Housing (Scotland) Act 2006 (Consequential Provisions) Order 2008

I am grateful for the welcome of the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan, for the order, and the rather more muted enthusiasm of the noble Duke, the Duke of Montrose. I recognise that his party had some reservations about the English version of the measure, but, as he rightly acknowledged, this is an issue of consumer protection, which is why it is on a UK-wide basis. I accept exactly what the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan, said: not only is it to be welcomed that consumer protection measures should be UK-wide, but we ought to expect such measures to form part of European initiatives as time goes on, against the background where people purchase across frontiers and need defences for any wrongs that may be done to them as they do so. The noble Lord is right to say that second homes are involved. What enthusiasm I am meant to express from the Dispatch Box for second home purchases in other countries I am not so sure, but I recognise that those who do purchase need to be fully aware of what they are doing and need all the protection that we can provide. In so far as we see extensions of that in due course, so be it. The purpose of the order is to introduce into Scotland an opportunity for greater awareness of the position on the part of the purchaser, because of the additional information in the home report. The noble Duke, the Duke of Montrose, asked what impact it may have on the housing market. He particularised it at first by asking whether it will lead to claims such as, ““I have bought the house, but now it does not look to be as valuable as when I bought it””. He is right to say that that looks to be more of an issue of the housing market than of the surveyor’s report and the home report to which scrutiny is given. It is much more likely, rather than being on the global value of the house, that the claim will be that the surveyor had failed to identify a serious defect with the house which was causing the loss of value. It would not be the price and the loss of value that was the issue but the defect that had not been identified by the professional, in which case there might be a question of a claim. We have said that any such claim of a failure in that respect must be able to be pursued across the length and breadth of the United Kingdom. I am sure that he recognises the value of that. The order covers it. On the more general point about the effect on the market, the order will come into play this December, a month in which the housing market traditionally is dampened down and a relatively small number of transactions are concluded. The noble Duke also talked about anxieties that have been expressed about the home report dampening the market. First, the home report is a particular service to the consumer that is meant to give the purchaser of a house, where purchasers are involved, greater security in what is probably their most substantial transaction ever. Protection is necessary. Secondly, I doubt whether this legislative change for benign consumer protection will be particularly marked, given that, as we all recognise, the housing market is changing in fairly significant ways and may do so for the foreseeable future. It is therefore highly unlikely that the order will have much to do with market conditions. I think the noble Duke will appreciate that rather bigger forces are at play with regard to house prices, so he should not expect too great an impact in those terms. Again on the more general issues that have been raised, I emphasise that the reason for the order relates to an important dimension of the housing market in Scotland in that it seeks to improve the condition of Scottish housing, which we all recognise falls below the standard that we would wish to see. This measure is therefore brought before the Committee because of its consumer protection dimension, which is a UK-reserved issue for the very reasons to which the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan, referred. I hope that noble Lords who made points about the order will feel reassured, and I commend it to the Committee. On Question, Motion agreed to.