Transaction time

The key proposals outlined in the government’s Home buying and selling reform consultation, launched in October, aim to reduce transaction fall-through rates, cut costs and save time, with a goal of reducing the typical transaction timeline by four weeks. They include: 

• requiring sellers and their agents to provide crucial property information (such as tenure, condition and leasehold details) at the point of listing, thereby reducing late-stage surprises and delays
• introducing earlier binding contracts to reduce ‘gazumping’, ‘gazundering’ and transaction fall-throughs
• expanding the use of digital tools like property logbooks, online ID verification and data-sharing platforms to stop duplication and save time, and 
• establishing new qualifications and a code of practice for estate, letting and managing agents, to ensure consistent minimum standards and improve consumer confidence.

Benefits and drawbacks

If the Labour government attempts to implement change, this will likely end up as a colossal failure and be scrapped before or shortly after a new party takes over, says Nick Kalms, founder of Probate.Auction. “That said, I do support the idea of sellers having key information, such as searches, ready and available to be sent directly to prospective buyers. This could help speed up the process and provide greater transparency,” he adds.

The proposals are ambitious and long overdue, says Shibli Begum, a senior associate solicitor in the residential real estate team at Birketts LLP. “As someone who has been a residential conveyancer for many years, I welcome the government’s ambition to modernise the system and, in the process, improve transparency and efficiency. Prioritising upfront information, standardisation and digitalisation tackles long-standing inefficiencies in the current system.” 

Nevertheless, she admits that past initiatives, such as home information packs (HIPs), demonstrate that well-intentioned reforms can falter without practitioner buy-in, legal clarity or user-centric design. “If delivered effectively, however, these changes could shorten transaction times, reduce fall-through rates and ease client frustrations around wasted money where ultimately a transaction fails because lawyers have discovered a problem too late in a transaction,” she concludes. 

Nathan Khider, owner of Nathan K Real Estate, is concerned about the accuracy of the information provided. “They tried to bring out HIPs in 2007, which got suspended in May 2010 and abolished in January 2012. The coalition government suspended them to reduce red tape and boost the housing market. Ultimately, it didn’t work because the way the system was set up meant it couldn’t work. Everyone wanted information from everywhere. You’ve got to have searches and then independent reviews on surveys, which takes a lot of time.” 

Liz Ramsden, a residential property lawyer at Knights, also fears that the proposals risk repeating the issues that came from the scrapped HIPs system. She urges the government to think carefully to avoid making the same mistakes. “Back then, many sellers paid hundreds of pounds to compile legal searches and documents upfront, only for the information to go out of date before a sale was agreed, forcing them to pay again. The new proposals risk repeating those mistakes. To avoid another failed rollout, the government must learn from the last attempt and ensure information packs are digital, low-cost and reusable, with clear validity periods to stop data expiring.”

The idea of binding contracts is particularly concerning, she continues. “What would happen if someone were to lose their job or find issues following the surveys and checks on the property? The system needs reform, but it has to protect consumers as much as it promotes efficiency. The government needs to make legal advice mandatory before any contract becomes binding. Without these safeguards, the reforms could once again burden sellers and confuse buyers rather than speeding up the process.” 

Binding contracts are an area that divides opinion, notes Angela Hesketh, head of UK market development at PEXA. “However, if the industry can provide trusted, comprehensive data upfront, allowing buyers to make informed decisions with their conveyancer’s guidance, then the concept becomes far less radical. In Australia, where PEXA originates, transactions typically complete in four to six weeks, with minimal fall-through rates thanks to trust, standardisation and robust digital infrastructure.”

The proposal for a code of conduct for estate agents is also contentious, she says. “For those already operating to high standards, it would level the playing field. For others, it will invite greater scrutiny – an overdue development given that every other stakeholder in the process works within a regulated framework.”

Winners and losers

As with any major reform, there will be both winners and losers, Hesketh observes. “Those who have thrived on inefficiency may resist change, but for most professionals and certainly for consumers, the benefits will outweigh the disruption. Lenders will gain clearer visibility and liquidity. Conveyancers will be able to work from verified, consistent data and reduce duplication. Estate agents could achieve faster turnover and brokers may gain access to a broader range of products. Most importantly, clients will move from a process defined by stress and uncertainty to one built on transparency, security and confidence.”

