Consultation outcome

Home buying and selling reform roadmap

Updated 19 June 2026

Chapter 1: Introduction

Why reform is needed

For too many people, moving home becomes a drawn-out test of patience at exactly the moment life needs certainty. Once an offer is accepted, it takes around 120 days on average to complete, and the journey is now around 60% longer than it was in 2007.

When things go wrong, they often go wrong late: around one in 3 transactions fall through, leaving families facing wasted fees, stress, and months of planning unravelling. 

Property professionals are forced to spend time chasing updates, re-checking information and managing avoidable delays, rather than helping customers progress with confidence. When transactions stall or collapse, the effects ripple beyond individual moves – undermining trust in the market and holding back the wider economy that depends on a functioning system for people to move, settle and take up opportunities. Evidence from other countries shows us it doesn’t have to be this way.

There are a number of reasons for these issues, including:

• upfront information is often missing, late or inconsistent so issues surface only after time and money have already been spent
• the role of property agents is not defined by clear standards and expectations, with varying practices around how transactions are managed, undermining the confidence of consumers and other property professionals
• commitments are weak until late in the process, making it too easy for parties to withdraw without good reason after others have incurred costs – driving uncertainty and avoidable fall‑throughs
• there is limited transparency for buyers and sellers who often can’t see which elements of their transaction have been progressed, what remains outstanding, or who is responsible for delays. They also lack clear information to help them choose and evaluate the professionals they rely on
• processes are repeated, driving costs and delays for consumers and for professionals trying to move a transaction forward
• a lack of digitalisation means too much of the process remains manual and paper‑based. Where digital processes are used, systems and data are fragmented across organisations, making it hard to share information securely and efficiently
• sellers can be let down by freeholders, managing agents or estate managers who can take too long to provide them with the information they need to sell their property and charge them extortionate amounts for this information

These issues have severe implications for home movers: for the vast majority, buying a home will be by far the biggest financial decision of their lives and fall-throughs alone cost consumers circa £400 million per annum.

With around 1.2 million housing transactions annually, in a sector employing more than a million people and contributing £100 billion a year to the UK economy, disruption in the system has wider impacts. Independent research from Santander suggests that fall-throughs cost the economy around £1.5 billion per year.

These problems have been allowed to drag on for far too long, becoming so entrenched that many now view them as an unavoidable part of home buying and selling. This government refuses to accept that such frustration and uncertainty is inevitable – we can make this crucial moment in people’s lives better.

That is why we launched our consultations: to challenge this status quo and drive meaningful, once in a generation reform for everyone involved in home buying and selling.

A roadmap for reform

Vision for the home buying and selling system

We want to deliver a home buying and selling system that works for every household, the property market and the wider economy by the end of this Parliament.

For consumers and industry, our reforms will mean moving home is a faster, clearer and more predictable experience. Earlier commitments between parties will end the nightmare of people pulling out at the last minute, causing chains to collapse. This will provide much greater certainty that a transaction will proceed. Key information will be available from the outset, reducing the likelihood of delays or unwanted surprises.

On top of this, a fairer regulatory system will mean customers can have confidence in the service they’ll get from estate agents. Sellers will have greater confidence in the role that estate managers, freeholders and managing agents will play in helping sell their property.       

Our reforms are underpinned by much-needed digitalisation. Property professionals will be able to share trusted information seamlessly with others, reducing delays and the risk of fraud.

We will accelerate the use of existing digital tools that reduce reliance on outdated, repetitive and too often paper-based processes. AI-enabled conveyancing technologies will support conveyancers and improve the efficiency of transactions.

Better access to data and technology standards will give industry the confidence to innovate, unleashing the development of technology that allows consumers to manage, track and progress their home move anytime, anywhere.

Taken together, these changes will transform the home buying and selling system from one that too often lets people down to one that lives up to the hopes people invest in this most important of journeys.

Design principles for reform

A whole system approach

We will consider impacts across the entire home buying and selling ecosystem – recognising how changes in one part of the system affect others.

Design in collaboration with property professionals and consumers

These reforms will be designed and delivered in partnership with those who use and operate the system, ensuring changes are practical, grounded in experience and focused on real outcomes.

Phased change, supported by building industry capacity

Reforms will be introduced step-by-step, with targeted support for industry where needed, recognising that sustainable change depends on giving industry the tools, skills and time to adapt.

A phased approach will ensure that the right foundations, such as access to comprehensive upfront property information, are in place to enable a fair and proportionate shift towards more binding offers.

Smarter, proportionate regulation

Industry is already making good progress towards creating a more efficient system so government will only intervene where it is uniquely positioned to add value to the process. We will raise standards while avoiding unnecessary burden, reducing duplication and inefficiency for both consumers and property professionals.

Monitoring, evaluation and continuous improvement

We will track the impact of reforms as they are implemented and use evidence to refine and improve the system over time.

Reform roadmap

A home buying and selling system that rises to the hopes people place in one of life’s most important decisions.

Objectives

1. Faster, more reliable transactions – enabled by better digital tools, streamlined processes and reduced repetition

2. Reduced fall throughs and risks, including those caused by property chains – giving consumers and professionals greater clarity

3. High professional standards – ensuring competence and accountability across the sector

4. Better informed consumers – through improved education and transparency

5. Trust and confidence in the system – leading to higher satisfactions and a more resilient market

Our ambition is to develop a system where all parties have access to comprehensive upfront information and that allows both buyers and sellers to confidently commit to a transaction at an early stage.

The timeline below sets out the sequenced steps we will take to get to this point, and how we will ensure these changes are underpinned by high professional standards and digital innovation.

Timeline for reform

Now (in 2026)

• publish non-statutory guidance to improve the quality of information in property listings and to support estate agents to meet their legal responsibilities

• identify ‘sales pack’ information working with industry that can be voluntarily provided, upfront immediately, to support more efficient transactions and help the sector adjust in anticipation of legislation 

• publish a non-statutory Code of Practice setting out minimum standards for property agents

• explore opportunities to support training and skills development, including through existing training and apprenticeship routes, to build long-term capacity

• work with industry to build preparedness for the use of binding contracts and spread awareness of the voluntary use of reservation agreements

• commence next stage of work to improve accessibility of key property data in local authorities

• publish a call for evidence on a smart data scheme for the property sector

Next (in 2027 to 2028)

• publish an advisory Charter setting out expectations and behaviours for property professionals to support efficient home buying and selling.

• consult on mandatory qualifications for estate and letting agents

• work with the sector and facilitate uptake of digital ID, Qualified Electronic Signatures, and digital logbooks and packs

• consider which homeownership schemes digital logbooks and sales packs should be made a requirement of.

• consult on leasehold and freehold estates sales information legislation

• work with industry to define the most suitable penalty fee structure for binding contracts

• create a voluntary accreditation scheme to identify data standards that meet a core set of criteria for industry to adhere to

• consult on a smart data scheme for the property sector

Future (by end of Parliament)

When parliamentary time allows, introduce legislation to:

• require the preparation of ‘sales packs’ prior to listing, including searches and a property condition report
• require the use of binding conditional contracts in property transactions after sales packs are embedded
• support the secure sharing of data, and make digital sales packs and logbooks a standard feature of all property transactions

The measures in the timeline above represent the priority actions government will take to reform home buying and selling. A comprehensive list of the actions we will take can be found at Annex A.

What the proposals in the roadmap mean for you

First-time buyers and those moving home

For first-time buyers and those moving home, it is our intention that:

• for buyers, property listings will contain the information you need to make a confident decision and in the longer-term you will be able to access a comprehensive sales pack for any property you consider buying (see Annex B for further information)
• for sellers, you will be clear what information you need to provide buyers with now and ahead of sales packs becoming a legal requirement (see Annex B)
• sales will be less likely to fall through, because buyers will make informed decisions at the outset
• you will have a contract with your buyer or seller which will secure the other parties’ commitment to proceed with the transaction, while also allowing withdrawal for legitimate reasons, reducing the likelihood of people pulling out at the last minute without good reason
• you will be confident of the service you can expect from property agents, with best practice standards defined in a Code of Practice and reassurance that property agents hold suitable qualifications
• you will have easier access to the property information you need through digital property logbooks —  online secure records of information specific to a property owned by the homeowner — and sales packs
• the government’s Home Buying and Selling Charter will help you identify property professionals that are adopting best practice, driving up standards in the industry
• buyers and sellers will no longer face duplicative anti-money laundering checks, which add time and effort into the process
• for sellers, you will be able to obtain the information you need to sell your property from freeholders, managing agents or estate managers without delay and at reasonable cost

Property professionals

For property professionals, it is our intention that:

• you will be supported by government to provide more detailed upfront information ahead of this becoming a legal requirement and we will build capacity to enable this change
• property agents will be clear on best practice standards through a Code of Practice and in the future, potential mandatory qualifications for estate and letting agents. This will bring us in line with many other countries and reflect the professionalism and expertise of the role
• you will be confident, as a result of more binding conditional contracts, that you will waste less time on transactions that never reach completion
• you will be clear on what you are expected to provide for inclusion in digital property logbooks and packs
• you will be clear on best-practice use of AI technologies to automate certain routine aspects of the conveyancing process
• government’s Home Buying and Selling Charter will set out the practices you should adopt to support an efficient moving process.
• you will see anti-money laundering checks becoming more joined-up across property professionals, allowing greater reliance on checks carried out by others
• you will be able to rely on a regulatory framework which supports the secure sharing of trusted information between different property professionals
• you will be able to more easily access the information you require during the property search process
• you will be clear what is expected of you regarding the provision of material information

If you live in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

The territorial extent of home buying and selling systems across the UK is a complex issue as it cuts across a number of devolved (for example housing) and reserved (for example consumer protection) policy areas. We anticipate that the majority of measures described in this document will apply in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

As there is a distinct framework in place in Scotland, we do not expect these measures to apply there, though final territorial extent will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Where legislation is being proposed, final territorial extent will be determined through the legislative process.

