The New TA6 Property Information Form (6th Edition): What’s Changed, What’s Missing, and Why It Matters

 

A New Chapter in Property Disclosure

The Law Society has released the long-awaited 6th edition of the TA6 Property Information Form, marking the most significant overhaul of property disclosure in years.

This new version launched alongside a proposed “two-form” approach is designed to simplify the process and reduce confusion after widespread criticism of the 5th edition.

While simplification is welcome, many conveyancers are asking: has essential information been lost along the way?

From Complexity to Clarity: The Rationale Behind the 6th Edition

The 5th edition TA6 form, introduced in 2024, was meant to improve transparency by capturing “material information” aligned with NTSELAT guidance.

Instead, it drew heavy criticism for being too long, too complex, and confusing both sellers and practitioners.

Following consultation with over 1,200 stakeholders including solicitors, conveyancers, estate agents, and consumers the Law Society opted to scrap the 5th edition and rebuild.

The result is a new 6th edition, with streamlined questions, simplified guidance, and a separate Material Information (MI) Form for the pre-marketing stage.

From 30 March 2026, CQS firms will be required to use this new edition. Until then, both the 4th and 5th editions can still be used.

The Big Picture: What’s New in the 6th Edition

Simplified structure – The new TA6 now has 15 sections, down from the sprawling 25-section layout of the 5th edition.

Clearer language – Many questions are now framed as “Are you aware…” rather than demanding certainty. Sellers can respond “not known” where appropriate.

Improved explanatory notes – The accompanying notes (as published by the Law Society in October 2025) are more readable, better signposted, and filled with practical examples. 

More flexible responses – Sellers can legitimately say “not known” without fear of technical breach, recognising that not every homeowner has full historical records.

Split-form process – The new “two-form” approach separates marketing information (for estate agents and buyers before offer) from contract-stage disclosure (the revised TA6).

• The Material Information Form will be used pre-offer (optional for CQS firms).
• The TA6 (6th edition) will be used post-offer, when conveyancers take over.

What’s Gone Missing: Key Omissions from the 5th Edition

The most striking feature of the new form is what’s not there.

Entire subject areas have been removed – including:

• Council tax and valuation details
• Asking price and tenure explanations
• Restrictive covenants and easements
• Building safety and cladding questions
• Physical characteristics of the property
• Mining and coastal erosion risks
• Accessibility features

While the Law Society argues these topics can be addressed through title documents, searches, or separate enquiries, their absence may cause practical and legal gaps.

Buyers and their conveyancers will need to work harder to ensure those points are covered elsewhere.

The Good: Less Paperwork, Fewer Headaches

There is no doubt the new TA6 is cleaner and less intimidating.

• Sellers will find it easier to complete.
• Conveyancers spend less time explaining obscure questions.
• The new explanatory notes are more user-friendly and avoid legal jargon.
• A simplified structure may speed up the early stages of a transaction and reduce inadvertent errors.

In short, it’s more accessible, particularly for lay sellers who struggled with the 5th edition’s technical phrasing.

The Bad: Oversimplification and “Not Known” Creep

However, simplification comes with trade-offs.

By allowing more “not known” answers and removing entire areas of disclosure, the form may reduce accountability.

It’s easy for sellers to tick “not known” even when further investigation could or should reveal an answer.

This risks a culture of under-disclosure, leaving buyers less protected and conveyancers potentially facing more post-completion complaints.

The more vague or defensive the form becomes, the less reliable it is as a disclosure tool.

Example: The “Not Known” Boundary Dispute

Scenario:

Mr and Mrs Green are selling their semi-detached home. Their next-door neighbour recently built an extension that slightly overlaps the shared fence line.

Under the TA6 (5th edition), they were asked directly:

“Are you aware of any disputes or complaints regarding the boundaries or ownership of the property?”

They would have had to declare:

“Yes – our neighbour extended near the boundary last year. No formal dispute, but we discussed the position informally.”

