On Wednesday at 1pm, IPSA Kind Of Magic takes a closer look at something many in the property world talk about quietly. Search indemnity has become a familiar tool. It keeps transactions moving when councils are backed up or when deadlines cannot shift, yet one wonders whether we have started leaning on it far more than intended.

Hosted by Gareth Wax and joined by myself, Hamish McLay, this week’s session explores what happens when insurance becomes the first solution rather than the last resort.

Search indemnity is often presented as a neat shortcut. If a full search cannot be carried out in time, a policy is put in place and completion goes ahead. On the surface it feels convenient. Buyers feel protected, lenders seem satisfied, and the process avoids delay. Although the conversation becomes very different when you look a little closer at what these policies actually do.

An indemnity policy is not a search. It gives no insight into conditions that may affect building works, extensions, drainage, conservation areas, road schemes or environmental constraints. It simply offers financial cover if an undisclosed issue later causes a loss. The issue itself still exists. The buyer still has to live with it. The policy only steps in afterwards, and usually when the impact is measurable in money.

Those who gather searches day in and day out know the risks better than anyone. When data feeds are incomplete or councils have merged records, unusual patterns become easier to spot. An experienced search agent can often retrieve partial information or refine what is already known, reducing the need for blanket insurance. Local context matters. Some areas have legacy files on microfiche. Others have planning histories split across former district offices. These quirks do not disappear because a policy has been purchased.

There is also the question of fairness. A buyer might complete with an indemnity, only to discover later that an extension is restricted or a nearby development was planned years ago. The policy may cover financial loss, yet it cannot restore peace of mind. A future buyer might insist on full searches, revealing something the first buyer had no chance to prepare for. It is a chain reaction that begins with missing information.

This week’s discussion is not about criticising indemnity. It exists for a reason and can be genuinely helpful where delays are unavoidable. Instead, it is about recognising the balance. Due diligence provides knowledge. Insurance provides a safety net. They work best together when each plays its proper role.

It will be interesting to hear real examples from the field and to learn how search agents, conveyancers and lenders judge when a policy is appropriate. IPSA members know the difference between a risk managed and a risk masked. That experience is exactly what makes these conversations so valuable.

Join us live on Wednesday at 1pm. Comments, experiences and questions are always welcome, before, during or after the session.

Watch live or catch up on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/@SpillingTheProper-Tea

For content enquiries: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
For podcast or media information: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.