Creating a purely digitised system could alienate older clients and those who are not as computer literate, says Delicia Campbell, an associate in the residential property team at Paris Smith. “Substantial investment from firms in digital systems is also likely to be required, which may price out the experienced sole practitioner and smaller firms, decreasing client options.”

While these reforms seek to make the process faster and more streamlined, this will require time and resources from industry professionals, warns Perdip Kaur Bhachu, legal director in the residential property team at Blacks Solicitors. “Of these changes, upfront information and standardisation included in the initiative are proving to be the most contentious. Both require significant changes from existing practices, particularly around who supplies and verifies data, and how consistent that process can be made across firms and local authorities.”

Buyers should benefit from faster transactions and greater transparency, but as with any change, many will be put off and will remain in their homes, when otherwise they may have ‘tested the market’, says Jonathan Rolande, founder of House Buy Fast. “Estate agents will enjoy the reduction in fall-throughs, but stock to sell will inevitably reduce, at least until the rules become normalised.”

Khider, meanwhile, is worried about the seller’s upfront costs. “I anticipate there will be larger fees with more upfront costs from the likes of solicitors, as they’ll have to do more work. I’m also worried about inaccuracies from surveyors, who may be inexperienced and provide wrong information, which may cause more delays.”

Forward-looking conveyancers who are already using digital tools and adopting streamlined processes stand to gain a competitive advantage, but buyers will undoubtedly also benefit from upfront information with reduced surprises, says Begum. “They will be more secure in the knowledge that the offer being made and accepted is reflective of the true value of the property, taking into account all known matters, including those relating to repair and condition of the property.”

Sellers with limited means, those whose plans are not finalised or those who own complex or non-standard properties may face challenges, however, especially if issues are flagged prematurely in the process when parties might be far more inclined to just walk away rather than seek to resolve any issues, she says. “Smaller firms with limited digital infrastructure could also struggle to keep pace. Ultimately, the success of the initiative hinges on comprehensive government support across the entire supply chain. The biggest winners are likely to be those who embrace change. The biggest losers may be those who resist it.”

Implementation sticking points

The implementation challenges involved are significant, explains Mish Liyanage, chief executive officer of Mistoria Estate Agents. “Data standardisation remains a barrier without universal frameworks, training requirements are substantial and building consumer trust around early data sharing will take time. Any increase in shared data also brings GDPR risks that must be managed carefully.”

Achieving standardisation between authorities and firms will be a significant hurdle, agrees Kaur Bhachu. “However, alongside regulatory clarity and training, both are long-overdue steps required to modernise and improve the efficiency of this process.” 

Availability of information could cause problems, as many of the delays in the current system are down to turnaround times for local authorities and management companies, says Campbell. “If it takes four to six weeks to obtain information, are clients going to wait this long before marketing or are incomplete packs going to become the norm? Having the information available to a buyer before an offer is made is only useful if it is presented in a way that can be understood and digested.” 

A ‘one-size-fits-all’ information pack will also not work unless lenders align their requirements. “In addition, there is the issue of whether the buyer can rely on, and subsequently sue (if required), the providers of any searches and surveys purchased by a seller and provided as part of the information pack,” she continues. “The proposals also do not address the issues with chains – and in particular, incomplete chains. It doesn’t matter how much information is available upfront if the seller has not found somewhere to move to.”

Technology readiness also remains a key concern, says Begum. “Many local authorities and practitioners still rely on legacy systems. Reaching consensus on data standards and liability frameworks will be complex. If the government imposes substantial process changes without adequate funding or a phased rollout, adoption is likely to be patchy. The industry will also need clear guidance on how responsibilities are divided among sellers, agents and legal professionals to avoid confusion and duplication.”

Implementation will be the real test, in Hesketh’s opinion. “Legacy systems, uneven digital readiness and lack of interoperability remain significant barriers. Reform must unite the sector through shared data standards and trusted frameworks, not add further fragmentation or complexity. An open property data trust framework, inspired by open banking, could be transformational, creating a common language across the ecosystem while preserving privacy and security. But progress will require sustained collaboration and pragmatism from all parties.”

