Upfront information could slash transaction times and fall-throughs – but who’s picking up the bill?
The Conveyancing Association (CA) has submitted its formal responses to two major Government consultations that could reshape the homebuying and selling process in England and Wales — and is urging policymakers to combine ambition with practical safeguards and enforcement.
The consultations, led by the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG), closed in December and centre on reforming the home moving process and the provision of material information at listing.
Broad support — with critical conditions
The CA, the leading representative body for conveyancers, submitted its responses following member research, surveys and roundtables. It backs the overall direction of reform — greater transparency, earlier information and a more digital process — but stresses that policies must be deliverable for firms and supported by clear standards, funding and regulatory teeth.
Nicky Heathcote, CA Chair, said:
“Both these Government consultations go to the heart of how homes are bought and sold, and conveyancers have a critical role in making any reform work in practice.”
“If these changes are implemented properly, they can reduce stress for consumers and create a more stable and sustainable environment for conveyancing firms.”
Upfront information: benefits proven – but who pays and when?
Evidence from member firms already using upfront and material information shows transaction times falling to around seven weeks and fall-through rates reduced by 60%. However, the CA stresses that providing more information earlier creates extra legal work that must be properly costed and supported by digital systems, data reliability and clarity on liability.
Beth Rudolf, Director of Delivery at The Conveyancing Association, stressed to Mortgage Introducer that this additional work needs to be properly priced and funded.
“In practice, this means consumers should expect some costs to be incurred earlier than they are today, particularly where legal review, searches or specialist reports are needed pre-listing, but the overall aim is to reduce wasted spend caused by failed transactions and duplicated checks,” she said. “And, of course, for those buying and selling too this will be cost neutral,”
“Without clear enforcement, shared standards and early instruction of conveyancers, the benefits these consultations seek will not be fully realised.”
What this means for mortgage brokers and client conversations
The move towards earlier, richer property information has the potential to change the timing and content of brokers’ advice – largely for the better, according to Rudolf.
“For mortgage advisers, the shift toward earlier and clearer property information should reduce uncertainty rather than increase it, but advisers will need to prepare clients for a process where key facts about a property are known sooner and may influence decisions earlier. Advisers will benefit from earlier visibility of tenure, restrictions and known risks and be able to point buyers towards lenders who will lend much earlier in the process rather than buyers, and their advisers, discovering weeks later that the property is unsuitable for that lender,” Rudolf said.
Earlier visibility of title issues, restrictions, cladding concerns, environmental risks or lease anomalies should help brokers to match clients with suitable lenders at an earlier stage and avoid wasted application costs or last‑minute declines. But it also means brokers may need to adjust scripts to explain why more information – and potentially more cost – is being front‑loaded into the journey.
Early instruction of conveyancers – and why voluntary change isn’t enough
A recurring theme in the CA’s responses is that the timing of conveyancer involvement will determine whether reforms deliver their intended benefits.
The Association is strongly advocating that sellers should instruct a conveyancer before a property is listed, allowing legal title, searches and seller information to be reviewed in advance. This, it argues, is essential for identifying issues early, reducing delays and cutting the risk of fall‑throughs later in the chain.
However, the CA is realistic about behaviour change. Rudolf said:
“While we believe seller instruction, and their conveyancing lawyer’s review of the title, searches and seller information before marketing is essential to delivering the benefits of upfront information, it recognises behaviour change at scale is unlikely without some form of mandate or strong commercial incentive. Voluntary adoption has shown clear benefits among firms that have implemented early instruction, but uneven take-up risks creating an inconsistent market. The CA’s position is that Government intervention may be required to ensure early instruction becomes the norm, particularly if the objective is to reduce fall-throughs and delays across the entire system rather than in isolated pockets.”
For brokers, a mandated or strongly encouraged pre‑listing legal review could eventually become part of the standard advice narrative to both buyers and sellers – something firms may want to plan for now.
Standardised, digital property data – and the risk of ‘new fragmentation’
Central to the CA’s position is the call for standardised, trusted property data that can be shared digitally through property logbooks and interoperable systems. The Association warns that without genuine standardisation and interoperability, reforms could simply replace one fragmented landscape with another.
“If data cannot move cleanly between platforms, providers and professional users, duplication and inconsistency will persist, undermining confidence in early information. We have warned that digital property logbooks and data tools will only deliver value if they are portable, based on shared standards and linked to authoritative sources. For mortgage lenders and advisers, interoperability is what enables reliable reliance on information provided early, rather than treating it as provisional and repeating checks later,” Rudolf stated.
For lenders and intermediaries, the long‑term prize is a world where upfront information can be relied upon throughout the mortgage journey, drastically reducing the need to repeat checks and re‑verify facts as a case progresses.
Raising standards among estate agents – qualifications and real enforcement
Another major plank of the CA’s submissions is the call for mandatory qualifications, effective regulation and meaningful enforcement for estate agents.
“We strongly support mandatory qualifications and effective regulation for estate agents, but have been equally clear that training without enforcement will not deliver change. Meaningful regulation must include the ability to audit agent behaviour, identify non-compliance without waiting for consumer complaints, and require changes to processes where needed. This is about creating consistency across the market, so agents who comply with the law are not disadvantaged by those who do not. From a conveyancing and mortgage perspective, better qualified and regulated agents improve the quality and reliability of information entering the transaction at the earliest stage,” Rudolf continued.
Professional indemnity insurers: bring them in early
The CA is also urging Government to engage professional indemnity (PI) insurers from the outset. With more reliance being placed on earlier information, there is clear potential for shifts in liability and risk.
“Clarity on scope, responsibility and data provenance is essential to avoid unintended shifts in liability that could affect insurer appetite or pricing,” Rudolf added.
Alongside this, the Association is calling for a phased and realistic implementation period, to give firms, insurers and technology providers time to adapt and avoid unintended consequences.
With the consultation period now closed, attention turns to how MHCLG will shape and implement its proposals, and over what timeframe. For mortgage brokers, lenders and conveyancers alike, the direction of travel is clear: more information, more structure and more digital processes, but also more emphasis on accountability and funding.
