The government has abandoned the Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year for all house sales in
England and Wales.

There seem to be several reasons for this:
Cost of the HIPs (Home Information Packs) was looking like it
was going through the roof;
Nowhere near enough HI's (Home Inspectors) have been trained (I
know from talking with one of the training bodies that almost all
those who came forward for training were completely unsuitable);
Banks/Building Societies have told government they won't accept
the survey in the HIP;
There has been a significant public backlash against the scheme.

It should be noted that HIPs are not abandoned yet -- only the
survey element (Home Condition Report). However, strangely, the
SAP evaluation is still in, which is done by the Home Inspectors
during the Home Condition Report inspection. Quite how this is
supposed to work I can't imagine.

There are also a large number of HI who have funded their own
training who will now not be required -- I wonder what happens
about that.

Yet another cock-up from start to finish -- exactly as predicted
by everyone who gave the issue even the slightest thought at the
outset.

--
Andrew Gabriel

Link he http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5192100.stm

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...

Yet another cock-up from start to finish -- exactly as predicted
by everyone who gave the issue even the slightest thought at the
outset.

I was just about to say - "gee - we couldn't see that coming could we?"

Cheers
Dan.

Hi Andrew
I sent you an OT question via email a day or two ago - did you get
it?

Thanks
Jon N

In article .com,
"jkn" writes:
Hi Andrew
I sent you an OT question via email a day or two ago - did you get
it?

gets over 1000 junk mails a day, so I
haven't read emails sent to it for years. I just trawled through
and dug out your email. I didn't persue the BT Converse 2025 headset
connection, so I didn't work out the connections, sorry.

--
Andrew Gabriel

Hi Andrew

gets over 1000 junk mails a day, so I
haven't read emails sent to it for years. I just trawled through
and dug out your email. I didn't persue the BT Converse 2025 headset
connection, so I didn't work out the connections, sorry.

Yeah - I just came across an old discussion on spam where you mention
this.

OK on the headset connection. If I get anywhere I'll let you know.

Cheers
Jon N

Andrew Gabriel wrote:

The government has abandoned the Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year for all house sales in
England and Wales.

I have only one comment, as per Nelson the thug from the Simpsons:


Ha ha.


And good riddance.

Tim

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
snip
Yet another cock-up from start to finish -- exactly as predicted
by everyone who gave the issue even the slightest thought at the
outset.

The government is good at that, organising large sweeping changes, often
hugely unpopular and rarely get off the ground (ID cards is another dead
herring), but hey-ho, a lot of people have already made millions from them
so the main objective has been fulfilled - complete success!

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:57:50 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote
(in article ):

The government has abandoned the Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year for all house sales in
England and Wales.

Brilliant news.



There seem to be several reasons for this:
Cost of the HIPs (Home Information Packs) was looking like it
was going through the roof;
Nowhere near enough HI's (Home Inspectors) have been trained (I
know from talking with one of the training bodies that almost all
those who came forward for training were completely unsuitable);

It would be interesting to know why they were considered to be unsuitable -
i.e. whether they really *were* unsuitable, or weren't able to do the sharp
intake of breath, the tapping of the clipboard and recite "It's more than my
job's worth in 8 different languages"

Banks/Building Societies have told government they won't accept
the survey in the HIP;
There has been a significant public backlash against the scheme.

It should be noted that HIPs are not abandoned yet -- only the
survey element (Home Condition Report). However, strangely, the
SAP evaluation is still in, which is done by the Home Inspectors
during the Home Condition Report inspection. Quite how this is
supposed to work I can't imagine.

It won't. In a few months time, that will be quietly dropped as well.



There are also a large number of HI who have funded their own
training who will now not be required -- I wonder what happens
about that.

Hopefully, having lost their money without recompense, they will seek proper
gainful employment.



Yet another cock-up from start to finish -- exactly as predicted
by everyone who gave the issue even the slightest thought at the
outset.



I wonder if part P could be similarly targetted......

Must drop another letter to local MPs.

In article ,
Andy Hall writes:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:57:50 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote
(in article ):

The government has abandoned the Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year for all house sales in
England and Wales.

Brilliant news.

