I have never bought or sold property. But I have spent enough time listening to my elders—who seem to talk about little else—to know that the process is an exercise in patience, plus a little deception and even blind hope. It is, in the words of The Daily Telegraph, “an outdated, slow and fraught” system where sales can collapse at the last minute, leaving buyers and sellers to pick up the pieces (The Daily Telegraph, 3rd March 2025). If the government’s latest plans to reform the system are serious, they are to be cautiously welcomed. But given the record of “reforms” in Britain over the past century, one must ask whether this will be another fine-sounding disaster.

Britain’s housing market is a jungle. Buyers make offers, sellers accept them, and yet nothing is guaranteed. Up to one-third of transactions fall through before completion, sometimes due to “gazundering” (when a buyer drops their offer just before exchange) or “gazumping” (when a seller takes a better offer at the last minute). As the article notes, buyers and sellers currently enter into agreements “without legal commitment,” which leaves the entire process vulnerable to breakdowns and bad faith. Given that a house is often the most expensive purchase a person will ever make, this is a system unworthy of a civilised country.

Housing Minister Lee Rowley has proposed a system in which key property information is provided up front, reducing the risk of late surprises and delays. Sellers will be required to complete “Property Information Packs” before listing their homes, including details on leasehold status, service charges, and other essential facts. This, the government hopes, will prevent wasted time and sudden withdrawals.

The government promises that these reforms will create a “more transparent and efficient” housing market. Experience suggests otherwise. In principle, this is an improvement. In fact, one must consider the record of attempted reforms. Almost every major government intervention in housing over the past century has produced unintended consequences, often worsening the problems they sought to fix. Rent controls introduced in 1915 led to a collapse in private rentals. The mass council house sales of the 1980s—while beneficial to those who bought—destroyed the supply of affordable rental housing, leaving a generation trapped between extortionate rents and impossible mortgages. The leasehold reforms of recent years, while aimed at curbing abuses, have created fresh uncertainties about property rights. The last major attempt to streamline the home-buying process was the introduction of Home Information Packs (HIPs) in 2007—an initiative that was quietly scrapped three years later because it achieved nothing except extra bureaucracy.

Moreover, one must ask whether this reform is even necessary. The common law already provides a remedy for buyers who are deliberately misled. Fraudulent misrepresentation—where a seller knowingly withholds or falsifies important information to induce a sale—is a well-established legal offence. If a seller conceals defects or provides false information, the buyer can sue for damages or seek to have the contract rescinded. This being said, proving fraud is expensive and uncertain. Many buyers who discover hidden defects after purchase lack the time or resources to fight a legal battle.

If the government’s new rules merely codify existing protections in a more accessible form, they may be useful. But if they introduce yet another layer of paperwork without making enforcement any easier, they will be nothing more than another bureaucratic exercise for estate agents to manipulate and ignore.

If the government wants a better housing market, it should focus on what really matters: increasing supply. The real reason house sales are so chaotic is that Britain’s housing shortage makes every transaction a desperate fight. This shortage is exacerbated by mass immigration, which adds enormous pressure to demand, particularly in the large cities. At the same time, native-born Britons are fleeing urban centres due to rising crime, cultural changes, and declining living standards, further distorting the housing market. The problem is not just legal uncertainty, but the sheer scarcity of homes in desirable areas, coupled with population pressures that the government refuses to address.

Yet on this, the government has nothing to say. Nor are there any meaningful plans to limit immigration, despite the extraordinary figures of recent years. Net migration peaked at 906,000 in the year ending June 2023, with 1.2 million arrivals and only 414,000 departures. Though this fell to 728,000 in the year ending June 2024, these remain historically unprecedented levels. While ministers talk about tightening visa rules for foreign graduates and accelerating deportations, these half-measures have done little to stem the overall numbers. Without decisive immigration controls alongside planning reform, the housing crisis will persist.

Nor are there any plans to overhaul Britain’s absurdly restrictive planning laws, which make it easier to build an industrial warehouse than a row of houses. Nor is there any effort to address the artificial scarcity caused by green belt restrictions, which often protect scrubland rather than genuinely valuable countryside. Stamp duty, a tax that actively discourages people from moving, remains untouched, along with endless other distortions in the housing market.

Instead, we may have another administrative fix—one that may bring minor improvements, but will not solve the fundamental problem.

A functioning housing market requires transparency and, above all, enough homes. On that last point, the government remains silent. And so, while we may get slightly fewer collapsed sales and slightly more upfront information, the housing market will remain what it has been for decades: a stressful and deeply unfair mess.