Building on lessons from past initiatives

We recognise that previous efforts at reform were unsuccessful, and we have carefully considered the challenges associated with Home Information Packs to ensure our approach does not replicate similar issues. Home Information Packs were criticised for increasing costs, using jargon and failing to provide buyers with the right information. They were also paper-based and launched without necessary industry collaboration.

Our reforms have been developed in collaboration with industry and will be implemented gradually, building on action government and industry has taken to digitalise home moving. In particular, we will ensure upfront information is drawn from trusted data sources, underpinned by clear standards, and updated as needed.

We recognise that our proposals represent a fundamental shift in how homes are bought and sold and cannot be delivered all at once. While we intend to progress reforms as quickly as possible, implementation will be carefully sequenced to support a smooth and effective transition. In the short term, we will continue to engage with industry to further define and support readiness for future requirements.

Where legislation is necessary, we will ensure appropriate processes are established so that any measures introduced are proportionate and fair. Buyers and sellers will not be required to enter into binding conditional contracts until upfront sales packs have been fully tested and embedded.

This will help ensure that critical property information is available before parties are expected to commit to a transaction.

The remainder of this document

The remainder of this document provides a detailed explanation of what we heard through our recent consultations on home buying and selling and how this informed the reform agenda above.

This includes a full description of all the actions government will take to improve home buying and selling, beyond the headline measures captured in our roadmap.

These measures are set out in the relevant chapters below and a full summary of the measures across all chapters is provided in Annex A.

Chapter 2: Consultations on home buying and selling reform

About the consultations

We ran 2 consultations last year which sought views on how we could address the issues set out above. Our roadmap is a response to these 2 consultations.

Our Home Buying and Selling Reform consultation took a holistic view at the current system. This consultation presented proposals designed to tackle the root causes of these problems, including:

• mandatory provision of comprehensive upfront information to buyers
• enabling earlier, more binding conditional contracts
• digitalising the transaction process and raising property agent standards via a consultation on mandatory qualifications and a Code of Practice

Our proposals for estate agents drew on existing work including the industry Code of Practice developed by Baroness Hayter’s working group and the sector-led Regulation of Property Agents report.

Alongside this, we also consulted on the issue of material information in property listings. This consultation explored how government guidance could support estate agents in meeting their legal obligations to provide buyers with information that could reasonably influence their decision to view, offer on, or purchase a home.

It focused on what information should be considered “material”, when it should be made available, and how greater consistency at the point properties are marketed could prevent problems emerging later in the transaction.

This matters because, under the current system, important issues – such as tenure, planning constraints, flood risk or service charges – are often discovered only after an offer has been accepted, when time, money and emotional energy have already been invested. By clarifying expectations and improving the quality and timeliness of information provided to consumers, the consultation sought to reduce uncertainty, avoid wasted costs and fall-throughs, and build greater trust and confidence in the home buying and selling process.

These 2 consultations are closely related. The Home Buying and Selling Reform consultation sought to ensure we develop a system fit for the future and included a proposal to radically change the information that is provided up front during property transactions. The material information consultation is aligned with that proposal in that it sought, as an immediate priority, to support estate agents to fulfil their current legal responsibilities for ensuring consumers have the property information they need early in the process.

Overview of consultation responses

The consultations were open for 12 weeks from 6 October to 29 December 2025. Both consultations were published on GOV.UK with responses accepted via online survey, email or written letter.  

The Home buying and selling reform consultation and Material information in property listings consultation received 1,133 and 188 responses, respectively. The tables below provide a breakdown of the consultations’ responses by type of respondent.

Table 1: Types of consultation respondent

Respondent	Home buying and selling consultation	Material information in property listings consultation
Individuals	560	34
All organisations / professionals	573	154
Conveyancers	152	23
Developers	17	3
Estate agents	125	32
Professional bodies	52	32
Surveyors	70	15
Banks / lenders / brokers	20	2
Local authorities	31	14
Removals and storage	15	1
Proptech companies	20	11
All other organisations	67	21
Total	1,133	188

The remainder of this document provides a summary of the consultation responses received. It does not attempt to capture every point made, nor does it cover comments on aspects of policy that fall outside the scope of the consultation. It sets out how government intends to move forward with the proposals set out in the consultations and the changes the government will make in response to the points raised in the consultation.

We have provided a statistical summary of responses for each question. It should be noted that a number of respondents chose not to answer certain questions. Where percentages are used, they indicate the proportion of responses to the consultation that answered a particular way (as opposed to the proportion of responses to a single question that answered a particular way). 

The government recognises its statutory obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and the Environment Act 2021, and has had regard to these, where relevant. As specific proposals are developed, Ministers will consider these obligations in more detail. Individual measure-by-measure analysis will be undertaken to ensure that equality and environmental considerations are properly taken into account throughout policy development and implementation.

Chapter 3: Objectives

What we consulted on

• Question 5: do you agree with the proposed objectives for reforming the home buying and selling system?
• Question 6: are there any objectives you think should be changed, removed, or added?

What we heard

• 1,001 responses were provided for question 5. 82% of consultation responses agreed with our proposed objectives
• 979 responses were provided for question 6. Despite high levels of agreement with the objectives, 68% of consultation respondents took the opportunity to comment on or propose changes to our objectives

Key points from respondents

The vast majority of respondents agreed with our objectives.

Where respondents disagreed with the objectives, this was most often because they opposed digitalisation (8%).

Support for our objectives was strong across all respondent groups. Whilst still considerable, support was lower from surveyors (69%) and conveyancers (72%).

Of those respondents that used question 6 to comment or propose changes to the objectives, the most common responses were to caution against too readily adopting systems from other countries (4%); and to indicate that there should be penalties for unexplained delays (4%).

Government response

In response we will:

• progress with the objectives we consulted on as part of our roadmap (see Chapter 1)

Government response for Question 5 and 6

We sought views on our objectives to give consultation respondents the opportunity to provide comments on our overarching strategy for home buying and selling reform, alongside individual proposals.

Consultation responses make clear that there is broad consensus on what home buying and selling reform should aim to achieve across all respondent groups. This reflects the fact that home buyers and sellers, property professionals and wider society all stand to benefit from a more efficient system.

While responses to other questions in the consultation show strong support for our digitalisation plans (Chapter 10), respondents that raised this issue were concerned about digital exclusion and cyber-attacks. We recognise concerns regarding the unintended consequences of digitalisation. We will work with industry to provide arrangements for consumers who might be at risk of digital exclusion; for example through additional support from property professionals. We understand respondents’ concerns about digital security, and will ensure that any government digitalisation interventions are implemented with due care and have strong security measures in place.

Government notes that conveyancers and surveyors were less likely than other groups to support our objectives. The most common comment made by conveyancers who disagreed with our objectives was that government should learn from past reform initiatives including Home Information Packs (11% of answers that disagreed). As set out in the above “Building on lessons from past initiatives” section, we have designed our approach to avoid replicating these issues.

Amongst surveyors who disagreed with our objectives, the most common concern was that speed must not come at the expense of quality and professional due diligence (13%). The importance of maintaining quality and due diligence is already captured in our objectives around high professional standards and the need for trust and confidence in the system. Our proposals support this, for example on professionalising estate agents (Chapter 5), our commitment to build industry capacity (Chapter 4) and the measures we are taking to ensure trusted data can be shared between professionals (Chapter 10).

The government recognises the comments made cautioning against wholesale adoption of systems from other jurisdictions. The process in this country has evolved over more than 100 years, and it would be incredibly challenging, time consuming, costly and fraught with unintended consequences to crudely transplant a system from abroad. Instead, we have carried out extensive research and engagement with industry experts and stakeholders to build our evidence base. This includes but is not limited to drawing on relevant examples of international best practice.

Whilst, as noted in the above section, a small proportion of respondents (4%) supported including penalties for unexplained delays, we do not consider this appropriate to reflect in our objectives. Instead, we will bring forward legislation to introduce more binding conditional contracts which will include penalty provisions for parties that cause transactions to unnecessarily collapse, while retaining some flexibility to ensure either party can withdraw for certain legitimate reasons (Chapter 7). On the basis of the above we intend to proceed with the objectives we consulted on and this is reflected in our roadmap (Chapter 1).

Chapter 4: Requiring upfront property information

What we consulted on

• Question 7: Do you agree that there should be a mandatory requirement for sellers and estate agents to provide comprehensive upfront information?
• Question 8: Do you agree that this should include a requirement to order property searches and undertake a property condition report?
• Question 9: What steps should government take to ensure that conveyancing lawyers, estate agents and surveyors have the capacity and capability to implement this change?
• Question 10: What resources and additional training would be needed in order to implement these changes?

What we heard

1,111 responses were provided for question 7. 79% of responses to the consultation agreed there should be a mandatory requirement for comprehensive upfront information, 8% disagreed, 11% were undecided.

1,107 responses were provided for question 8. 58% of respondents agreed upfront information should include property searches and a property condition report, 16% disagreed, and 24% had mixed views.

999 responses were provided for question 9. Respondents put forward a range of suggestions for how government could support industry capacity to implement these changes. Introducing new legislation was the most common suggestion (27%).

863 responses were provided for question 10. There was a broad range of recommendations for additional resources and training that would be needed to implement these changes. A leading suggestion was for government to issue guidance clarifying new standards and the respective responsibilities of professionals and consumers when providing upfront information (19%).

Key points from respondents

There was considerable support for requiring comprehensive upfront information across all respondent groups, particularly amongst banks / lenders / brokers (100%), removal and storage professionals (100%) and Local Authorities (91%). Support from individuals (84%) was higher than that from professionals (77%).

Support was less strong amongst conveyancers (62%) and surveyors (67%) though still considerable.

More than half of respondents supported the inclusion of both property searches and condition reports in upfront information requirements (58%) and support was particularly strong amongst individuals (68%). Support for individual measures was higher, as 66% of respondents agreed that either property searches or a property condition report should be included.

Professionals were less supportive but overall more than twice as likely to support the inclusion of both searches and a survey compared to being opposed (44% vs 18%), and more than half (53%) of all professionals supported the inclusion of at least one of either a search or a condition report.