There seem to be several reasons for this:
Cost of the HIPs (Home Information Packs) was looking like it
was going through the roof;
Nowhere near enough HI's (Home Inspectors) have been trained (I
know from talking with one of the training bodies that almost all
those who came forward for training were completely unsuitable);

It would be interesting to know why they were considered to be unsuitable -

The government assumed people from the building trade would apply
to become HI's. What actually happened was that unskilled people
with no knowledge whatsoever of building construction came forward
for training, and that's not what the training courses were geared
up to deal with. For example, most of them were never going to be
able to be qualified to carry out the SAP assessment, and would
have had to sub-contract it (one reason the price has rocketed).

It should be noted that HIPs are not abandoned yet -- only the
survey element (Home Condition Report). However, strangely, the
SAP evaluation is still in, which is done by the Home Inspectors
during the Home Condition Report inspection. Quite how this is
supposed to work I can't imagine.

It won't. In a few months time, that will be quietly dropped as well.

That's the one part designed to meet an EU directive. I'm sure
we've gold plated it though, just like we normally do.

--
Andrew Gabriel

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:57:50 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote
(in article ):

The government has abandoned the
Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year
for all house sales in England and Wales.

Brilliant news.

Matt, it is not brilliant news at all. The idea of HCR is sound indeed. An
MOT at house change. It ensures that the buyer get a decent deal and the
services are all inspected. Everyone gains.

You may find it is more on hold than abandoned.

The message ews.net
from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:

It ensures that the buyer get a decent deal and the
services are all inspected.

If it were done properly that might just possibly be true. However, I
suspect it would end up like most surveys - done from a distance with so
many disclaimers that it'd not be worth the paper it's written on.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message ews.net
from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:

It ensures that the buyer get a decent deal and the
services are all inspected.

If it were done properly that might just possibly be true. However, I
suspect it would end up like most surveys - done from a distance with so
many disclaimers that it'd not be worth the paper it's written on.

If gas and electricity are tested and inspected than that is one way down
the road that is right.

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 18:51:39 UTC, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

If gas and electricity are tested and inspected than that is one way down
the road that is right.

It's one way to sort out the dangerous Drivel installations.

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
Avenue Supplies, http://avenuesupplies.co.uk

In article ews.net,
"Doctor Drivel" writes:
"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message ews.net
from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:

It ensures that the buyer get a decent deal and the
services are all inspected.

It doesn't. That's why the banks/building societies have
told the government they won't accept the HCR.

If it were done properly that might just possibly be true. However, I
suspect it would end up like most surveys - done from a distance with so
many disclaimers that it'd not be worth the paper it's written on.

If gas and electricity are tested and inspected than that is one way down
the road that is right.

That was never even part of the now abandoned plans.

--
Andrew Gabriel

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:43:59 +0100, Doctor Drivel wrote
(in article ews.net):


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:57:50 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote
(in article ):

The government has abandoned the
Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year
for all house sales in England and Wales.

Brilliant news.

Matt, it is not brilliant news at all.

Anything involving a diminution in government involvement in people's daily
lives is brilliant news.

The idea of HCR is sound indeed. An
MOT at house change. It ensures that the buyer get a decent deal and the
services are all inspected. Everyone gains.

No they don't.

Only a half wit in the position of buying a property would accept a survey
commissioned by the vendor.



You may find it is more on hold than abandoned.


As long as the hold remains for the next 150 years or so, we can say it's on
hold if you like.

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:43:59 +0100, Doctor Drivel wrote
(in article ews.net):

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:57:50 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote
(in article ):

The government has abandoned the
Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year
for all house sales in England and Wales.

Brilliant news.

Matt, it is not brilliant news at all.

Anything involving

Matt, anything involving a house is sound, a house MOT, is fine by me. It
is a great idea.

The idea of HCR is sound indeed. An
MOT at house change. It ensures
that the buyer get a decent deal and the
services are all inspected. Everyone gains.

No they don't.

Matt, of source they don't, as it hasn't been inspected.

Only a half wit in the position of buying
a property would accept a survey
commissioned by the vendor.

Matt, it is not commissioned by the vendor. It would be "mandatory" and the
vendor pays. Do you think a Part P inspector pulls back on the rules because
of the person paying? You probably do. I suppose you think the same about
MOT inspectors too. But you do come from Little Middle England.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:43:59 +0100, Doctor Drivel wrote
(in article ews.net):

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:57:50 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote
(in article ):

The government has abandoned the
Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year
for all house sales in England and Wales.

Brilliant news.

Matt, it is not brilliant news at all.

Anything involving

Matt, anything involving a house is sound, a house MOT, is fine by me. It
is a great idea.

