Do you know who you're dealing with when you move house?

Time to look again at the way homes are bought, sold and let.

It is fair to say that most people would not allow their children to be taught by an unqualified teacher or get a filling from a dentist with no formal training. Why, then, when buying, selling or renting a home do many still seem happy to use an agent with no formal qualifications or training?

We have been campaigning for a long time to see greater regulation in the residential market and to ensure agents are working to properly enforced standards. Those who sell and let homes have for far too long been allowed to operate without the necessary training or knowledge to properly serve their clients and provide the sort of professional advice and guidance that people need when taking such a big step. All in all, we have a bit of a problem on our hands.

There are two issues at play here. One is that of agents selling property; the other is agents letting property.

Firstly, let’s look at the sales side of things. Although all agents are obliged to offer a redress scheme for customer complaints should anything go awry, those who are not members of a professional body, such as RICS, are not forced to meet professional competency standards. Why is this important? Well, it could mean that when buying or selling a house, people are potentially dealing with an agent who, while technically abiding by legislation, doesn’t necessarily understand or follow all the processes involved. Selling property is no easy business and agents who are not subject to the educational and regulatory requirements of a professional body could even be providing inaccurate advice. All this at a time when people need all the help they can get.

Significantly, with the property market turning a corner and confidence returning, the need for compulsory standards is greater than ever. The government has established schemes such as Help to Buy and Funding for Lending to help buyers and sellers. However, one thing the government hasn’t addressed is those responsible for the transactions - the agents. What we need is legislation ensuring all agents meet minimum professional standards before they start trading. Both this and existing legislation on property sales need to be tightened. And, importantly, there need to be consequences for all those agents who don’t abide by the law.  

A similar approach is needed in the lettings sector to protect both tenants and landlords. Until a recent amendment was passed in the House of Lords, agents who let property and weren’t a member of a professional body such as RICS could operate completely unchecked. There was no comeback for consumers if things went wrong. After a long campaign industry campaign, including RICS, the government finally agreed to introduce compulsory redress schemes for all agents. However, this is not enough to properly protect the consumer, as redress only tackles problems once they arise. Tenants and landlords will still be left exposed as long as agents can continue to operate without any formal qualifications or training.

All told, with the worst of the housing crisis now behind us, the time is right to look again at the way homes are bought, sold and let. Standards are everything. They make sure agents understand current law and legislation, that ethical principles are followed and observed, and that offer consumers have the peace of mind that they are dealing with a competent, skilled professional. So, next time you are moving, make sure you know exactly who you are dealing with before you sign on the dotted line.

Photograph: Getty Images

Mark Walley is Regional Managing Director of RICS EMEA.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Theresa May is paying the price for mismanaging Boris Johnson

The Foreign Secretary's bruised ego may end up destroying Theresa May. 

And to think that Theresa May scheduled her big speech for this Friday to make sure that Conservative party conference wouldn’t be dominated by the matter of Brexit. Now, thanks to Boris Johnson, it won’t just be her conference, but Labour’s, which is overshadowed by Brexit in general and Tory in-fighting in particular. (One imagines that the Labour leadership will find a way to cope somehow.)

May is paying the price for mismanaging Johnson during her period of political hegemony after she became leader. After he was betrayed by Michael Gove and lacking any particular faction in the parliamentary party, she brought him back from the brink of political death by making him Foreign Secretary, but also used her strength and his weakness to shrink his empire.

The Foreign Office had its responsibility for negotiating Brexit hived off to the newly-created Department for Exiting the European Union (Dexeu) and for navigating post-Brexit trade deals to the Department of International Trade. Johnson was given control of one of the great offices of state, but with no responsibility at all for the greatest foreign policy challenge since the Second World War.

Adding to his discomfort, the new Foreign Secretary was regularly the subject of jokes from the Prime Minister and cabinet colleagues. May likened him to a dog that had to be put down. Philip Hammond quipped about him during his joke-fuelled 2017 Budget. All of which gave Johnson’s allies the impression that Johnson-hunting was a licensed sport as far as Downing Street was concerned. He was then shut out of the election campaign and has continued to be a marginalised figure even as the disappointing election result forced May to involve the wider cabinet in policymaking.

His sense of exclusion from the discussions around May’s Florence speech only added to his sense of isolation. May forgot that if you aren’t going to kill, don’t wound: now, thanks to her lost majority, she can’t afford to put any of the Brexiteers out in the cold, and Johnson is once again where he wants to be: centre-stage. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.