Conveyancers were the least supportive of including both searches and a condition report, and were more likely to oppose this proposal than support it (28% for, 38% opposed). However, 38% were in favour of at least one of searches or a condition report being provided upfront. There was also less support amongst surveyors for including both searches and surveys (34% for, 21% opposed), but 56% supported the inclusion of at least one.

Concerns about searches and surveys were most likely to be related to the validity of the property data over time, increased costs for sellers, lenders not accepting the data or buyers not trusting the data.

Responses from professionals also emphasised that phased or gradual implementation would be important for ensuring the sector has time to adapt to this change, and that government should support training and apprenticeship schemes, including existing schemes, to assist businesses with upskilling and to build workforce capacity.

Government response

In response we will:

• introduce legislation, when parliamentary time allows, to require the preparation of ‘sales packs’ prior to listing, including searches and a property condition report. This will ensure prospective buyers have access to comprehensive property information prior to making an offer and reduce the likelihood of critical information coming to light late in the transaction
• work with industry immediately to identify ‘sales pack’ information that can be voluntarily provided now to support more efficient transactions and help the sector adjust in anticipation of legislation
• use guidance to clearly define and communicate desirable standards on upfront information for sellers and professionals ahead of legislation, giving the sector time to prepare for the transition and build the necessary capacity
• starting later this year, explore opportunities to support training and skills development, including through existing training and apprenticeship routes, to build long-term capacity

Government response for questions 7 to 10

The government intends to move towards a system in which a standardised ‘sales pack’ is prepared before a property is listed, including property search and condition report results.

We intend to bring forward legislation to make this a requirement when parliamentary time allows as we recognise legislation is needed to ensure standards are applied consistently. We will encourage industry to make use of information already available, where appropriate, to support faster transactions and reduce fall-throughs and will commence work with industry immediately to identify information that can be provided upfront now, to support improvements ahead of statutory requirements and to help the sector prepare for transition.

This will ensure changes are introduced gradually, allowing systems, processes and capacity to develop. From later this year we will also explore opportunities to support training and skills development in the conveyancing and surveying sectors through existing training and apprenticeship routes, to assist businesses in building long‑term workforce capacity.

Sellers will retain overall responsibility for ensuring the sales pack is prepared, with relevant professionals responsible for gathering and verifying relevant information (e.g. conveyancers on legal and title information, surveyors on condition-related information, etc.).

We will produce guidance ahead of legislation, taking account of the provenance, reliability and utility of property information over time. This will include defining how and when data such as search information needs refreshing and what is needed to support lender acceptance and buyer trust. This will involve further engagement with industry to shape sales packs requirements, including specific requirements for upfront property searches and condition reports. Our aim is to develop a tailored system that addresses the challenges arising from insufficient upfront information and ensures small and medium-sized businesses continue to play a vital and sustainable role in the market.

Guidance will define the elements of information that a standardised sales pack should contain, to encourage adoption of good practice ahead of this being set out as a requirement in legislation. Guidance will define best practice standards for different actors, provide clarity on what audience different information is intended for (buyer, buyer’s conveyancer, lender, valuer, surveyor, etc.) and details on which points of information in a sales pack should be included in property listings. We anticipate the best practice standards will include the information listed at Annex B.

The government will undertake a thorough impact assessment ahead of any legislation, considering overarching costs and benefits, and how the approach can improve speed and certainty while maintaining consumer protections and aligning with business needs.

Chapter 5: Professionalising property agents

What we consulted on

• Question 11: Do you agree that we should intervene to drive up standards amongst, and improve trust in, property agents?
• Question 12: Do you agree with our proposal to bring forward a Code of Practice on a non-statutory basis, and to legislate to put this on a statutory footing in future if necessary?
• Question 13: Do you agree with our proposal to consult on mandatory qualifications for estate and lettings agents?
• Question 14: Are there additional interventions you think government should take to drive up standards among property agents?
• Question 15: Are there any other areas across the property agent sector that need to be monitored or regulated in order to improve the customer journey?

What we heard

1,061 responses were provided for question 11. 86% of responses to the consultation agreed that government should intervene to drive up standards and improve trust in property agents. 7% disagreed, and 1% were undecided.

1,032 responses were provided for question 12. 82% of responses to the consultation agreed with our proposal to bring forward a Code of Practice on a non-statutory basis with potential legislation in future if necessary. 9% disagreed, and 2% were undecided.

1,036 responses were provided for question 13. 80% of responses to the consultation agreed with our proposal to consult on mandatory qualifications for estate and letting agents. 10% disagreed, and 2% were undecided.

883 responses were provided for question 14. 59% of responses to the consultation said there were additional interventions that government should make to improve standards among property agents. 16% believed no further interventions are necessary, and 3% were undecided.

799 responses were provided for question 15. 58% of responses to the consultation felt there were other areas across the property agent sector that need to be monitored or regulated in order to improve the customer journey. 13% felt there were not, and 3% were undecided.

Key points from respondents

There was strong support for government action to improve standards and trust in property agents across all respondent groups, particularly among developers (94% of all responses to the consultation), banks / lenders / brokers (90%), individuals (88%), and estate agents (88%).

Similarly, there was strong support for a non-statutory Code of Practice across all groups, particularly local authorities (87%), professional bodies (85%), and estate agents (78%).

Respondents across all groups showed strong support for our proposal to consult on mandatory qualifications for estate and letting agents. 81% of surveyors, 77% of organisations and professionals combined, and 79% of estate agents were in favour of this approach.

Responses suggested a range of additional interventions that government should take to drive up standards among property agents. The most common suggestion related to strengthening oversight and enforcement of the law relating to property agents (23%). This was the most frequent suggestion made by professional bodies (46%), developers (35%) and estate agents (22%). Other responses felt there was a need for further intervention regarding sector practices (16%), with conditional selling and referral fees the most often highlighted examples. Other examples of sector practice respondents felt required intervention included sole agency contract terms, estate agency fees, and standardising contracts.

On the question of whether there are other areas across the property agent sector which should be monitored or regulated, the most often cited area was estate agent terms and conditions (including fees, conflicts of interest, and business practices), which was mentioned by 17% of all responses to the consultation. 12% felt there should be more monitoring or regulation of other parts of the sector (such as property auctions, removals, property search companies and valuers).

Government response

In response we will:

• later this year, publish a non-statutory Code of Practice setting out minimum best practice standards
• next year, consult on introducing mandatory qualifications for estate and letting agents; subject to the outcome of the consultation, legislate when parliamentary time allows
• consider legislation to ensure compliance with the Code of Practice

Government response for questions 11 to 15

We know that many property agents conduct themselves to a high standard. However, in order to raise trust, reputation and professionalism within the sector we need to improve the minimum standards of those who are not.

There was strong support across these questions for government intervention to increase oversight and standards and as a result of this we will implement proposals as outlined in the consultation.

Therefore, building on the work carried out by Baroness Hayter’s working group, we will work with the sector to develop and publish a Code of Practice setting out minimum best practice standards for property agents. The Code will be published on a non-statutory basis, but we will keep this under review with a view to mandating adherence to its provisions by legislation, if necessary, and making compliance a legal requirement for property agents.

We will also consult on proposed mandatory qualifications, including who should be required to hold qualifications, what qualifications should include, and appropriate grandfathering arrangements (i.e. arrangements for experienced property agents) in due course. Subject to the outcome of the consultation, we will legislate if necessary and when Parliamentary time allows.

We will monitor industry’s response to these interventions and continue to consider Lord Best’s recommendations and wider options to increase standards and consumer trust, setting out our full position on the regulation of estate, letting and managing agents in due course.

Chapter 6: Digital property logbooks and packs

What we consulted on

• Question 16: Do you agree that government should aim to support the wider use of digital property logbooks and packs?
• Question 17: If yes, what do you think would drive their wider adoption? How could government support this and do you think that legislation might be needed to bring about this change?
• Question 18: What risks would need to be considered when creating and storing digital logbooks?

What we heard

1,057 responses were provided for question 16. 82% of responses to the consultation agreed that government should aim to support the wider use of digital property logbooks and packs.

855 responses were provided for question 17. The most common response to the consultation suggested that government should mandate usage of digital logbooks and packs via legislation to drive wider adoption (27%).

813 responses were provided for question 18. The most common response (43%) to the consultation highlighted the risk of data breaches when considering potential risks to delivering digital logbooks.

Key points from respondents

There was overwhelmingly strong support (82%) for government to intervene and support the wider use of digital property logbooks and packs, with no significant difference in the way different respondent groups answered.

27% of respondents suggested that government should mandate the use of these products via legislation as a requirement of future property transactions. Developers were most supportive of this, with 44% agreeing that legislation would be the right approach.

The other major suggestions were that government should open up or standardise data (12%), and that government should mandate change via a means other than legislation (12%).

Of the respondents that disagreed with government supporting logbooks and packs, the most common issues cited were privacy and data security concerns (13%).

Similarly, for question 18, 43% raised the risk of data breaches, with proptech organisations being most concerned (65%). 25% of respondents to the consultation also mentioned the risk of not complying with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Government response

In response we will:

• when parliamentary time allows, we will bring forward legislation to ensure that digital logbooks and packs become a standard part of property transactions. As part of this we will mandate the minimum, standardised data that both products should contain
• ahead of delivering legislation, from next year consider which government homeownership schemes, digital logbooks and packs should be made a requirement of
• we will promote these products through a new, advisory home buying and selling Charter (Chapter 8), and this year work with industry regulators and membership bodies to promote via their channels

Government response to questions 16 to 18

As a result of the strong support shown from respondents for government intervention to support wider usage, we will legislate to make both digital property logbooks and sales packs a requirement for all property transactions when parliamentary time allows. We believe that wider coverage of these products will enable more informed choices for buyers leading to faster, more secure property transactions. Whilst we legislate there is nothing to stop industry from providing these products now in order to improve their services.