The idea of HCR is sound indeed. An
MOT at house change. It ensures
that the buyer get a decent deal and the
services are all inspected. Everyone gains.

No they don't.

Matt, of source they don't, as it hasn't been inspected.

Only a half wit in the position of buying
a property would accept a survey
commissioned by the vendor.

Matt, it is not commissioned by the vendor. It would be "mandatory" and
the vendor pays. Do you think a Part P inspector pulls back on the rules
because of the person paying?

The (other) problem with the HCR is that it is going to
be a fairly basic check at unnecessarily high cost for
what you get (As you have to have one there will
be less incentive to bring the price down). It will
be one of those reports that tells you everything you
can see for yourself (if you CBA to look) and
almost nothing that you can't. For 49% of house
purchases it's going to be completely unnecessary
and for another 49% of sales it will be completely
inedaquate and a fuller survery will be required.
Only for about 2% of sales will be be of any
value (and yes it is obvious which sales these are)

tim

Doctor Drivel wrote:

Do you think a Part P inspector ...

No such person.

... pulls back on the rules because of the person paying?

Yes, actually - and very definitely. What you're talking about here is
assessing the condition of an existing electrical installation, i.e. a
"periodic inspection." This is indeed carried out according to a quite
well-defined set of rules, but the rules allow for limitations of
inspection and testing to be agreed between the person doing the work
(electrician, electrical surveyor) and the "person ordering the work" -
i.e. the vendor in this case. So if the vendor says they don't want a
particular circuit isolated for testing it won't be. If they don't want
covers or wiring accessories removed for inspection because of the risk
of damage to decorations, they won't be. And so on. The limitations
will be noted in the report, but their significance won't necessarily be
appreciated by the casual reader.

To my mind the whole HIP/HCR thing - which, as has already been said,
wasn't going to include testing gas or electrical installations in any
case - is fundamentally flawed. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

You probably do. I suppose you think the same about MOT inspectors
too.

Your analogy with the MOT is quite invalid, IMO. You could compare,
say, a landlord's gas safety check with an MOT, but not an HCR. The HCR
is just a report - you don't pass or fail it.

--
Andy

On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 10:24:48 +0100, Doctor Drivel wrote
(in article ews.net):



Matt, it is not commissioned by the vendor. It would be "mandatory" and the
vendor pays.

That argument is semantic. A one-size-fits-all survey package is not
appropriate for every property. it is quite individual.

A mortgage lender may well specify a set of checks to be made in order to
protect his collateral for a loan. That's his affair and of course the buyer
pays. The buyer may be happy with that as being sufficient. He is paying
for this evaluation and indeed, ultimately for the property.

I would not rely on one of these vendor funded packs because a) I didn't pay
for it, b) I didn't specify the work and c) I will make the decisions on the
information that I need in order to make an informed purchasing decision.

I neither need nor want the government to have any part in that whatsoever.
It is not their business because they are not paying.

Therefore this becomes yet another stealth tax and job creation scheme.

Quite rightly it should be buried.





Do you think a Part P inspector pulls back on the rules because
of the person paying? You probably do. I suppose you think the same about
MOT inspectors too.

These are both quite separate issues.

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:32:30 +0100, Andy Hall wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:57:50 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote
(in article ):

The government has abandoned the Home Condition Reports, which
were due to be introduced next year for all house sales in
England and Wales.

Brilliant news.



There seem to be several reasons for this:
Cost of the HIPs (Home Information Packs) was looking like it
was going through the roof;
Nowhere near enough HI's (Home Inspectors) have been trained (I
know from talking with one of the training bodies that almost all
those who came forward for training were completely unsuitable);

It would be interesting to know why they were considered to be unsuitable -
i.e. whether they really *were* unsuitable, or weren't able to do the sharp
intake of breath, the tapping of the clipboard and recite "It's more than my
job's worth in 8 different languages"

Banks/Building Societies have told government they won't accept
the survey in the HIP;
There has been a significant public backlash against the scheme.

It should be noted that HIPs are not abandoned yet -- only the
survey element (Home Condition Report). However, strangely, the
SAP evaluation is still in, which is done by the Home Inspectors
during the Home Condition Report inspection. Quite how this is
supposed to work I can't imagine.

It won't. In a few months time, that will be quietly dropped as well.



There are also a large number of HI who have funded their own
training who will now not be required -- I wonder what happens
about that.

Hopefully, having lost their money without recompense, they will seek proper
gainful employment.