Preparing for change

Property professionals should stay informed about potential legislative changes and begin reviewing internal processes to ensure they can adapt quickly, Kalms advises. “They should also consider how to streamline document handling and client communication to improve efficiency and transparency.” 

Technology could play a major role in this, he says. “Secure online platforms for document sharing, digital ID verification tools and blockchain-based systems for recording transactions could all help to make the conveyancing process faster, safer and more transparent.” Tools powered by artificial intelligence (AI) could also assist with compliance checks and document management, he adds.

Ahead of the reforms, property professionals are best advised to take the time to audit processes, engage with reform consultants and implement training in digital tools, says Kaur Bhachu. “Technology presents a huge potential to unlock efficiencies and reduce delays to ensure a smoother process for both clients and professionals, from digital ID checks and secure data sharing to using AI for document reviews, e-signatures and centralised client portals that provide real-time updates across organisations.”

Now is the time for firms to take stock, agrees Hesketh. “Every practice should be asking: how digitally ready are we? How interoperable are our systems? Are our teams equipped to manage and interpret data effectively? It’s equally important for firms to look closely at their existing technology providers and understand what support and innovation those suppliers are offering to help prepare for reform.” 

This is also the moment to engage proactively with pilot projects, training initiatives and consultations shaping the next phase of reform, she adds. “The more practitioners participate in these discussions, the more workable and beneficial the eventual framework will be for the profession as a whole.”

Privacy / data protection concerns 

Using a centralised digital ID system creates challenges around data protection and cybersecurity, warns Kaur Bhachu. “Before changes are put in place, firms will need to ensure they have robust systems for handling personal data safely, making sure clients give proper consent and controlling who can access information. It’s important that everyone at the firm is properly trained and understands how to use the new systems from start to finish, thus reducing risks. Firms will also have to ensure that digital ID systems will be easily accessible for vulnerable clients.”

Readily accessible property ‘logbooks’ could make personal data easily available to the public, says Campbell. “Cyber-attacks are of key concern. Recent industry attacks show the very real threat that the system could be brought to a standstill with catastrophic consequences for clients.”

Other potential improvements

There are lots of ways to make the conveyancing process smoother from start to finish, says Kaur Bhachu. “For example, mandating digital processes, setting national standards and encouraging greater collaboration between lenders, agents and lawyers,” she explains. “Together, these changes would help create a more cohesive and streamlined process.” 

The current system is outdated and adversarial, with one in three transactions collapsing, says Liyanage. “Beyond these proposals, we need national property data hubs, search standardisation and clearer professional boundaries. We’re seeing tentative market recovery, and if these reforms deliver faster, more secure transactions, they could stimulate further movement.”

Regular testing and ongoing training should be required to ensure solicitors’ knowledge stays up to date, says Kalms. “Too many firms have adopted a ‘sausage factory’ approach to conveyancing, which doesn’t work and fails to inspire client confidence. The focus should return to quality over quantity.”

Removing the need for conveyancers to carry out anti-money laundering checks on the funds being used by a purchaser would help improve the system, states Campbell. “This is time-consuming and not really what we all signed up for. Digitising information to enable this to be obtained more quickly and easily also makes sense, while local authority data services need to be modernised and available at costs which are capped.” 

To achieve the government’s broader ambitions both for housing delivery and digital transformation, equal focus must be placed on the infrastructure that underpins the homebuying system, says Hesketh. “Government has a vital role to play, but reform will only succeed through collaboration with those who understand the process best. If policymakers and practitioners can align on shared goals, transparency, trust and security, we can deliver a system that is not only digital, but also dependable – one that restores confidence for professionals and clients alike.”

In addition to the proposed reforms, targeted funding for smaller firms and national digital platforms for tracking property chains, clearer sector-wide performance benchmarks and stronger integration with mortgage lenders would help drive meaningful change, says Begum. “Most importantly, reform must be adaptive. The system should evolve in response to what genuinely works well, reduces fall-through rates, speeds up transactions and enhances client experience, not merely what appears promising on paper.”