Recognising that 12% of respondents suggested that government should standardise data in digital logbooks and packs, we will, when parliamentary time allows, legislate on what data should be included, ensuring information is aligned with our sales packs requirements (Chapter 4). As part of this, to support government’s aims with regards to older people’s housing, we will consider the inclusion of information on property accessibility so that buyers with accessibility needs (including older people) can confidently assess whether a home is right for them.

We will work with regulators and membership groups to ensure industry guidance and protocols support the standardisation of these tools and ensure data is only gathered from trusted, verified sources. This work will be informed by the progress already made by the Residential Logbook Association’s proof of concept project testing how HM Land Registry (HMLR) data can be accessed within logbooks, and also by work led by the Open Property Data Association and other stakeholder work.

Ahead of legislation we will consider which of our government homeownership schemes digital logbooks and sales packs should be made a requirement of to signal to industry and consumers our intent to make these products a standard feature of the property transaction.

We will also promote and advocate the use of digital logbooks and sales packs through government channels, including setting an expectation in our advisory Home Buying and Selling Charter (Chapter 8) that professionals make these products a requirement of property sales.

Recognising that some respondents raised concerns about the security of data stored in digital logbooks and sales packs, we will work with the proptech industry and other technology specialists to ensure our plans incorporate robust technology and digital security systems. We will also work with representative and regulatory bodies towards setting an agreed level of digital security these products must meet. This will include organisations such as the Law Society, the Council of Licensed Conveyancers, the Conveyancing Association, the Digital Property Market Steering Group, and the Home Buying and Selling Council.

We recognise that Digital Property Logbooks have a wider role than just buying and selling and will work with other government departments to co-ordinate their roll-out so we all benefit from a consistent, mutually supportive approach.

Chapter 7: Binding conditional contracts

What we consulted on

• Question 19: Do you agree that government should support mechanisms to make property transactions more binding at an earlier stage?
• Question 20: What do you think is the most effective means of doing this – incentivise estate agents to offer this as a service; raise consumer awareness of binding agreements; legislate to require their use in property transactions etcetera?
• Question 21: What would be appropriate costs or penalties for failure to comply with binding contracts?
• Question 22: Would there be any listed exceptions, or certain situations, for binding contracts not being applied?

What we heard

1,033 responses were provided for question 19. 72% of responses to the consultation agreed that government should support mechanisms to make property transactions more binding earlier in the process, 15% disagreed, 5% were unsure.

999 responses were provided for question 20. Legislation was the top suggestion for supporting binding transactions, backed by 44% of responses to the consultation.

987 responses were provided for question 21. With 37% of responses to the consultation in agreement, the most popular suggestion for penalties for failing to comply with binding contracts was to pay a percentage of the agreed sale price or transaction costs.

976 responses were provided for questions 22. 58% of responses to the consultation agreed that certain listed exceptions should prevent binding contracts from taking effect, 13% disagreed, and 1% were unsure.

Key points from respondents

Support for earlier binding contracts was strong overall (72%) and particularly strong from individuals (81%). Support was also considerable amongst professionals at 63%.

Support was less strong among conveyancers though this group was still more likely to support than oppose the proposal (45% vs 38%). Conveyancers that did not support the proposal cited concerns about premature commitment before legal checks, the risk of penalties for legitimate withdrawals, and chain complications.

In terms of how to effectively implement change, legislation was the most popular suggestion (44% of all respondents), followed by awareness raising and education (18%) and improving upfront information (10%).

Most respondents agreed there should be exceptions that allow individuals to pull out of more binding contracts. Death / illness (30%), newly discovered property information (27%), and major financial changes (20%) were the most common suggestions for such exceptions.

Respondents also stressed that buyers cannot safely commit before full property information is made available (29%).

Government response

In response we will:

• introduce legislation, when parliamentary time allows, to require the use of binding conditional contracts in property transactions. We will only bring this legislation into force after sales packs are embedded
• from next year, as part of the procedure for any proposed legislation, we will work with industry to define suitable penalty fees which increase commitment to transactions without being unfair and specify exception clauses as well as dispute resolution mechanisms
• from later this year, undertake further industry engagement to prepare the sector for this change and, where appropriate, spread awareness of the voluntary use of reservation agreements ahead of legislation

Government response for questions 19 to 22

The intention of this proposal is to address the high level of transaction failures that currently characterise the home buying and selling process in this country. These failures are driven in part by the ability of parties to withdraw at any point prior to exchange of contracts, largely without consequence and oftentimes at significant cost to the other party.

Alongside considerable support for binding conditional contracts, consultation responses agreed that sequencing these measures after upfront information (sales pack) reforms would be most effective. We therefore intend to introduce legislation to require the use of binding conditional contracts in property transactions when parliamentary time allows, bringing systems across the rest of the UK more in line with Scotland. This legislation would represent a significant change to the way things operate currently so would be introduced gradually and not come into effect until after sales packs are embedded. This will ensure buyers do not become unfairly bound to transactions before becoming aware of key property information.

Consultation responses showed relatively strong support for applying financial penalties where parties fail to comply with binding contracts, particularly penalties that are based on a percentage of the property’s sale value and which reflect the stage at which the transaction fails. Therefore, ahead of legislation, we will work with industry to determine the most suitable penalty fee structure which increases commitment to transactions without being unfair.

Binding contracts would need to be flexible, accounting for legitimate circumstances where parties need to pull out of transactions, for example where they are forced to do so because their chain has collapsed. We also recognise that clear, accessible dispute resolution arrangements will be essential to ensuring fairness and enforceability. Our development of legislation will consider these issues carefully, ensuring exceptions and dispute resolution mechanisms are clearly specified.

Ahead of legislation, starting later this year, we will raise awareness amongst both consumers and industry and establish our expectations regarding professional responsibilities over binding contracts to ensure the sector is prepared when it becomes appropriate to implement these requirements. Alongside this, we will prioritise spreading awareness of the voluntary use of binding contracts and reservation agreements in instances where comprehensive upfront information is available, as existing initiatives to secure commitment earlier in the process have proven effective.

Chapter 8: Increasing consumer education and transparency

What we consulted on

• Question 23: Do you agree that publishing information on the services of property professionals would improve home buying and selling by supporting consumer choice and driving competition?
• Question 24: What information would you want to see included in a service of this type?
• Question 25: Do you think a Charter as set out above would be useful in supporting consumers to identify quality property professional services?

What we heard

1,016 responses were provided for question 23. 56% of consultation responses agreed that publishing information on the services of property professionals would improve home buying and selling. 21% said no, and 12% were unsure or provided mixed views.

879 responses were provided for question 24. The top response was to publish clear performance data to help consumers understand how effectively firms handle transactions (23%).

927 responses were provided for question 25. 50% of consultation responses supported a Charter to identify quality property professionals and services, 20% said they did not support this, and 11% were unsure.

Key points from respondents

Support for publishing information on the services of property professionals was higher amongst individuals (63%) than organisations and professionals (42%).

The most common theme across the respondents was that information of the sort proposed for publication was already publicly available (8%). Respondents also highlighted that complexities and external factors in transactions could make the publication of performance metrics unfair (5%) and raised concerns about the reliability or verification of data (4%) and about the need for information to be carefully regulated to avoid gaming (4%).

In answering question 24, publishing performance and outcome metrics gained the most support across all respondents (27%) in particular amongst the following groups; Local Authorities (36%) developers (35%), banks / lenders / brokers (30%) and individuals (27%). Publishing verified reviews and complaints handling details (17%) and information on qualifications and regulation (16%) received the next highest levels of support.

Amongst organisations and professionals, almost half supported publishing a Charter (45%) and amongst individuals, more than half supported the proposal (55%).

Some respondents (5%) raised the concern that a new Charter could overlap with existing regulatory, accreditation frameworks and redress schemes. Amongst these, organisations and professionals (87%) were more likely to raise this issue than individuals (13%)

Government response

In response we will:

• publish an advisory Charter next year setting out professional best practice and behaviours for property professionals to support efficient home buying and selling

Government response for question 23 to 25

Next year, we will publish an advisory Charter for property professionals. However, in light of lower overall levels of support for this proposal, concerns about the reliability and verification of data, duplication of existing information or regulation, questions about enforceability and the potential administrative burden of implementing the proposal set out in our consultation, this will only be produced as a light-touch guide to support efficient home buying and selling practices.

Property professionals will be encouraged to self-assess against the Charter and signal to consumers where they are complying with its principles.

The Charter will encourage many of the practices we ultimately want to legislate for and in this way will act as a bridging tool, supporting a transition to a new regulatory framework, whilst avoiding clashing with existing regulations.

To this end, we expect the Charter to include principles on:

• providing upfront information
• the use of modern digital tools
• professional standards and working together
• complaints handling and accountability

In light of concerns about perverse incentives and the administrative burden of publishing and verifying data, we are not moving ahead with proposals to publish information on property professionals’ services. However, the Charter will include direction on the information organisations are expected to publish to support transparency for customers.

Chapter 9: Streamlining transactions

What we consulted on

• Question 26: Do you agree that anti-money laundering (AML) checks should be streamlined?
• Question 27: How can government most effectively support the application of AI conveyancing technology?
• Question 28: What else do you think government should do to streamline the conveyancing process?

What we heard

973 responses were provided for question 26. 83% of responses to the consultation agreed that AML checks should be streamlined, 4% disagreed, and 14% did not answer.

893 responses were provided for question 27. The most common responses were that government should support centralised data storage to improve shareability of property information, e.g. through logbooks (7% of responses to the consultation), and that there is a need for clear standards on appropriate use of AI conveyancing technology (6%).

899 responses were provided for question 28. The most popular suggestion was for government to support digitalisation and centralisation of property data to streamline the conveyancing process (10%).

Key points from respondents

Support for streamlining AML checks was strong from both individual respondents and those responding as professionals. This was especially the case among banks / lenders / brokers (100%), estate agents (90%), and conveyancers (90%), which are the professions that most likely to carry out AML checks during transactions.

