Early clarity can ease the mortgage journey – Rudolf

Much of that strain comes from the late arrival of key information. By the time problems surface, borrowers may have paid for valuations, advisers may have set expectations that no longer match the facts, and lenders may be forced to reassess risk at the wrong stage.

This is why this consultation is so important.

It is a chance to repair the early stage of the process so the rest of the journey is less exposed to delay. But any reform has to work for the people who rely on clear information to give advice, make lending decisions, provide conveyancing services and keep borrowers on track.

The Conveyancing Association (CA) is now speaking with our membership on the details of this consultation, but we are also speaking to the other sectors involved to get a holistic view of what is needed to make transactions more certain.

We are doing the same on the separate material information consultation – available to view here.

Sponsored

First-time buyer knowledge gaps – and where brokers can help

Sponsored by Aldermore

These discussions matter because every part of the mortgage market feels the impact of unclear or missing information.

Certainty from the start

One of the most notable proposals in the consultation is the potential move towards binding offers. On paper, this gives a clear benefit to the mortgage market: more certainty and fewer late drop-outs.

But a binding offer is only fair if the buyer understands the legal position before they commit.

This is not always the case today. Many people still enter auction purchases without checking the full pack. They commit blindly to restrictions, rights of way, or limits on future plans, without knowing what they are committing to.

If this behaviour continues under a binding offer system, advisers and lenders will face a rise in cases where the title does not match the buyer’s expectations. That means delays, renegotiations, or withdrawals after both have already put time and resources into a case.

The CA believes that offers, binding or not, only work when buyers receive legal advice first. If a conveyancing lawyer checks the title and the information that matters before the buyer commits, it gives advisers a safer base for their guidance and gives lenders clarity before they progress an application.

Upfront information is another key element. This has the potential to make the biggest difference for advisers. When title documents, search data, relevant statements, and supporting evidence are available at the start, it reduces guesswork.

Advisers can be more accurate when setting early expectations. Lenders can recognise risk sooner. Borrowers can make decisions with confidence rather than hope.

Getting reform right

But the format must be right. The recent update to the TA6 means it no longer captures the material information that estate agents must provide. If a separate Property Information Questionnaire is added, we risk two sets of forms collecting overlapping details.

Many believe the Buying and Selling Property Information dataset (BASPI) structure, which brings the relevant documents and statements together, offers a simpler and cleaner route. Our members are sharing their views on this point now, and we will reflect that in our final submission.

The consultation also focuses on home condition reports. Advisers and lenders will welcome anything that gives a clearer sense of future cost and structural risk, but the quality of the report will decide its value.

A newer home may only need simple checks. Older stock may require a more informed assessment. If untrained staff are asked to judge matters such as damp, structural movement, asbestos, or other age-related issues, buyers may be misled.

That may leave advisers in a difficult position and force lenders into late-stage reassessment. The right specialists must provide the information, or it will add more risk than it removes.

Digital property logbooks could also reduce repeat checks for remortgages and future transactions. Advisers would gain quicker access to verified information. Lenders would gain a cleaner view of the property throughout its life. But the system must use common standards and must link to the Unique Property Reference Number (UPRN).

Without this, logbooks will simply add more platforms without improving the process.

We will continue to take views from our members and other stakeholders as both consultations progress.

This reform programme is clearly a huge step forward in the right direction, and could remove some of the pressure from advisers, reduce the late shocks faced by lenders, and give borrowers a calmer, more predictable path to completion. But that will only happen if the early stage of the process is strengthened and if buyers have the right advice before they commit.