Image: Dreamstime.com
All housebuilders should belong to an independent ombudsman scheme to drive down defects and provide better redress for dissatisfied buyers, according to MPs.
In a report published today, the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Excellence in the Built Environment said that a New Homes Ombudsman should be independent, free to consumers and provide a quick resolution to disputes.
The report also recommended that government, warranty providers, housebuilders and consumer groups draw up a code of practice to be used by the New Homes Ombudsman to adjudicate on disputes.
It is the result of the APPG’s most recent inquiry, which has examined how an ombudsman scheme could operate, following a July 2016 report on the quality and workmanship of new housing in England.
That report, entitled ‘More homes, fewer complaints’, called for a New Homes Ombudsman after revealing a high level of frustration and disappointment from buyers of new homes both in terms of the number of defects homes often have, as well as the problems consumers encountered in getting them fixed.
‘Kafkaesque’ redress system
The APPG’s vice chair Richard Best said: “Buying a new home is stressful enough but buying a defective one, as we heard from submissions and witnesses, can take a massive toll on people’s wellbeing as they wrestle with an almost Kafkaesque system seemingly designed to be unhelpful.
"The purchaser of a new home in this country should be confident that they are buying a high-quality product, no matter where they are or who built it. Our proposals could help to make this a reality."
The report is recommending a single portal – or entry point – for ombudsman services spanning the entire residential sector in order to reduce consumer confusion.
Alongside house building, it would cover other services related to the residential housing market, ranging from the conduct of estate agents through to social housing.
The overarching service would contain either a number of specialist ombudsmen or specialist divisions, one of which would cover new homes.
Paid for by housebuilders’ levy
The APPG proposed that all disputes taken to the New Homes Ombudsman should be noted in an annual report while funding for the scheme would be paid for by a levy on housebuilders, with larger companies paying proportionately more.
The Group was chaired by Eddie Hughes, the Conservative MP for Walsall North, until 13 June. He stepped down following his appointment as a parliamentary private secretary at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
Chris Blythe, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Builders (CIOB), which submitted evidence on behalf of members to the APPG earlier this year said: "The CIOB welcomes the publication of these proposals. Our support for the idea of an ombudsman and our suggestions for how it could work are largely reflected in the APPG’s proposals.
"It’s also a reflection of our values in putting the public at the heart of our service and supporting others within the industry to do so. A New Homes Ombudsman will lead to improvements in the quality of any new homes built; whilst prompt and effective rectification is essential after sale, what is more important is that housebuilders adopt a ‘get it right first time’ attitude. We all win. Buyers get good quality houses and the industry gets the capacity to build more."
He added: “This could also be a significant and meaningful step change in helping to improve the overall culture of the construction industry, in seeking to drive standards up and maintain a culture of quality and professionalism.”
Graham Watts OBE, chief executive of the Construction Industry Council, said: "We are delighted to give our backing to this report. Consumers buying new homes should be entitled to expect the same levels of aftercare and redress they would receive when purchasing any other new product. A New Homes Ombudsman will ensure this service is available to them."
Comments
Comments are closed.
Surely the original NHBRC mandate was to do what is now being suggested???
Why do we keep “reinventing the wheel” when a problem arises???
I once worked for a private housebuilder of medium size estates who personally inspected the houses during construction and prior to handover to satisfy himself that the company was delighting the purchaser!! and he had a waiting list to purchase his new properties because of his reputation for quality.
You have to draw a line between the pride of the genuine builder together with the need to make a necessary profit to survive, and the opportunist entrepreneur who seeks a fast profit by any means and gets the Industry a bad name.
We’ve heard all this fine talk before. NHBC was formed to enhanced quality & resolution of defect disputes. However, somewhere along the way they have lost their way. The LA Building Control is also toothless & generally is only concerned with the submitted plans conforming to the Regs. but do not adequately enforce conformity on site. No doubt much of this lack of inspection is attributed to lack of staff in these austere times? The only problem is that the purchase of a new home is the largest purchase most people will make in their lives, being £100,000’s, so they have the right to expect a quality product. So, it has now been plainly exposed that both supposed ‘Regulators’ are now well past their sell-by date & need to be replaced for not only on-site inspection for conformity to the Building Regs. & quality, but also a new Regulator to replace NHBC for dispute resolution. Don’t hold your breath!
.