In terms of how to achieve more streamlined AML checks, respondents most frequently pointed to centralising or enabling re-use of AML checks to remove duplication across various professions (13%). Respondents also suggested using digital identity systems (6%) to support the secure sharing and portability of verified checks.

On both supporting the application of AI conveyancing and streamlining the conveyancing process more broadly, the most frequent suggestions put forward by respondents were consistent with measures that we proposed in other sections of this consultation. Specifically, there was support for more standardised and centralised property data (7%) to facilitate information sharing and accessibility, which is a core aim of our proposals on digitalisation and logbooks. There was also good support for encouraging earlier instruction of conveyancers (8%) to enable upfront access to key property information, which is consistent with the types of changes we want to drive through the implementation of sales packs.

Suggestions on improving capacity and performance in key delivery partners (including Local Authorities and HMLR were also relatively common (9%).

Government response

In response we will:

• immediately support appropriate industry-led technological solutions to improve shareability of AML checks and reduce duplication in the transaction process
• prioritise our wider reforms that will do the most to improve the efficiency of conveyancing (upfront sales packs, leasehold and freehold estates sales information, digitalisation and logbooks)
• work with the Digital Property Market Steering Group (DPMSG) (Chapter 10) next year to establish clear standards on appropriate use of AI conveyancing technology

Government response for questions 26 to 28

Recognising that the role and responsibilities of conveyancers have expanded significantly in recent years, the purpose of these proposals is to help simplify conveyancing to ensure that consumers and professionals do not face unnecessary delays and duplication.

We agree with the strong support respondents showed for reducing duplicate AML checks. Consultation responses highlighted that industry is already developing practical solutions to address this.

Rather than redesigning the regulatory framework for AML checks at this stage, the government will support sector-led solutions to improve shareability of AML checks and reduce duplication in the transaction process. We believe information needed for these checks should be gathered once, at a high standard, at the earliest possible stage. We will work with industry to support appropriate technological solutions that ensure that information is only shared with permissioned parties and protects the home movers’ right to know what data is being shared and with whom. We will do this alongside our work to expand digital identity and secure data sharing arrangements and will consider how this broader work can further support streamlining (Chapter 10).

Consultation responses suggest that the biggest gains in conveyancing efficiency will come from the implementation of our wider reforms such as sales packs, digitalisation, digital property logbooks and leasehold and freehold estate sales information. We will therefore prioritise these reforms to streamline conveyancing.

We recognise the potential of AI to automate routine tasks (e.g. document classification, triage, data extraction) while preserving human judgement for decisions. Next year we will work with DPMSG to establish standards that ensure AI conveyancing technologies are applied practically and consistently across the sector, and will continue to work with industry more broadly to further identify suitable AI use cases.

This will build on government’s AI Growth Lab which was recently established to support responsible AI-driven innovation and adoption. Its first area of focus will be the legal services sector, including conveyancing. This initiative supports AI application testing and brings together relevant regulators to provide clear frameworks for the effective and appropriate use of AI. Applications for Law Tech, legal services and conveyancing services firms to the AI Growth Lab will open later in summer 2026.

Some respondents provided suggestions that key delivery partners improve their capacity and performance. This need for improvement is recognised in our HM Land Registry Strategy 2025+ which sets out how we will continue to invest in our digital systems and registration services, lay the foundations for geospatial data, and scale the responsible use of AI tools to make these services more resilient. We are also continuing to invest in HMLR’s workforce capability, which has led to an increase in caseworker productivity by around 10% over last 3 years and the quality of its training academy recognised by the Princess Royal Training Award.

We will also work to make publicly held data more accessible for consumers and the wider sector (Chapter 10).

Chapter 10: Next steps for digitalisation

What we consulted on

• Question 29: Do you agree that this is the correct direction of travel?
• Question 30: Is there anything else that government should be doing to promote digitalisation of the property sector?

What we heard

967 responses were provided for question 29. 70% of responses to the consultation agreed with the direction of travel, 10% disagreed, and 15% of respondents did not provide a view.

692 responses were provided for question 30. 36% of responses to the consultation suggested that there were additional things government should consider to promote digitalisation beyond the proposals set out in the consultation. 18% responded that there was nothing additional that government should consider, and 39% did not answer.

Key points from respondents

There was overwhelming support for the direction of travel described in question 29 from banks / lenders / brokers and proptech firms (94% and 90% respectively). There was also strong support from local authorities (79%).

Most responses to question 30 did not provide a view beyond stating yes or no. Those that did covered a range of different issues. As a result, there was no single suggestion that received considerable support.

8% of respondents supported the direction of travel but also suggested that legislation to underpin the proposal would strengthen it. 72% of all proptech organisations responding took this view.

5% of respondents whilst supporting the direction of travel suggested that for government’s proposal to be effective it should be sufficiently funded. 44% of all local authorities responding supported this view.

2% of respondents, whilst supporting the direction of travel, stated that security of data and systems should be considered as a fundamental part of our plans.

Whilst supporting our direction of travel, 2% of respondents also advised against increasing the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in conveyancing. Respondents pointed to a need to retain a human element when dealing with a significant life event such as buying and selling a home.

2% of respondents did not support the direction of travel because they were strongly opposed to using AI in the home buying and selling process.

Government response

We will ensure the secure sharing of data

When parliamentary time allows, we will legislate for a regulatory framework that sets out how to store, maintain and share data in a secure way, and which establishes rules on liability and consumer protection, enabling trust.

In advance of that, we will:

• this year, publish a call for evidence to identify the conditions professionals require, and the barriers they face, when sharing data securely to inform proposals for a future smart data consultation
• next year, consult on the implementation of a smart data scheme to identify whether existing legislation could provide for the framework
• next year, deliver a voluntary accreditation scheme that identifies data standards that match a core set of best practice criteria that government wants industry to use when storing, maintaining and sharing data
• continue to modernise and expand HMLR’s Application Programming Interface (API) services to enable almost instant sharing of data

We will digitalise key data sets

We will commence the next stage of our work to drive improvements in the digital accessibility of building control and highways data.

As part of this we will commit £1.4 million to commence work this year with LAs to set data standards, charging practices and service level agreements for these data sets. ​

We will complete the Local Land Charges programme by 2028. This involves the transfer of all local authorities land charges information, part of the local search process, to a central digital register held by HMLR.​

We will develop a fully digital geospatial land register by 2035. Combining geographic and ownership information this will mean that vital property information will be instantly accessible online.

We will deliver transformative digital products

Later this year we will commence work with the sector and facilitate uptake of Digital Verification Services (DVS) that have been certified against the DVS trust framework and are on the DVS register, Qualified Electronic Signatures, and digital logbooks and packs (Chapter 10).

Government response for questions 29 to 30

Recognising the considerable support for our proposed direction of travel for digitalising the home buying and selling system, we will implement our plans as set out in the consultation to enable faster and more secure transactions. This will deliver a digital service that ensures consumers and professionals can access priority data at the right time, and be reassured that this data is trustworthy and governed by consistent data standards.

Ensuring organisations can access trusted, shareable data will provide the conditions to enable the market to develop innovative products that support an end-to-end digital service for consumers. We will work with industry partners to improve the coverage of innovative market products such as digital logbooks and sales packs to ensure they become a standard feature across the sector.

Formed in 2023 as a collaboration between industry and government to modernise the home buying and selling process, the Digital Property Market Steering Group (DPMSG) is well positioned to deliver the change required for reform. Industry-led delivery groups have been established which align with our roadmap commitments. We will work with the group to take forward this programme of work.

Recognising that a number of respondents were concerned about the risk of digital exclusion when responding to these questions and also to those pertaining to the use of digital logbooks and packs (Chapter 6), we will work with industry to preserve non-digital options for home buying and selling processes, and we will ensure all of our digital policies adhere to our responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010. All customers, whether engaging with digital services directly or not, will benefit from digitalisation that supports professionals to share consistent, accurate information.

Ensuring the secure sharing of data

When parliamentary time allows, we will legislate for a regulatory framework that mandates how industry should store, maintain, and share data in a secure way. This recognises the view of 8% of respondents who felt that our direction of travel would be strengthened with legislation.

This legislation will establish a framework which builds trust by defining liability rules and ensuring those using the data are aware of its origin. We will also include rules on consumer protection and complaints processes in the event of inaccurate data being used in a property transaction. This will build on market activity such as the Open Property Data Association’s testing of their property data trust framework.

As a first step, we will publish a call for evidence to identify the specific conditions, such as regulatory change or legal liability, that businesses require to take part in a smart data property scheme, along with understanding the current barriers that they face when sharing property data. This will inform future proposals that we intend to consult on for the implementation of a smart data scheme.

Following this, we will consult on the implementation of a smart data scheme to identify the extent to which powers under the Data Use and Access Act 2025 would enable such a scheme for the property sector. Based on the findings from this consultation, we will identify if additional legislation is required to deliver the regulatory data sharing framework. This will meet the concerns of respondents who highlighted that security of data and systems should be considered as a fundamental element of our digitalisation strategy.

At the same time, we will work with industry colleagues to accredit data standards that meet a core set of criteria and ask professionals to adopt these standards before legislation is implemented.

We will also work with HMLR to explore the reuse of machine-readable information with lenders to streamline and simplify the remortgaging process.

We will continue to modernise and grow HMLR’s application programming interface (API) services, making it easier for organisations to connect with and share public data securely and reliably. Working closely with our partners and users, we will ensure our APIs follow recognised industry standards, making it simpler for different systems and organisations to work together seamlessly. We will also introduce a dedicated online hub to help users find what they need and get started with our APIs more quickly, regardless of their technical background.

Digitalising key data sets

Following completion of our recent pilot which sought to understand the impact of opening up key locally held datasets, we will commence the next stage of this work with local authorities to improve the accessibility of building control data and highways information. Depending on the individual local authority, this could include a combination of digitising the data and implementing data standards to improve accuracy and data sharing.

