Material information and upfront information: how the reforms fit together

Over the past two years, the regulation of residential property transactions has entered a period of significant change. Estate agents, conveyancers and consumers are increasingly hearing references to “material information”, “upfront information”, and wide-ranging home buying and selling reforms. While these concepts are closely linked, they serve different purposes and sit at different levels of law and policy. 

Understanding how they dovetail is essential for anyone involved in property transactions.

At the foundation of the current framework is consumer protection law, most notably the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024. This Act did not introduce a new concept of material information; rather, it strengthened and consolidated long-standing principles that prohibit misleading actions and misleading omissions. In simple terms, estate agents must not omit information that an average buyer needs in order to make an informed transactional decision. That obligation already applies today and is legally enforceable.

Crucially, the law does not provide a definitive checklist of what counts as material information in a property transaction. Instead, it requires judgement. What is “material” depends on whether the information would influence a buyer’s decision to view, make an offer, or proceed. In practice, this places responsibility squarely on estate agents to think carefully about what a reasonable buyer would want to know upfront, particularly at the point a property is marketed.

Property listings almost always qualify as an “invitation to purchase” under consumer law. That means material information should generally appear in the listing itself, rather than being disclosed later in the process. Where information is withheld, obscured, or drip-fed after a buyer has already invested time and money, this can amount to a misleading omission. Enforcement bodies have been clear that “we’ll deal with that later” is no longer a safe position where the information could reasonably affect a buyer’s initial decision.

Despite this, there has been widespread uncertainty across the sector. Many agents have struggled to interpret how general consumer law principles apply to the specific realities of residential property. That uncertainty is one of the main drivers behind the government’s recent consultation on material information in property listings. Importantly, this consultation does not propose new legal duties. Instead, it seeks to publish formal guidance explaining how existing law should be applied in practice.

The proposed guidance is intended to give estate agents greater clarity by identifying categories of information that are likely to be material in most transactions. These include matters such as tenure, price, council tax, service charges, rights and restrictions, flood risk, known defects, and building safety issues. The guidance would not remove the need for professional judgement, but it would narrow the grey areas and make it harder to justify omissions on the basis of uncertainty.

This clarification exercise represents the first stage of a broader reform agenda. Alongside the material information consultation, the government has published a much wider consultation on reforming the home buying and selling process as a whole. That document makes clear that improving compliance with material information law is a necessary starting point, but not the end goal.

The reform consultation proposes a future system in which comprehensive upfront information is routinely available at the point a property is listed. This goes well beyond current material information requirements. Rather than relying on agent judgement alone, the proposal is for a standardised, seller-led information pack that could include title data, searches, leasehold information, building safety details, and even property condition assessments.

The distinction between material information and upfront information is critical. Material information sets the legal minimum: it is about fairness and informed decision-making under consumer law. Upfront information, by contrast, is about transaction efficiency and certainty. It is designed to reduce fall-throughs, shorten timescales, and allow buyers and conveyancers to proceed with confidence much earlier in the process.

The government has been explicit that upfront information could include data that would not necessarily be legally “material” at the listing stage, but which is essential to complete a transaction smoothly. In other words, all material information would form part of upfront information, but upfront information would go further. This is why the reforms are described as complementary rather than overlapping.

Timing is also central to how the two regimes dovetail. The government does not propose to mandate upfront information immediately. Instead, it intends to first clarify expectations around material information, improve data standards, expand digital property logbooks, and ensure that reliable sources of property data are available. Only once that infrastructure is in place would legislation be considered to require sellers and agents to provide comprehensive upfront packs.

This sequencing is deliberate. Past initiatives, most notably Home Information Packs, failed in part because they were introduced without sufficient trust in the data, clarity over liability, or integration with the wider transaction process. The current proposals aim to avoid repeating those mistakes by focusing on data provenance, standard validity periods, and clear roles for sellers, agents, conveyancers and surveyors.

If upfront information is ultimately introduced in statutory form, it is likely to reduce legal risk for estate agents rather than increase it. A system based on verified, standardised data leaves far less room for disputes about whether something should have been disclosed earlier. It also shifts responsibility away from subjective judgement and towards transparent, auditable information flows.

For conveyancers, the implications are equally significant. Earlier access to reliable property information has the potential to reduce duplication, shorten investigations, and minimise late surprises that currently derail transactions. From a consumer perspective, the reforms promise fewer wasted costs, fewer collapsed chains, and greater confidence when making what is often the most important financial decision of their lives.

In summary, material information and upfront information are not competing concepts. Material information represents the legal floor that already exists under consumer protection law. Upfront information represents a higher, system-wide standard that may be introduced in the future to transform how property transactions work. The government’s current approach is to align the two, ensuring that clearer compliance with existing law becomes the foundation for more ambitious reform.