Under the new TA6 (6th edition), the relevant question is softened:

“Are you aware of any ongoing disputes or complaints with neighbours, owners or managers of nearby property?” and the explanatory notes add that sellers can reply “not known” if they are unsure or lack direct evidence.

The Greens, unsure whether their informal disagreement “counts,” tick “not known.”

The Problem

Three months after purchase, the buyer discovers the boundary wall encroaches 10cm onto the neighbour’s land. The neighbour produces old correspondence proving the Greens had discussed this and agreed to “sort it later.”

The buyer feels misled claiming that the Greens did know of a potential boundary issue and failed to disclose it clearly.

However, because the new form allows a “not known” response, the sellers argue they weren’t sure it was a dispute — only an informal discussion.

The Legal Grey Zone

This example highlights the key ambiguity introduced by the 6th edition:

• Under the 5th edition, the stricter question wording encouraged fuller disclosure.
• Under the 6th edition, sellers can more easily justify vagueness.
• The buyer’s solicitor may not have any indication of a potential issue, because “not known” reads as neutral.

The result?

A latent dispute surfaces post-completion, and the buyer has limited recourse because the seller technically answered truthfully even though they should have disclosed more detail.

Takeaway

The new TA6’s flexibility is a double-edged sword.

While it protects sellers from overstating what they know, it can also weaken the reliability of the form as a disclosure document.

Conveyancers will need to:

• Probe behind “not known” answers, especially for disputes, alterations, and boundaries.
• Advise sellers clearly that if they have any awareness of an issue, it’s safer to disclose it than risk a claim later. (see sample wording below)

'Please take care when completing the Property Information Form (TA6).

Where a question allows you to answer “not known”, that option should only be used if you genuinely have no reasonable way of finding the information. It is not intended as a default or a way to avoid giving an answer.

If you are unsure about something, for example, whether work was carried out with the proper permissions, who owns a boundary, or whether a neighbour has raised an issue, please let us know before completing the form.

We can help you decide whether further checks are sensible or whether additional information should be included.

It’s usually better to disclose and explain rather than risk a misunderstanding or dispute later in the transaction. Clear, honest answers now can prevent delays, renegotiations, or even legal issues after completion'.

The Uncertain: The Two-Form System

The introduction of a separate Material Information Form for pre-marketing is well-intentioned but potentially problematic:

• It’s not mandatory for CQS firms, meaning inconsistent adoption across the market.
• Where agents use one form and solicitors another, duplication and mismatch may occur.
• Information disclosed early may differ from what later appears in the TA6, risking confusion or even misrepresentation claims.

Unless estate agents, conveyancers, and form providers integrate this new system smoothly, we could see more friction, not less.

The Practical Risks for Conveyancers

During the transition period (2025-2026), conveyancers will need to:

• Be clear which version of the form their client has used (4th, 5th or 6th edition).
• Update internal checklists and precedents to reflect the missing question areas.
• Train staff to handle the “not known” culture carefully and advise sellers when further checks are sensible.
• Manage expectations with buyers about what the new form does not cover.

The simplification will only achieve its goal if practitioners supplement it with intelligent questioning and due diligence.

Verdict: Progress, But With Caution

The TA6 (6th edition) represents a welcome simplification and a more user-friendly approach.

It responds constructively to years of feedback that the 5th edition was over-engineered.

However, it also risks losing valuable detail, particularly on matters like restrictive covenants, building safety, and environmental risks.

As ever, the quality of disclosure will depend not just on the form, but on the professionalism and diligence of those completing and reviewing it.

For conveyancers, this is not the time to relax, it’s the time to re-tool, re-train, and review your processes before the March 2026 deadline.

The Law Society’s goal of balancing simplicity with legal sufficiency is laudable.

Yet, as with any reform, the success of the TA6 (6th edition) will depend on how well it is understood and implemented in practice.

For now, sellers should continue to disclose fully and honestly, buyers should seek independent verification, and conveyancers should stay vigilant through the transition.

© 2025 David Pett – MJP Conveyancing

For more insights on property law and conveyancing reform, follow our updates at mjpconveyancing.com.