Government trying to speed up property buying and selling.

[cramptramp]

I’ve just read this and I think it seems like a good idea in principle. What do other people think?
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2025/10/homebuying-selling-government-reforms/?utm_source=whatsapp&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=news&source=WAORG-NEWS

Just skim reading that I’m unsure if it would work but buying and selling is awful. I do like the thought of estate agents needing more regulation. One out and out lied to my builder who was with us when we were at a second viewing of a house.

Upfront information provided by seller will give buyers more information upfront and avoid nasty surprises however many buyers will still want their own survey or report unless thats a standardised regulated body doing these reports.
Chains are also an issue. With everyone moving at the same time and funds migrating up a chain. A long chain means more issues and the longer the chain the longer the process takes unless someone is willing to break the chain. We should incentive someway to having small or even no chains.

Bridging loans used to be much more of a thing, where you could have a double mortgage for a little time, allowing you to move into your new house before you’d fully sold your old one, meaning everything wasn’t hinged on a single day. It certainly helped out where there was a long chain.

@TheLadyofBower Upfront information provided by seller will give buyers more information upfront and avoid nasty surprises however many buyers will still want their own survey or report unless thats a standardised regulated body doing these reports.

The system is already in place in Scotland. The survey has to be done by an independent surveyor so there is no need for additional surveys.

Typical Labour response. More regulation, information packs, blah, blah, blah. This will just add time and expense to the process rather than speed it up.

Good, about time. Sounds similar to the Scottish system. Took us half the time to buy our flat here than it did to sell our house in England.

There needs to be a deposit system. Once an offer is made and accepted I think surveys and investigations need to be done within six weeks and then a £3-5k non refundable deposit should be put down on both sides. There is too much pulling out after months with no consequence (our buyers pulled out after 4 months, wasted the whole summer for us).

What would happen if you bought a property and found problems not mentioned in the upfront information provided by the seller?

Could you get the money to rectify the problems off the seller and/or the surveyor?

I’d be very happy with a (regulated) survey provided by the seller - the issue currently is that the only person who can sue a surveyor for missing stuff is the person who paid them so something would need to change to give the buyer comeback even if the seller paid.

also surveyors would need to stop saying “I couldn’t assess blah I recommend a specialist blah survey” (drains, electrics, damp, plumbing) otherwise sellers are going to end up paying for all of those too.

If the gvt wanted to speed up home transactions, then do what’s done in Scotland and Australia. When the sellers list the home they provide a pack of all the relevant searches (similar to what is proposed), and an offer is a binding contract once accepted.

that way there’s no gazumping or gazundering. Home buyers have to have mortgage in principle’s already established, so they know what they can offer, and then the home seller chooses their sale and the contract is signed. Job done.

Get rid of the ridiculous back and forth that currently exists. Lawyers already offer indemnity insurance for virtually any unknown quantity in a house transaction for a very modest fee, this would essentially become standard because the contract can’t be exited from once the offer is made.

I’ve never bought a property and the process always sounds complicated. It makes far more sense for one independent survey to be done rather than one buyer doing one, paying loads of money then pulling out because something is beyond their means to fix. Then the next buyer doing the same
survey and finding out the same info as the first buyer and having to pay the same money out for the exact same info as someone already has.

If the surveyor has not picked up on something they should have then you would be able to take legal action against them. This is no different to what happens if the buyer's surveyor doesn't do their job properly now.

A very good move - well done labour. An independent survey makes sense. We all use the same local companies anyway around here. Makes the sellers aware of what’s going on with own property too which helps keeps prices sensible - at the moment sellers don’t know what’s in the reports which is odd when you think about it

I would like to see surveyors less keen to cover their own backs by saying that they can't access things or that you should get the electrics, plumbing, roof etc looked at by an expert.

I also feel that sometimes surveyors for buyers are keen to point out every little defect to justify the high costs of a full survey. Hopefully if the seller is paying they will restrict themselves to only highlighting important issues.

I do think that there should be some sort of non-refundable deposit upon making an offer, especially if the seller is going to be providing a survey, to stop flaky buyers pulling out on a whim. Not 10% but an amount of money that you wouldn't want to lose without very good reason.