Living in the material information world
How are the CRM software system providers dealing with the demands of Material Information compliance? Lisa Isaacs takes the tech experts to task.
That’s the distinct feeling garnered after a deep dive into the synergy between CRM systems, the requirement for more upfront information and third-party integrations. It’s led me to question whether the industry is digitising itself.
“The industry is crying out for faster, more efficient transactions, which more information upfront can support.” says Iamproperty’s Ben Ridgway. “Time to sell has risen from 62 days in 2023 to 72 days at the end of Q2 2024, and fall-throughs sit at 13%*.
“Looking at other countries where upfront Material Information has had a positive impact, evidence from Scotland shows a 60% reduction in fall-through rates, while Norway demonstrates that well-informed buyers lead to the ability to charge higher fees and a greater level of client satisfaction.
The industry is crying out for faster, more efficient transactions, which more information upfront can support.”
“From our experience with our auction service, we know the decision to choose this method is largely down to its speed, security and transparency, due to upfront Material Information being built into the process from the start.”
The full implementation of Material Information (MI) parts A, B and C has increased the amount of data agents gather for a listing but CRM systems have quickly stepped up, adapted and delivered agents a pain-free way of amassing exactly what the National Trading Estate and Letting Agency Team (NTSELAT) require.
Invaluable streamlining by CRMs
“Maintaining an understanding of fluctuating regulations and carving out time to dedicate to compliance is swiftly becoming unsustainable for agents – yet it’s a non-negotiable,” comments Heather Staff, the Co-Founder of Street.co.uk.
She feels it’s the role of CRMs to streamline processes and speed up transactions, with digitalisation at the core: “It’s our responsibility to reduce the burden on agents so they have more time for high-value tasks.”
It’s our responsibility to reduce the burden on agents so they have more time for high-value tasks.”
As such, Street.co.uk’s Property Information Questionnaires (PIQs) are now an automated, digital part of its onboarding journey. The forms display a pre-populated set of common questions, with clear colour-coded markers that show whether the data falls under part A, B or C of MI.
The automated aspect means the fully customisable PIQs are sent to vendors and landlords on instruction, without the agent having to manually press send. An automatic push notification then alerts the client that something needs their attention, with the form displaying clearly in the client app.
“We’ve recently released Smart Suggestions to PIQs in the client app, adds Heather. “This pulls from the 150+ Street Insights data points to serve verified data on a range of difficult property questions, such as years left on lease, property age, construction materials, flood risk and more.”
Collation without consternation
Heather touches on the point that much of the MI requirement exists in the ether, and can be pulled into digital forms thanks to smart integrations. Reapit excels at such practices, offering agents a variety of ways to be compliant.
“Reapit has launched a new feature to help agents comply with the latest MI guidelines,” says the company’s Steve Richmond. “Our customers using the latest version can now easily add crucial MI from sections A, B, and C to properties for sale and rent, but we also provide a whole compliance and MI ecosystem through apps and integrations for those who want additional services.”
We also provide a whole compliance and MI ecosystem through apps and integrations.”
Existing integrations with Coadjute, Perfect Portal and ViewMyChain have just been joined by a new assimilation with Moverly. On the latter Steve comments: “Moverly’s mission is to make client onboarding and MI simple for agents. With just three clicks, agents using Reapit can now access Moverly’s comprehensive MI solution, which automatically part-populates property listings with data that’s provenanced in the Property Data Trust Framework.”
Ben Ridgway at Iamproperty explains their approach, “Ahead of Parts B&C coming into play, we worked closely with our Partner Agent network to adapt our solutions to support them. We made a series of innovations to our Movebutler solution, which is integrated with our CRM for a streamlined experience across an ecosystem of complementary tech solutions, so agents have Material Information taken care of, as it gathers what’s now required upfront for them.
“Within an Enhanced Property Information Questionnaire (PIQ) agents can easily collect property information questionnaire data and vendor disclosures as required by the Material Information guidelines. Also included are the TA7 and TA10 alongside the TA6 Protocol Documents.