Yet another cock-up from start to finish -- exactly as predicted
by everyone who gave the issue even the slightest thought at the
outset.



I wonder if part P could be similarly targetted......

Must drop another letter to local MPs.

I think you'll be backing a loser.
Firstly the matter is done and that means a magnitudes more effort to
change things.

Secondly the real reason for Part P is the same as Part F,G,J
L etc. ISTM it's to introduce a culture of qualification,
registration and self-certification which makes being casually
self-employed as a general workman very awkward.

Either you have to specialise or you have to be employed by a company
which is registered. It's just too damn expensive to be registered for
more than couple of trades, and very hard if you are not full time.

IIRC around 75% of all self-employed people are in construction and
related trades. ISTM that the treasury or other departments want to
control this sector. So far I expect they have simply driven it
underground.



--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html
Choosing a Boiler FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/BoilerChoice.html
Gas Fitting Standards Docs he http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFittingStandards

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:34:25 +0100, Ed Sirett
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:32:30 +0100, Andy Hall wrote:

[-snip-]

I wonder if part P could be similarly targetted......

Must drop another letter to local MPs.

I think you'll be backing a loser.
Firstly the matter is done and that means a magnitudes more effort to
change things.

Secondly the real reason for Part P is the same as Part F,G,J
L etc. ISTM it's to introduce a culture of qualification,
registration and self-certification which makes being casually
self-employed as a general workman very awkward.

Either you have to specialise or you have to be employed by a company
which is registered. It's just too damn expensive to be registered for
more than couple of trades, and very hard if you are not full time.

IIRC around 75% of all self-employed people are in construction and
related trades. ISTM that the treasury or other departments want to
control this sector. So far I expect they have simply driven it
underground.

IMHO Part P and it's ilk are there to discourage DIY and the use of
self employed "handymen". They want everyone to use large firms so
that the gov't get more Tax revenue. It all about Tax IMHO.

Mark

"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:34:25 +0100, Ed Sirett
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:32:30 +0100, Andy Hall wrote:

[-snip-]

I wonder if part P could be similarly targetted......

Must drop another letter to local MPs.

I think you'll be backing a loser.
Firstly the matter is done and that means a magnitudes more effort to
change things.

Secondly the real reason for Part P is the same as Part F,G,J
L etc. ISTM it's to introduce a culture of qualification,
registration and self-certification which makes being casually
self-employed as a general workman very awkward.

Either you have to specialise or you have to be employed by a company
which is registered. It's just too damn expensive to be registered for
more than couple of trades, and very hard if you are not full time.

IIRC around 75% of all self-employed people are in construction and
related trades. ISTM that the treasury or other departments want to
control this sector. So far I expect they have simply driven it
underground.

IMHO Part P and it's ilk are there to discourage DIY and the use of
self employed "handymen". They want everyone to use large firms so
that the gov't get more Tax revenue. It all about Tax IMHO.

Not so. To discourage the cowboys - like jack of all trades kitchen
fitters, who, do some appalling gas/water./electric work, But nice tiling
guv. Which it is now doing to a large extent. If you are rewiring the
house, approx ~£90 get a Part P check and "anyone" can do the work in any
room.

Odd isn't it how so many staunch New Labour supporters are so blatently
anti-english.

Perhaps Dr Drivel's views would be taken more seriously if he was not
so racist.

Surely the main problem with the HCR is the lack of accountability. If
the buyer relies on a report which has errors and omissions, or is just
plain wrong who does he sue? Not the vendor nor presumably the
Inspector.

At least if he gets his own survey he has a remedy against his surveyor

Little Middle Englander (and proud of it)

On 18 Jul 2006 19:57:50 GMT someone who may be
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote this:-

However, strangely, the
SAP evaluation is still in, which is done by the Home Inspectors
during the Home Condition Report inspection. Quite how this is
supposed to work I can't imagine.

It is something dreamt up by party politicians, so by definition it
is unlikely to work.

Anyone with an interest in such things will be able to gauge the
running costs by using their eyes and asking a few questions. Those
who are not interested are not interested. Thus the whole idea is
just another example of pointless nanny state tactics. It gives
administrators another box to tick, but is not useful to "real
people".

There are also a large number of HI who have funded their own
training who will now not be required -- I wonder what happens
about that.

They are in the same position as those who believed in company
pensions, those railway staff who invested their meager savings in
Railtrack and do on. The Labour Party doesn't give a **** about
them.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54