Alongside this, we will commence work with local authorities to review charging practices and put in place service level agreements so this data is more accessible for consumers and professionals, whilst also ensuring local authorities are not adversely impacted by any changes.​

We will also review the other data that should be prioritised for reform. Ahead of this, we will work with industry and data providers to identify interim solutions where digitalised data is unavailable, unreliable, or does not have the required trust credentials.

Recognising that 5% of all respondents suggested that for government’s proposal to be effective it should be sufficiently funded, we will commit £1.4 million for the next stage of this work and continue to consider local authority resourcing for future stages when digitalising priority data.

This work will complement funding for the co-development of building control standards with local authorities and Registered Building Control Approvers (RBCAs). As part of the Digital Building Control programme, we will also explore new publication requirements for building control registers to improve data accessibility.

We will ensure that the Local Land Charges programme is complete by 2028.

We will develop a fully digital, geospatial title (land) register by 2035, combining geographic and ownership information. This will enable vital property information held by HMLR to be instantly accessible online, enabling industry to map the data they are most interested in. By 2030, we will modernise the register by using agreed data standards to structure the information into a machine-interpretable and accessible format.

Delivering transformative digital products

We are clear that industry is best placed to develop the digital products that consumers and professionals require. Our plans to digitalise priority data and deliver a regulatory framework for data sharing will enable proptech organisations to innovate. This will lead to greater investment and competition. We will also act to improve coverage of those products currently available in the market to ensure they become a standard feature of property transactions.

Via the DPMSG, we will work with industry to define and publicise digital ID standards to enable the development of trustworthy, innovative and interoperable products that reduce the need for duplicative ID checks.

At the same time, building on HMLR’s work to ensure their services have the capability to accept Qualified Electronic Signatures (QES), we will work with stakeholder groups such as the DPMSG to promote the use of QES via their membership. QES are the most secure form of electronic signature, requiring no paper or witness, and so affording greater flexibility and simplicity.

We will legislate to ensure that digital logbooks and sales packs become a standard part of property transactions when parliamentary time allows, as set out in Chapter 6 which also details other planned activity for this workstream.

Chapter 11: Leasehold and freehold estates sales information

This section of the consultation did not include questions but set out action government will take to support leaseholders and freeholders on managed estates to make selling their properties easier.

Leaseholders can face delays and high costs when selling their homes because essential information they need is held by freeholders or managing agents who often take too long or charge too much to share this information. Homeowners on private or mixed‑tenure estates can face similar barriers where they must obtain relevant information from an estate manager to progress a sale.

These delays and uncertainties can increase the risk of transactions stalling or falling through, undermining confidence for both buyers and sellers. Addressing these issues is an important step in creating a fairer home buying and selling system and ensuring households do not face unnecessary delays because of the type of property they live in.

The government is taking forward a comprehensive programme of reform through the implementation of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LFRA). The LFRA provides new powers to set enforceable expectations on the timeliness and cost of providing relevant sales. We will use these powers to establish firm caps on fees and turnaround times for information requests. We will also introduce a clear and standardised framework defining both the information to be provided and the processes for how it is requested and delivered.

We will consult next year on the supporting secondary legislation needed to give these measures full effect. Consultation will ensure that measures are developed based on the expertise of industry stakeholders and homeowners with relevant experience of this issue. In developing legislation, we will ensure new requirements are underpinned by effective enforcement and proportionate monitoring systems; and that commencement arrangements are clear to support consistent delivery and compliance.

Alongside legislation we will provide clear, practical guidance to raise standards in advance of implementation. This will set out consistent expectations for all parties on the requesting and provision of sales information, supporting a more streamlined and reliable process while the new statutory framework is put in place.

Chapter 12: Material information in property listings

What we consulted on and what we heard

We held a separate standalone consultation on material information in property listings, and 188 responses were provided to the consultation overall. The following sections include the questions and key points from respondents. 

Challenges in providing material information

Question 5: What do you think are the most significant issues that prevent estate agents from providing material information in property listings?

155 responses were provided for question 5. The most frequently mentioned issue was estate agents’ lack of expertise and reliance on other professionals (39% of all responses to the consultation).

Almost a third of all responses (32%) highlighted consumer awareness and behaviour as an issue.

23% of all responses pointed to a lack of incentives for estate agents.

Question 6 – In addition to providing guidance, what other steps do you think government should take to support estate agents to meet their legal responsibilities with regard to material information?

171 responses were provided for question 6. Over half (53%) of all responses to the consultation said government should provide standardised forms.

48% of all responses suggested government should require mandatory qualifications, training, and/or continuing personal development (CPD).

22% of all responses suggested licensing or wider regulation of estate agents.

Question 7 – What action would you like to see from other organisations or property professionals, and consumers, to support estate agents with their legal responsibilities regarding material information?

166 responses were received to question 7. 21% of all responses to the consultation highlighted improved digitalisation and interoperability of property data.

20% of all responses mentioned action to improve consumer understanding of their rights and obligations. Three-quarters of enforcement and redress bodies made this point, as did 46% of proptech firms and 25% of professional bodies.

18% of all responses said better guidance on the legal responsibilities of other organisations/property professionals, standardised material information forms for them to provide information to estate agents, and standardisation of how material information is displayed by property portals.

Key points from respondents

The most common barrier to estate agents providing material information raised by respondents was estate agents’ lack of expertise and reliance on other professionals. This point was made by nearly two-thirds of conveyancers (65%), 64% of proptech firms, and 53% of surveyors. A number of responses suggested that estate agents are not qualified to assess technical issues such as structural condition, covenants or easements, and that such information should only be interpreted by trained professionals e.g. legal representatives and surveyors.

Another key theme across these questions was barriers created by consumers. Nearly a half (44%) of estate agents, 35% of conveyancers, and a third (33%) of developers felt this was a significant issue. Respondents pointed to sellers’ limited knowledge of key information about their property and their reluctance to disclose negative information which could have an effect on price. Responses also highlighted difficulties obtaining property information during probate, corporate or non-resident owner transactions.

An additional barrier outlined was a lack of incentives for estate agents to do the right thing and the fact that this could create an “uneven playing field” between estate agents in the market. 60% of surveyors made this point as did 24% of individuals and 18% of conveyancers. Responses felt estate agents’ incentives to provide material information were often limited because of the costs involved in collecting it, especially when sellers may choose an agent who does not ask for this information.

There was a strong desire for standardised forms/templates to ensure a consistent process for gathering material information. Support was particularly strong from developers (67%), local authorities (64%), proptech (64%), and conveyancers (57%). Respondents suggested that these forms could promote greater consistency, reduce omissions, and provide clarity about what constitutes material information.

There was also a significant theme of regulation and training across this set of questions. Respondents suggested that government should intervene to ensure estate agents meet their legal responsibilities, with 48% of all responses to the consultation suggesting mandatory qualifications, training, and/or continuing personal development (CPD); and 22% of all responses suggested licensing or wider regulation of estate agents.

Material information categories

Question 8: What information categories do you think should be included in guidance as things that would likely be considered material information?

144 responses were received to question 8. Answers were spread fairly consistently across all listed categories. For example, 56% of all responses to the consultation highlighted tenure; 56% of all responses said sewerage; and 54% of all responses said ground rent or service charge.

Question 9: Are there any information categories you want to highlight as data you would not consider material information? If so, why would you not consider it material information?

154 responses were received to question 9. 60% of all consultation responses did not identify any of the information categories provided.

Question 10: Are there any information categories that you think should be considered material information, but which could be challenging to display in property listings in a way that is easily understood by consumers? How do you think any information categories of this sort should be treated?

145 responses were received to question 10. Respondents highlighted the difficulties of displaying some types of material information in property listings in a way that can be readily understood by consumers. Rights and easements (cited by 19% of all responses to the consultation) and building safety defects (17%) were felt to be particularly challenging.

17% said there were none or the question was not applicable.

Key points from respondents

A full breakdown of responses to question 8 is as follows:

Material information category	Percentage of total responses who thought it should be included
Tenure	56%
Sewerage	56%
Ground rent/service charge	54%
Planning permission	52%
Water supply	51%
Parking	51%
Price	50%
Flood risk	50%
Heating type	49%
Restrictions (listed property, conservation area etc)	49%
Property construction (thatched, prefabricated etc)	49%
Building safety defects	48%
Rights and easements	47%
Council tax	47%
Electricity supply	47%
Issues with property (damp, asbestos etc)	47%
Broadband	46%
Property type (detached etc)	46%
Coastal erosion	45%
Accessibility and adaptations	45%
Number and type of rooms	44%
Mobile phone signal	44%
Coalfield or mining area	42%
Any other category	60%

60% of all responses to question 8 said any other category, suggesting categories including pollution risk, neighbour disputes, renewable energy installations, and probate information should also be included as material information.

For question 10, the most frequent response on how to handle challenging material information categories was that buyers should be signposted to consult a professional for help interpreting the information and putting it into context (16% of all responses to the consultation). To explain complex information in the most straightforward way, 13% said the information should be streamlined and presented in plain English. While the majority (60%) thought all listed categories should be material information, some felt mobile phone signal (10%) and broadband (9%) and issues with the property (7%) should not.

Timing of sharing material information with buyers

Question 11: Do you think it is reasonable for any information that could be considered material to not be included in full detail in property listings, instead with further details being provided at a later stage in the process, for example when a customer views a property?

162 responses were received to question 11. 46% of all responses to the consultation agreed that it is reasonable to not include all material information in listings and provide further detail at a later stage in the process.

40% of all responses felt that all information should be provided upfront.

Question 12: If so, what are the differences between information you think should be included in property listings vs that which should be provided at a later stage? Can you give examples of each?

123 responses were received to question 12. Around a third of all responses to the consultation (31%) said all information should be provided upfront.

Key points from respondents

Responses were divided on whether material information should be shared with buyers using a phased approach. 46% felt it was reasonable for some categories of material information to be shared with the buyer later in the transaction process, for example at the viewing stage. 40% said all information should be provided upfront and 24% said some information should be available upfront and some at a later stage in the process.

