Hips disregarded by purchasers
by Gill Montia
An Ipsos Mori survey on the impact of Home Information Packs (Hips) has come up with disappointing results.
According to the research, which was based 3,118 Hips, 60% of purchasers were never shown a Hip on a property they were interested in buying.
In addition, around one-third of potential buyers believed the property they were viewing did not have a Hip when, in fact, it did.
Hips have been strongly opposed by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and National Association of Estate because the packs do not include a property survey, which would contain the information potential purchasers most wish to see.
The introduction of the packs also led to a skewing of the property market, as vendors rushed to put their homes up for sale ahead of Hip deadlines.
At the same time it permanently removed large numbers of speculative vendors from estate agents’ books.
In addition, legal issues have arisen concerning the validity of local searches undertaken by Hip providers.
The survey found that only 37% of buyers agreed that Hips had made the purchasing process more efficient, while 41% disagreed.
The report concluded: “Given few buyers saw their Hip during the trials, it is perhaps not surprising the Hip had very little impact on their decision to purchase.”
Around 370,000 Hips, costing between £300 and £350 on average, have been provided since August of last year.
Discuss this in the Finance Markets forums
Story link: Hips disregarded by purchasers
Add to Bookmarks:
Related financial stories to: Hips disregarded by purchasers
- Hips stumble on local searches
- Homesellers and estate agents dodge HIPs
- Hips providers petition for extension
- Hips extended to three-bedroom homes
- Hips valid for just six months
- Hips remain unpopular as full roll-out arrives
- Carsberg Review recommends optional HIPs
- Home owners demand deferred payment Hips
- House purchasers seek parking at a price
- Hips evasion strategies unlikely to profit vendors
Previous: « HomeBuy scheme flops on low numbers
Next: Thirtysomethings face future of poverty »
Visited 1247 times, 2 so far today