What all changes are faced by people in Conveyancing?

Vacant dwellings classed as poor housing have a much larger cost to make fit and free from disrepair than occupied dwellings (£10,100 compared with £4,800). Including all vacant dwellings, together with their full cost, gives considerably greater weight to vacant than occupied dwellings. The Group were unhappy with using these costs as it, effectively, implied giving an equal priority to tackling vacant and occupied dwellings.

It was agreed that the cost of dealing with a vacant dwelling would be pegged to the average cost to deal with occupied dwellings. Because the indicator is based on the cost to deal with dwellings classed as poor housing, dwellings with very high repair costs will affect the indicator more than dwellings with very low repair costs. The incidence of dwellings with very high costs is very low, about 1% of private sector dwellings in this indicator had repair costs of more than £30,000. Because the incidence is low a sample, such as the EHCS, is unlikely to be representative of high cost dwellings at regional level. click here: E Settlement Agents Perth

Those with a repair cost of more than £30,000 have been given substitute repair costs equalling the average cost for dealing with occupied dwellings in that region. It is proposed that dwellings which have a repair cost of more than £30,000 should have substituted repair costs equalling the average cost for dealing with occupied dwellings in that region; views are invited on this proposal. The review group concluded that areas with concentrations of poor housing might generate a greater investment need than individual poor condition dwellings. An uplift factor of 50% seems appropriate as it reflects the additional expenditure on types of work that are completed in renewal areas that would not usually be completed as part of a single private sector renovation grant.

Regions with higher concentrations of poor condition housing than average and/or higher than average cost to deal with such dwellings, should experience an increase in PSSCI share as a result of this proposal. The review group, therefore, decided that it would better to await the outcome of this report later in the year before trying to do anything to reflect this issue in the indices. This is a complex issue and, in advance of the PAT report, there is no clear basis for identifying the location and scale of low demand/unpopular housing.