What the UK Government’s home-buying consultation means for pre-marketing surveys and RICS surveyors

What’s going on?

On 6 October 2025 the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) published a wide-ranging consultation titled “Home buying and selling reform”. GOV.UK+3
Broadly it invites views across the UK (England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland) on how the home-purchase process can be made faster, fairer, more transparent and less prone to collapse.

Some of the key headline metrics:

The process currently (in England & Wales) typically takes ~120 days once an offer is accepted.
Around 1 in 3 residential transactions fail or “fall through”.
The proposed reforms aim to reduce failure rates, cut time, and improve consumer confidence.

Importantly: These are not yet law. The consultation invites responses over a 12-week period (from 6 Oct to 29 Dec 2025) and any changes would be subject to future legislation and “roadmap” implementation.

What is meant by “pre-marketing” survey / upfront condition assessment?

One of the more striking proposals is that, when a property is going on the market, the seller (and/or estate agent) would provide comprehensive information before any offer is made (i.e., at listing or “pre-marketing” stage).

Specifically, the consultation document says (under “Requiring upfront property information”):

“We are interested in introducing a mandatory requirement for sellers to work with conveyancers and surveyors to carry out searches and a property condition assessment prior to listing.”

And:

“Upfront information could … include … a property condition assessment tailored to the property age and type.”

The idea is that rather than waiting until after an offer is accepted for major surveys/searches to be done, some of that work is done earlier so that potential buyers can make decisions on better information, and the transaction chain is less risky. For example, the consultation references that in pilot work “early searches … have the potential to increase the speed of the average transaction by four weeks.”

There are also international and domestic comparison case-studies:

The document refers to how in Scotland (where sellers must provide a “home report” and buyers have earlier access to information) transactions fall through at a lower rate.
It mentions a case study: the service “Optimus Accelerate” from Landmark Information Group which enables searches to be ordered earlier (upon solicitor instruction rather than later) and reported to reduce transaction times by ~4 weeks.

So the “pre-marketing survey / condition assessment” is a concept under discussion — condition assessment meaning a survey of property condition before the property is marketed.

Why are they proposing this? What’s the reasoning?

Here are the main drivers:

High failure/”fall-through” rate: Around one in three transactions currently fail in England & Wales. That creates costs for buyers, sellers, professionals, and reduces system efficiency.
Time to complete: The process is lengthy (~120 days plus) and delays raise costs and strain.
Information asymmetry / surprises: Buyers often only discover major defects, legal issues (e.g., title, service charges, leasehold issues), or planning problems after an offer is made. That causes renegotiations or collapse. The consultation notes that only ~2% of home-movers believed they had received sufficient information prior to offer.
International comparison: Systems such as in Scotland, or more advanced digital platforms in Australia/Finland, show how earlier, standardised information and binding agreements can reduce failure rates and speed up processes.
Unlocking housing supply / affordability: A faster, more reliable process supports market confidence, encourages mobility, and helps deliver government housing ambitions (for example, the reform document mentions supporting delivery of 1.5 million homes over the next parliament)

Thus, mandatory upfront condition assessments (pre-marketing surveys) are seen as a cornerstone of shifting from a buyer-risk model (buyer commissioning survey after offer) to a seller/agent risk-mitigation model (seller provides baseline condition info upfront).

What are some of the case-studies and data points?

Here are a few that are referenced in the consultation or related documents:

Scottish “home report” model: In Scotland, a key factor is that the seller provides a property information pack including condition/valuation before marketing. The fall-through rate in Scotland is much lower (around 9%) compared to approximately 30% in England & Wales.
The “Optimus Accelerate” case study: It enables searches to be commissioned earlier (once a buyer or seller instructs solicitors) rather than later in the chain. The consultation says this approach “shortens the time taken to gather essential information … increases the speed from conveyancer instruction to completion by four weeks on average” and reduces fall-through risk by up to ~30%.
Research among estate agents: A survey found 83% of agents believe upfront information would improve the home-buying/selling process. Today’s Conveyancer
Cost and time-savings projections: The consultation estimates that the reforms could reduce fall-throughs from 1 in 3 to 1 in 7; buyers could save on average £710 (first-time buyers) and home-movers ~£400; sellers would face increased upfront costs (~£310) but benefit from higher certainty.