Respondents who opted for all information to be provided upfront felt that a lack of transparency causes frustration, wasted time, and transaction delays; and providing material information upfront mitigates these issues by allowing buyers to make more informed decisions earlier in the process.

19% of all responses to the consultation said some information should be provided upfront and the rest later on. Respondents felt information which usually does not change and is used by buyers to decide which property to view (such as number of bedrooms and tenure) should be provided upfront.

When asked which categories of information could be provided later in the transaction process, 10% said legal information and 3% said surveys.

Interpreting technical information

Question 13 : What should be the requirement on estate agents regarding material information that could require technical expertise to obtain or interpret?

165 responses were received to question 13. The most frequent response was that there should be no requirement on estate agents regarding material information that requires technical expertise to obtain or interpret (26% of all responses to the consultation).

Question 14: What should guidance state about estate agents working with surveyors and conveyancers to obtain or interpret technical information?

140 responses were received to question 14. The most frequent suggestions were that estate agents should gather advice from experts (25%) but that they should not be required to interpret that advice (22%).

Question 15: What should guidance say about estate agents working with other property professionals such as managing agents, mortgage advisers, lenders etc?

128 responses were received to question 15. Over a quarter of all responses to the consultation (29%) stated that estate agents should be required to collaborate with other professionals.

Key points from respondents

On the role of estate agents in interpreting technical information for buyers, responses were almost evenly split. Around a quarter of all respondents (26%) said there should be no requirement for estate agents to do so.

These respondents felt that without formal qualifications, estate agents should not be expected to advise consumers on technical information, but should defer to a relevant expert (e.g. conveyancer or surveyor). However, 22% of all responses to the consultation said estate agents are responsible for this information and should be appropriately trained and regulated to provide it.

On the issue of collaboration, 18% of respondents felt professionals should collaborate regarding technical information that requires expertise to interpret. 29% believed that estate agents should have a duty to collaborate with other property professionals and that this should be set out in the material information guidance.

22% of all responses to the consultation said estate agents should be transparent about fees. Respondents said that referral fees should be disclosed and at a reasonable level or capped as a proportion of the total fee.

11% of all responses to the consultation said estate agents should be regulated or be subject to minimum professional standards.

Ensuring data accuracy

Question 16: How could guidance on material information ensure data gathered by estate agents, and supplied by sellers, is as accurate as possible?

142 responses were received to question 16. 48% of all consultation responses said guidance could require that trusted information is used or proof of source provided.

Question 17: What else could government do to ensure information gathered by estate agents is as reliable as possible?

130 responses were received to question 17. A third of all responses to the consultation (33%) said government should facilitate digitalisation of key information.

Question 18: What could other organisations and sellers do to ensure information gathered by estate agents is as reliable as possible?

148 responses were received to question 18. The most frequently mentioned participant was sellers (20% of all responses to the consultation): many respondents emphasised that reliable material information depends on sellers providing truthful, complete and verifiable information about their property.

Key points from respondents:

Respondents said government can ensure information is accurate by digitalising data (48% of all response to the consultation) and applying enforcement in cases where inaccurate data has been provided (19%).

15% of all respondents to the consultation felt wider digitalisation could play a significant role. Respondents highlighted that digital systems would make data collection easier for estate agents. Suggestions included a central digital platform, data standardisation, automation, and an emphasis on using official data sources.

22% of all responses to the consultation felt that digitalisation of key property data would help ensure data accuracy. 26% of organisations cited this point in their response.

Across responses there was significant support for a single, industry-wide data and governance standard. Respondents felt this would ensure that data is trustworthy, interoperable, and secure.

Contents of guidance and enforcement

Question 19: How can we most effectively support consumers to understand their rights and responsibilities regarding material information?

162 responses were received to question 19. The most frequent suggestion was for a separate clear and accessible guidance document for consumers, using plain English (41% of all consultation responses).

Question 20: Which of these audiences do you think should be provided with guidance on material information alongside estate agents – buyers, sellers, conveyancers, surveyors etc.

155 responses were received to question 20. Over a third (36%) of all consultation responses said that guidance should be provided to all audiences across the property sector.

Question 21: What information regarding enforcement do you think should be contained in the material information guidance?

156 responses were received to question 21. The most frequent suggestion was that guidance should set out who enforcement bodies are and what parts of the sector they have responsibility for overseeing (37% of all responses).

Key points from respondents

A key theme emerging from responses was the need for consumers to be supported. 41% felt that clear and accessible guidance in plain English would be needed and some suggested this could include a frequently asked questions section, checklists and non-technical summaries.

22% of all consultation responses highlighted the importance of consumer education and raising public awareness about material information in general and their rights and responsibilities in relation to it. A major theme in responses was a call for a national communications campaign across a range of channels and messaging co-branded with trusted organisations.

21% suggested there should be a standard educational document that could be shared with all buyers and sellers. Respondents suggested that estate agents could give this to consumers when a property is listed, when viewings are booked, and when offers are made. This layered approach was suggested to reinforce rights and responsibilities throughout the process.

On enforcement, 37% said guidance should include details on who enforcement bodies are and what parts of the sector they have responsibility for overseeing. 100% of banks and lenders made this point, as did 100% of enforcement and redress organisations, 55% of proptechs and 44% of conveyancers.

30% of all responses to the consultation felt the functions, powers and escalation pathways for enforcement bodies should be included.  29% of all consultation responses said guidance should be clear on what constitutes non-compliance and the consequences of failing to comply (including fines, warnings and banning orders for agents, and court action against sellers). 20% of all responses to the consultation felt that guidance should include information about consumer rights, including the complaints process.

Implementation

Question 22: What steps beyond those highlighted in your response to question 6 do you think government should take to support the implementation of material information guidance?

143 responses were received to question 22. 15% of all responses to the consultation favoured an implementation period for the guidance, with support for a phased rollout and lead-in period. Some responses highlighted the need for government to be clear about the process, warning that ambiguity creates confusion and unnecessary cost.

A further 15% of all consultation responses said there should be appropriate enforcement to ensure that material information guidance is followed with penalties for non-compliance.

Question 23: What steps beyond those highlighted in question 7 do you think other organisations should take to support the implementation of material information guidance?

124 responses were received to question 23. Training was highlighted as an important step, with 11% of all responses to the consultation citing this point.

10% of all consultation responses felt it will be important for professionals to work together to implement the guidance. There were frequent recommendations for cross-industry coordination to align guidance and avoid duplication.

Question 24: Are there changes industry or individual businesses will have to make to support the effective implementation of guidance on material information which you wish to highlight?

136 responses were received to question 24. 53% of all responses to the consultation thought individuals or individual businesses would need to make changes to support implementation of the guidance and 5% felt no changes were necessary.

Question 25: Do you think that material information guidance should be rolled out gradually during an implementation period?

159 responses were received to question 25. 43% of all responses to the consultation agreed and 31% disagreed, feeling that an implementation period was undesirable and/or unnecessary.

Question 26: Is there anything else, beyond the issues highlighted in the questions above, that you think needs to be included in guidance to support estate agents with their responsibilities regarding material information?

123 responses were received to question 26. 6% of all responses to the consultation highlighted enforcement. 6% highlighted the issue of liability and 6% also mentioned the need for practical, real-life examples of material information in the guidance to help agents apply it consistently in different scenarios.

A number of respondents felt that government mandating change would be necessary to successfully implement the guidance; others mentioned the need to make sure all parties were clear on their obligations and to specify the consequences of non-compliance.

Key points from respondents

18% of all consultation responses highlighted the importance of training in supporting guidance implementation. Respondents believed training in what constitutes material information, how to collect it, and how to present it clearly without giving technical advice would be necessary.

Some called for consistent, accredited training across professions so material information is interpreted in a consistent way across the property industry. Proposals included CPD-accredited modules led or endorsed by professional bodies.

19% of all responses to the consultation said that estate agents would need to make changes including internal compliance procedures to ensure material information is gathered, checked, and retained in an auditable way.

16% felt digitalisation will be important. Respondents highlighted that businesses may need to invest in updated systems, consider how to use technology better, and consider whether data standards agreements were needed.

Nearly half of respondents (43%) felt an implementation period could be beneficial to allow time to raise consumer and public awareness, train professionals, and upgrade processes to ensure industry readiness without disruptions. Some mentioned the possibility of using pilots focused on a particular property type (e.g. new builds) to facilitate roll out.

A number of respondents felt that mandating change would be necessary to successfully implement the guidance; others mentioned the need to make sure all parties were clear on their obligations and to specify the consequences of non-compliance. Some discussed the issue of liability, including the need for guidance to be clear on who is responsible for risk to meet private indemnity insurance requirements.

Government response

In response we will:

• publish non-statutory guidance to support estate agents to meet their legal responsibilities to provide buyers with relevant information during residential property transactions
• this guidance will explain existing responsibilities under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 with a view to ensuring that no further legislation on material information is required
• work with stakeholders to provide a standardised form for gathering material information
• work with stakeholders to consider how we can raise consumer awareness and produce accompanying guidance for consumers which sets out their rights and obligations, the roles of enforcement bodies, and how to complain
• continue to drive forwards access to accurate, verifiable, digital data through our digitalisation and data standards measures
• consult on mandatory qualifications for estate agents to drive up standards across the industry and ensure that all consumers have the level of professional support they need from estate agents during the transaction process

Government response for questions 5 to 26

We will publish non-statutory guidance which will help property professionals understand how they can meet their mandatory legal responsibilities regarding material information. This will build estate agents’ expertise in material information and ensure that responsibilities conferred on to property professionals by the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 can be applied consistently, creating a level playing field for agents and leading to a better experience for sellers and buyers regardless of which agent has listed a residential property.

A key theme from consultation responses was the need for clarity on the information required in listings. The guidance will outline that the information should be gathered from source, i.e. the organisations which own the data or from the homeowner directly; for example, title information should only be obtained from HMLR. There was also strong support for standardised forms to ensure consistency in information gathering, which we will investigate with support from industry.