“The Enhanced PIQ is also separated from the Protocol documents enabling a more streamlined view for agents, whilst the corresponding questions are mapped to the Protocol forms reducing double entry for vendors.”
Across the CRMs available, it’s possible to import crucial MI data from credible sources, including HM Land Registry, Gov.uk, the Valuation Office Agency, Ordnance Survey and Royal Mail, with the information automatically populating entry fields. So far, so good?
If it means less data entry and less data duplication, agents should be in favour of digitalisation and automation – especially with the added bonus of compliance with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.
Doubling down on doubling up
Data duplication has been an industry pain point for years and you only need a cursory glance of the MI required to realise the same facts and figures are required elsewhere. In fact, CRMs and their integrated apps have already identified this.
When it comes to MI gathering, Loop can streamline the process of collecting data.”
On the crossover of information required, Mark Bevan at Loop Software says: “When it comes to MI gathering, Loop can streamline the process of collecting data, such as filling in forms like TA6, TA7 and TA10. The document management system built within Loop allows a unique way of sharing required information to solicitors at the required point.”
TA: a touchy point
And now for the elephant in the room. CRMs, including Loop and Reapit via its Coadjute integration, are promoting the ability to automatically pre-populate forms, such as the TA6 and the BASPI, using the MI data it has already gathered. There are, however, grey areas with data sharing, specifically with the TA6’s 5th edition (now suspended until January 2025 pending a wider consultation).
MI is changing the chronology of conveyancing, and technology is what’s going to grease the wheels.”
Sally Holdway at The Home Owner’s Passport (HOP) has been deep in conversation with industry suppliers and legal experts to unpick matters of responsibility, liability and timings. “MI is changing the chronology of conveyancing, and technology is what’s going to grease the wheels,” she says. “We acknowledge upfront information isn’t going anywhere but while it was widely publicised among agents, it’s quite new to the conveyancing fraternity.”
Sally is referring to the disquiet among Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) members, who feel they haven’t been consulted on the addition of MI questions to the proposed TA6 form’s 5th edition. Of concern is any suggestion that conveyancers may feel comfortable using agent-gathered information.
“The wording of questions and ‘don’t know’ options may cause issues with the conveyancing framework. It boils down to trust and verification. If agents share MI with legal teams, conveyancers will be asking ‘who provided that data, was it the seller, where was the data sourced?’ If the MI is not provided to TA6 standards, it will need repeat collection by a conveyancer from a regulated industry.”
What comes first?
A chicken and egg situation is developing, especially as NTSELAT is advising sellers to appoint a solicitor as soon as they can. Conveyancers are pretty much unified in agreeing that early conveyancing is a good thing, but they’re also unified in their requirement of an upfront charge if they’re to start working on any TA forms before an offer is accepted. Conversely, agents will be gathering much of the same information as part of their mandatory MI requirement. How do we avoid duplicate or mismatched data?
HOP – an MI collation app – works on a reordering of events: TA6 first, MI second. HOP aggregates over 1,000 conveyancing data points on each transaction. It draws from two key pots: HM Land Reg for title deeds and TA6 data from the seller (HOP is a Law Society-licensed, third-party supplier of TA6 forms, alongside Coadjute and others, allowing it to gather TA6 information outside of a conveyancing firm).
All of the conveyancing paperwork that sits behind our report is in place and ready to go as soon as a buyer is found.”
This data is then used to populate MI forms, so trust among conveyancers is guaranteed. Soon, HOP hopes to pull data from a third pot – digitised conveyancing searches. The result? “When using HOP, properties can also be marketed as ‘contract ready’. All of the conveyancing paperwork that sits behind our report is in place and ready to go as soon as a buyer is found.”
Many agents – as well as buyer, sellers, landlords and tenants – are wondering when we’ll see real change. While CRMs play a critical role in digitalising property transaction, it may be an issue of mandating that units the entire end-to-end process. That and some really meaningful MI fines from NTSELAT.