These case-studies and data points serve to justify the proposal that doing more upfront reduces risk, delays and cost.

What are the potential impacts on RICS surveyors and the surveying profession?

For surveyors (for example members of Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors – RICS) the proposals raise several significant implications:

Increased demand / volume pressure
- If all properties listed require a “property condition assessment” before marketing, the volume of survey work placed earlier in the chain may increase substantially.
- The consultation asks explicitly: “What steps should government take to ensure that conveyancing lawyers, estate agents and surveyors have the capacity and capability to implement this change?”
- Some commentators suggest this could amount to a “+80 %” volume of transactions for surveyors (though that figure is not in the consultation document itself — it is an estimate of how much earlier work might be required across all listings). Surveying firms may need to scale up, reallocate resources, invest in training and systems.
- Surveyors may find a shift in timing (from post-offer to pre-marketing) and scope (standardised condition assessments, perhaps defined formats) which may require new operational workflows.
Standardisation and new formats
- The consultation implies assessments will need to be “tailored to the property age and type” and delivered in a standardised, easily-digestible format.
- This may lead to surveyors being asked to adopt or create “pre-marketing condition reports” or new survey products with defined minimum scope.
- Survey firms may need to invest in new templates, technology (digital reports, remote/AI support) and possibly third-party verification or certification if sellers/agents rely on a standardised format.
Risk, liability and independence issues
- If a seller commissions a condition assessment and then markets the property using that information, who holds liability if the survey is deficient? Surveyors may face new professional risk (e.g., the buyer relies on the seller-commissioned report).
- RICS has already launched its own consultation on updating its “Home Survey Standard” 2nd Edition.
- Surveyors will need to consider how their practice aligns with new frameworks, how to maintain independence, how to manage reliance by third parties (buyers) on their reports.
Pricing and business model implications
- If condition assessments become routine, surveyors may need to adjust their pricing models and workflows. Some early commentary suggests low-fee surveys may become unsustainable. Nova Surveyors
- Surveyors may compete on speed and standardisation rather than bespoke detailed reports; or may offer enhanced services for higher-risk property types (e.g., older properties, non-standard construction) which are less suitable for standard condition assessments.
Capacity, training and workforce development
- Surveyors (and firms) may need to recruit, train or up-skill to cope with increased volume and different timing of work.
- They may need to collaborate more with estate agents and conveyancers earlier in the marketing chain. The consultation notes that sellers/agents may need to “work with conveyancers and surveyors” before listing.
- Survey firms may need to adopt digital tools and processes to deliver efficiently.
Chain of work and earlier workflow integration
- The change means surveyors may be engaged before the traditional “offer accepted – survey commissioned” stage. Instead, the condition assessment may be commissioned at the marketing stage. That means surveyors work in a different place in the funnel, potentially before any buyer is identified. This may create different business models (seller-commissioned rather than buyer-commissioned).
- Surveyors may need to provide reports that are suitable for use by multiple prospective buyers (subject to liability issues) rather than a bespoke report paid for by one buyer alone.

What are the challenges / caveats / things to watch?

While the proposals are ambitious, there are several caveats and potential downsides, particularly for surveyors, which need to be carefully considered:

Nothing is confirmed yet: the consultation is about seeking views. Any reforms would require legislation, standards, business readiness, and time for implementation. So surveyors shouldn’t assume the change is coming tomorrow.
Capacity risk / double-running: One major risk is that if the system moves to require condition assessments at marketing stage and the traditional post-offer survey remains, surveyors could see a short-term doubling of workload (pre-marketing plus traditional). One Reddit user flagged this explicitly:

“If you want sellers to have surveys … before they put their property on the market, you have to explain … where on day one the extra capacity in the surveying … profession would come from … it would be double the workload for three or four months.”
Surveying firms and the profession may need to guard against capacity crunch, burnout, or quality drop.
Standard report vs bespoke risk: If condition assessments become more standardised, less detailed, there’s a risk they don’t capture specific risks (older houses, non-standard construction, etc) and buyers may still commission bespoke surveys — so surveying firms need to ensure clarity about scope and limitations of any “pre-marketing survey”.
Seller-commissioned vs buyer-commissioned: A shift to seller-commissioned reports may raise concerns about impartiality and buyer reliance. Surveyors will need to ensure their terms of engagement, disclaimers, and liability are clear.
Cost burden: The consultation estimates sellers would face additional upfront cost (average ~£310) according to one modelling. Surveyors may face pressure to deliver lower-fee condition assessments if sellers resist cost increases. Balancing cost, quality, and turnaround will be key.
Implementation timeline and transition: Surveying firms will need to plan for a transition period — training, process changes, integration with agents and conveyancers, technology upgrades.
Regulatory and standard alignment: Surveyors will need to align with whichever standard or regulatory scheme emerges (for instance from RICS or other professional bodies). RICS is already consulting on a new Home Survey Standard.

What should surveyors be doing now (so they are ready)?

Given the consultation and the possibility of change, surveyors (and surveying firms) may consider proactive steps:

Review current workflows: Map when work is commissioned in the lifecycle (listing → offer → contract → completion) and consider what preparing for a “pre-marketing” survey would entail (e.g., earlier instruction, faster turnaround, standardised deliverables).
Audit capacity: Assess current staff, turn-around times, backlog, quality metrics — what happens if volume increases significantly?
Consider business model: What would a “pre-marketing condition assessment” product look like? Could it be standardised with defined scope, quicker turnaround, and lower cost? Where does it sit alongside the Level 2/Level 3 full survey?
Engagement with agents and sellers: Start conversations with estate agents, conveyancers, seller clients about this change. Early collaboration may give firms a competitive edge.
Training & technology: Stay abreast of digital tools, remote inspection technologies, AI-assisted workflows, standard templates. The consultation hints at digital property logbooks and standard data sets.
Risk and liability review: Work with insurers/ legal advisers to ensure terms of engagement are fit for scenario where reports are provided upfront and possibly relied upon by multiple buyers.
Monitor standard developments: Track the RICS consultation on Home Survey Standard (2nd Edition) and any other relevant professional body updates.
Consider participation: The consultation asks for responses and surveyors are stakeholders. Firms may wish to submit responses via RICS or direct to MHCLG to influence how the reform is shaped.

A realist’s take: what might happen and when

Short term (now → 2026): The consultation period (Oct-Dec 2025) is live. Surveying firms should treat this as opportunity. No legislation yet, so business as usual for now.
Medium term (2026-2028): If policy is approved, there could be phased implementation of the requirement for sellers to commission condition assessments pre-listing. Surveying firms may start to see increased instruction volumes in certain pilot regions or property types.
Long term (after 2028): A new standard practice may emerge where most properties listed come to market with a baseline condition assessment and key search data packaged. Surveyors who adapt early may have strategic advantage; others may risk being squeezed or commoditised.

Final thoughts

The UK government’s home-buying and selling consultation is ambitious and potentially far-reaching. The idea of introducing a “pre-marketing” property condition assessment alongside upfront searches marks a significant shift in the buyer-risk model of residential property transactions. For surveyors, this means opportunity — and disruption. Firms that proactively plan for increased volume, earlier engagement, standardised outputs and strong relationships with estate agents may benefit. But capacity, cost models, risk management and business design will need careful thought.

Again: nothing is confirmed yet. Surveyors should keep watching the policy developments, engage in the consultation, and consider how to position themselves for a changing workflow.

If you like, I can pull out specific survey scope examples from the consultation draft (what “condition assessment” might cover) and estimate the number of extra survey hours or capacity uplift the industry might need. Would you like that