We have listened to the views expressed in the consultation and understand the liability concerns around estate agent responsibility for the accuracy of material information, especially where specialist expertise is needed. The guidance will therefore also provide clarity on how legal liability for gathering material information is to be understood and applied in practice. The guidance will aim to take a proportionate approach to estate agent responsibility conferred by the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 and focus on practical application, including the nature of the material information and means of communication used. To support estate agents in this work, guidance will also set out an expectation that property professionals (such as managing agents and freeholders) and sector organisations should act collaboratively with them to support material information gathering. The guidance will signpost buyers to consult a professional to interpret technical information where required. Guidance will also include the consequences of non-compliance with legal duties so that agents and consumers are aware of the enforcement process and the penalties.

When outlining what material information categories should be included in the guidance, we are taking an approach that balances what will assist a buyer in making an informed decision and what is reasonable for an estate agent to provide. We will work with industry to maximise the value of the information gathered. For example, this could include working with the property portals to enable users to search and filter listings based on certain material information categories. For example, being able to filter by accessibility information would be extremely beneficial to older people or those with disabilities in their search for a suitable property.

This is with a view to the future government intention to move towards a system of standardised upfront sales packs outlined in Chapter 4. These packs will include both a property search and a condition report and would therefore benefit from the expertise of both a conveyancer and surveyor.

Consultation responses agreed that sellers will play a critical role in the success of material information provision, and we strongly agree with the need for them to buy into the importance of providing timely and accurate information. Therefore, we will work with stakeholders to consider how industry and government can raise consumer awareness and investigate the possibility of accompanying plain language consumer guidance which sets out their rights and obligations, the roles of enforcement bodies and how to complain while providing real-life illustrative examples.

Although there was support for an implementation period, the purpose of the non-statutory guidance is to clarify existing legal obligations, stakeholders should have regard for the guidance as soon as it is published.

Recognising the considerable support for mandatory qualifications, training and continued professional development for estate agents to help them meet material information obligations, as well as the responses received in the Home Buying and Selling Reform Consultation (Chapter 5), we will implement our plans as set out in that consultation to conduct a further consultation on mandatory qualifications for estate agents.

Across several questions the need for key property data to continue to be digitalised was highlighted as something that would make the process more accurate, trustworthy and easier for those collating the information. We will continue to improve access to accurate, verifiable, digital data through our digitalisation and data standards measures (Chapter 10).

Annex A: Government commitments

Proposal - what we consulted on	What we heard	We will	Key delivery details
Sellers should be required to gather and provide comprehensive upfront property information	Strong support for mandatory upfront property information with more than half of respondents agreeing this should include property searches and a condition report.	- Require the preparation of ‘sales packs’ prior to listing, including searches and a property condition report. - Identify ‘sales pack’ information that can be provided upfront now to support more efficient transactions. - Use guidance to clearly define and communicate specific requirements for sellers and professionals ahead of legislation. - Starting later this year, explore opportunities to support training and skills development.	When parliamentary time allows, we will introduce legislation to require the preparation of sales packs.
A Code of Practice setting out the minimum best practice standards expected of all property agents	Strong support. Just under a quarter said the Code should be statutory from the outset or as soon as possible after introduction.	- Publish a non-statutory Code of Practice setting out minimum best practice standards. - Consider legislation to ensure compliance with the Code of Practice	We will publish the Code of Practice later this year.
Consult on introducing mandatory qualifications for estate and lettings agents	Strong support for a consultation on mandatory qualifications.	- Consult on mandatory qualification requirements for estate and letting agents. - Subject to the outcome of the consultation, legislate for mandatory qualification requirements.	We will consult in 2027.
Digital property logbooks and sales packs should be a standard feature of property transactions in the UK	Strong support for government to encourage the wider use of digital property logbooks and packs. Over a quarter of respondents said government should mandate the usage of these products as a requirement of future property transactions.	- Promote digital logbooks and sales packs through a new customer Charter and this year work with industry regulators and membership bodies to promote via their channels. - Consider which government homeownership schemes digital logbooks and sales packs should be made a requirement of. - Mandate use of digital property logbooks and sales packs as a standard part of property transactions.	We will introduce legislation to require the use of these products, when parliamentary time allows. The requirement for logbooks and sales packs in government home ownership schemes will start in 2027.
Transactions should become binding at an earlier stage	Strong support to make property transactions more binding earlier in the process, with more than half of respondents agreeing there should be certain exceptions which prevent binding contracts from taking effect.	- Require the use of binding conditional contracts in property transactions after sales packs are embedded. - Define suitable penalty fees, specify exception clauses and arbitration mechanisms. - Prepare industry for this change and spread awareness of voluntary reservation agreements ahead of legislation.	When parliamentary time allows, and after sales packs are embedded, legislation will be introduced to require the use of binding conditional contracts.
Information should be published on the services of property professionals. Government could publish a Charter and run an accreditation scheme to support consumers to identify appropriate services.	Levels of support were lower for these proposals. Concerns were raised regarding the reliability and verification of data, duplication of existing information or regulation, questions about enforceability and the potential administrative burden of implementing the proposal set out in our consultation.	Publish a property professionals Charter to define expected behaviours and good practice, and improve transparency for consumers.	The charter will be published next year, as a light-touch guide. Property professionals will be encouraged to self-assess against the Charter and signal to consumers where they are complying with its principles.
Streamlining the conveyancing process, including simplifying anti-money laundering (AML) checks and supporting the application of AI conveyancing technology.	Strong support for streamlining AML checks by enabling re-usable checks and removing duplication across professions. Agreement that our broader reforms (e.g. sales packs, digitalisation, logbooks) will have biggest impact on transaction efficiency.	- Support industry-led technological solutions to improve shareability of AML checks and reduce duplication in the transaction process. - Prioritise our wider reforms that will do the most to improve the efficiency of conveyancing. - Establish clear standards on appropriate use of AI conveyancing technology, building on government’s AI Growth Lab which was recently established to support responsible AI-driven innovation and adoption.	We will look to immediately support industry-led solutions and establish AI conveyancing standards next year. The AI Growth Lab launched on 8 June 2026.
Deliver a home buying and selling system that makes full use of digital information and processes including making key property information more accessible, ensuring this data can be shared between professionals, and driving forward adoption of trustworthy digital identity services.	Considerable support for the direction of travel with suggestions that legislation should be considered to strengthen the proposal. Suggestions also that security of data and systems should be considered as a fundamental part of our plans.	Ensure the secure sharing of data: - Legislate for a regulatory framework that sets out how to store, maintain and share data in a secure way, and which establishes rules on liability and consumer protection, enabling trust. - Publish a call for evidence to identify the conditions professionals require, such as regulatory change, and the barriers they face, when sharing data to inform proposals for a future smart data consultation - Consult on the implementation of a smart data scheme to identify whether existing legislation could provide for the framework. - Deliver an accreditation scheme that identifies data standards that match a core set of criteria that government wants industry to use when storing, maintaining and sharing data. - Modernise and expand HMLR’s API services to enable almost instant sharing of data. Digitalise key data sets: - Commence the next stage of our work to drive improvements in the digital accessibility of building control and highways data including commit £1.4m to commence work with LAs to set data standards, charging practices and service level agreements for these data sets.  - Complete the Local Land Charges programme. - Develop a fully digital, geospatial land register. Deliver transformative digital products: - Commence work with the sector and facilitate uptake of digital ID, Qualified Electronic Signatures, and digital logbooks and packs.	We will legislate for the regulatory framework in this Parliament, when parliamentary time allows. We will publish the call for evidence on a smart data scheme this year. We will consult on the smart data scheme, and deliver the data standards accreditation scheme next year. We will commence the next stage of our work to improve accessibility of building control and highways data next year. We will complete the Local Land Charges programme by 2028, and the digital geospatial land register by 2035. Later this year we will commence work with the sector and facilitate uptake of digital ID, Qualified Electronic Signatures, and digital logbooks and packs.
Leasehold and freehold estates sales information - this section of the consultation did not include questions but set out action government will take to support leaseholders and homeowners subject to estate management charges on managed estates to make selling their properties easier.	Not applicable	- Use the powers in the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 to make it quicker, cheaper and more predictable for leaseholders and homeowners on privately managed freehold estates to obtain the information needed to sell. - Consult on, and then bring forward, secondary legislation to set the specific information that must be provided; the maximum fee that can be charged; and the maximum time allowed for responding. - We will publish guidance ahead of legislation to support consistent compliance and sector understanding of the new requirements.	We will consult on the secondary legislation next year and lay secondary legislation to define the required information practicalities when parliamentary time allows.
Guidance to support estate agents to meet their legal obligations to provide material information to potential buyers for residential property transactions.	Strong support for guidance that supports the use of trusted information in property listings and/or that encourages proof of the source of data to be provided. Respondents also wanted guidance that supports truthful and complete information from sellers. Over half of all responses said government should provide standardised forms. There was also support for separate, clear and accessible guidance for consumers.	- Publish non-statutory guidance to clarify existing responsibilities. - Provide a standardised form for gathering material information. - Raise consumer awareness and produce accompanying guidance for consumers which sets out their rights and obligations, the roles of enforcement bodies, and how to complain.	We will publish non-statutory guidance later this year.

Annex B: Sales pack information

Specific details are subject to change and will be confirmed prior to any legislation, but we anticipate sales packs will include the following types of information:

• tenure type (e.g. freehold, leasehold, etc.)
• Council Tax Band
• EPC rating
• property type (e.g. house, flat, bungalow, etc.)
• title information (e.g. title deeds, known covenants) and documents
• seller ID verification
• leasehold and freehold estate terms (e.g. service charges, ground rent, estate rent charges, managed freehold charges, etc.)
• building safety information (e.g. whether mid or high rise, whether remediation identified, etc.)
• standard search results (e.g. local authority, drainage and water, environmental, locality-specific risks like mining or chalk)
• general property information (e.g. a property questionnaire)
• property condition assessment report tailored to the property age and type
• accessibility information
• chain status
• floor plan