Everybody is an expert

Go into any pub and you will get as many opinions on how to run the English football team as there are drinkers at the bar. Everyone knows what Capello should have done and where he went wrong. Want to find your way to Norwich? Everybody knows the best way – and most are different. Want to know how to run the country? Just ask – you’ll get a wide range of authoritative but completely different views (mostly right wing if you are in a pub in my part of the country).

Most of these people cannot do much harm (except if they send you to Norwich from Ipswich via Bristol). But there is one area where everyone is an expert – property – where unqualified people can cause real problems. Most people have bought and sold a house or two. So they are experts on everything to do with buying and selling property, construction, development and planning. And unlike managing the England football team, some of them are in positions of power and regularly take decisions on property matters that they do not understand.

There are many examples of property projects run by amateurs that have gone off the rails.

Tales of public sector projects that have gone wrong are legion. It’s not just officers – it’s politicians as well. The Scottish Parliament cost about ten times the original budget. So did the British library – and the construction programme overran by eight years.

But the private sector can also make mistakes. Tobacco Dock is a Grade1 was refurbished and converted to a retail centre in 1990. The scheme was intended to create the Covent Garden of the East End – but it is in a predominantly residential area with pretty ordinary public transport access. The developer was and old established firm, which, if I recall correctly was in the clothing business. No one had a clue about property development – but they thought they couldn’t lose. Well they did – and in spades. The scheme cost £47 million and was eventually sold for under £10m to convert to an outlet centre. Even that was an abject failure and the lonely, sole surviving shop has now gone and the development is boarded up.

If you want your pipes fixed, you hire a plumber. If you want a new hip you go to an orthopedic surgeon. But if you want to organise a major retail or office development – you do it yourself. Because you know what you are doing. Years of boom in the residential and commercial markets have given people the belief that they cannot go wrong. “It’s only a blip, don’t worry, values will soon be on the up.” “That roof only need a couple of new tiles.” “I don’t need planning for the new dormer.”

Of course property professionals can and do get things wrong. Agents of all types can be incurable optimists. Building surveyors can miss hidden defects. But by and large a professional will know a lot more about property than an amateur. So my advice is seek the opinion of a professional. And in the unlikely event that something does go wrong – you can always sue them.

Design Panels

It was with some scepticism that, as a planning and development surveyor, I put my name forward for the Inspire East (East of England) Design Panel. I thought such bodies were principally the province of architects and designers – and largely confined their deliberations to matters of aesthetics. Well some do. But I was very pleasantly surprised to find on our first meeting that we have a wide range of development experts. Sure we have architects, landscape architects and urban designers; but our panel also includes planning policy people, transport engineers, community cohesion specialists as well as me.

Our panel sessions are really enlightening. Although I have worked with multi-disciplinary teams before, people have largely been confined to their own professional boxes: often the lead consultant (usually a designer of one sort or another) has had the last word. But in our panel we work much more as a team of equals – everyone has their say and all comments are taken on board.

So what do a local authority and developer get out of bringing a project to our design panel? First they get an honest broker – an unbiased third party view. Secondly they get the collective view of a range of experts from different disciplines, some of which they won’t have on their team. And thirdly they often get some really bright ideas – things they haven’t thought of that come from people who can stand back from the scheme and view it afresh. (You would be amazed to see how far people get with designs that simply won’t work. For example a revised layout suggested by the panel for a waterside development saved the expense of constructing three new lifting bridges.)

Other places and organisations have their own versions of design panels. As I said above, some just include architects and designers. Others include just local people – too many conflicts and petty jealousies. Some are run by individual firms - these tend to have a very narrow focus. And perhaps worst of all, there are those that comprise largely local authority members – again too many conflicts and no expertise in any aspect of design or development. (But anyone who has bought and sold a house thinks he or she is a property expert.)

So it is with considerable regret that I have to let you know that Inspire East and its design panel are being wound up – unless we find a way of funding it that will retain our independence. Bearing in mind the extent of investment in the schemes that come before the panel, the cost would not be huge. Some members may be prepared to put in time pro bono. Developers could be charged a modest levy akin to that for pre-application discussions. Or the local authority might make a contribution. Ideally, both would pay and thereby avoid accusations of conflicts of interest.

A question of identity?

We recently completed a sale of a flat. Our solicitor demanded that we produce the requisite identity – passport, utility bills etc.

“Why?”

“In case you aren’t who you say you are.”

“Pardon? You’ve bought and sold five properties for us and my wife has been dealing with you and your colleagues on behalf of her company once or twice a week for the last fifteen years.”

“I know, but rules are rules and you might be money laundering.”

“So how does our confirming we are us – which you know already – make any difference to our ability to money launder – if we were so minded – which we are not?.

I recounted this tale to my chum – who had one better. Her daughter who was a week shy of eighteen (and looks much older) wanted to buy a lottery scratch card (for which you need to be 16 or over). The woman behind the counter said

“No ID, no sale.” So mum says that she will buy it.

“Still no.”

“Why?”

“Because you’ll give it to her!”

Later that day, the daughter goes into another shop and sees her old friend Craig whom she has known for 13 years.

“No ID, no sale.”

“But we have been in the same class since we started together at primary school. You know I’ll be eighteen next week – you’re coming to my party.”

“Sorry, no. Rules are rules!”

About a year ago, a shop was reported as having refused to sell a girl a paper cutting out set for her little brother’s birthday, because she was only 14 and not allowed buy anything that contained scissors. The fact that the set was clearly designed with children in mind and marked “suitable for children over four” cut no ice at all.

The point of these three stories is not about the case for or against identity cards – which I agree with in principle, but not at the inflated price they were going to cost under the last government’s proposals. No, it is about the lack of flexibility and common sense that pervades every aspect of modern life.