment,” says Ms Richardson. “How binding would a charter be, and how would it differ from the CQS? While the CQS is not mandatory, the vast majority of lenders require you to be CQS accredited to be on their panel.”

Streamlining transactions

According to the consultation paper, the home-moving process has expanded significantly and is now taking 60% longer than in 2007, due to the growing complexity of regulation such as those relating to anti-money laundering (AML).

In response, it recommends “streamlining AML checks so that consumers do not face repeated checks during a single transaction”. Conveyancers like the sound of this, but have some reservations.

“We do feel the burden of getting AML checks right,” says Ms Williams. “The amount of time it takes to get AML checks and proof of source of funds right has increased, and I would like to see a different process in place. So, while I am in support of that, knowing who holds liability when things go wrong needs to be addressed.”

Ambitious targets

The government envisages that the proposals will not only speed up the home-buying process but directly save consumers around £255m per year. On individual transactions first-time buyers could expect to save around £710, while home movers could save £400.

At the same time, a more competitive and efficient system could lead to conveyancing costs also reducing by about 20%, with the average of around £1,540 for buyers and £930 for sellers expected to fall by £340 and £250 respectively.

“A more competitive and efficient system could lead to conveyancing costs reducing by about 20%” 

Conveyancing fees have been squeezed for many years, and a drop would fail to recognise the importance of the work, say practitioners. “Historically conveyancing fees have been too low, considering the amount of risk that we are currently subjected to, and the huge cost to us individually if we get things wrong,” says Ms Williams. “I’ve been striving to improve standards in my own practice, so I am not tempted to take part in that race to the bottom.”

“I feel strongly that, regardless of any efficiencies that we see, we should not be reducing our fees, because they have not been high enough for a long time,” agrees Ms Richardson. “Where we are applying greater efficiencies and using more technology, that should be allowing us the time to do the actual advisory piece, that our clients are paying us for. If there are ways to streamline the stuff that actually goes on around the legal advice, such as when we are opening a file, then that gives us a chance to give better legal advice, and actually do our jobs better.”

The consultation period closes on 29 December this year. “It just feels very rushed, which is a real shame,” says Ms Williams. “Home-buying is important. It’s the backbone of social growth, and I don’t think the paper recognises the gravity of this. There are very few stakeholders who don’t want to see the process sped up. Everyone can see the benefits of it, but the question is can we do so while maintaining the high standards that we currently have. We can’t just cut corners with this exercise.”

The reality is there are too many moving parts to the current system, which involves multiple professionals as well as lenders and local authorities, for any reforms to happen imminently. “Anyone moving in the next three years or so is unlikely to see their immediate impact,” acknowledges Ms Richardson. “If this is not mandated, I can see it taking some time for these changes to filter through.”