header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Can HIPs save the planet?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
22 November 2007 / David Marsden
Issue: 7298 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Are we expecting too much from HIPs? David Marsden reports

Home information packs (HIPs) have caused much debate over the last year. They were first introduced for four-bedroom and larger houses in August 2007. This was extended to cover three-bedroom houses on 10 September 2007. At the time the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) was making confident statements that HIPs would be introduced to the whole residential market by the end of 2007.

The DCLG has a well-oiled PR machine and those interested in HIPs have been bombarded with e-mails from it for many months. A statement was issued in mid October confirming that HIPs would not be extended to all residential properties for the time being. It is interesting to note that this information was not circulated in the normal way via e-mail to those interested in HIPs. Perhaps this is a sign of the government deciding that it wants this scheme buried after all? Therefore, the uncertainty continues.
What has happened in practice? How has the market, and those

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Clyde & Co—Sian Langer & Gemma Parker

Clyde & Co—Sian Langer & Gemma Parker

Firm strengthens catastrophic injury capability with partner promotions

DWF—Dean Gormley

DWF—Dean Gormley

Finance and restructuring team offering expands in Manchester with partner hire

Taylor Rose—Vicki Maflin

Taylor Rose—Vicki Maflin

Firm announces appointment of head of remortgage

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
NLJ this week: Failure to deliver in Getty v Stability AI
The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined
NLJ this week: Spotlight on the Supreme Court in 2025
The UK Supreme Court may be deciding fewer cases, but its impact in 2025 was anything but muted. In this week's NLJ, Professor Emeritus Brice Dickson of Queen’s University Belfast reviews a year marked by historically low output, a striking rise in jointly authored judgments, and a continued decline in dissent. High-profile rulings on biological sex under the Equality Act, public access to Dartmoor, and fairness in sexual offence trials ensured the court’s voice carried far beyond the Strand
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll