There is a quiet confidence building around AI. The language is optimistic - smarter systems, faster transactions, fewer delays, cleaner data.
It would be reassuring if the story were that simple.
AI is already embedded across the market. Portals such as Rightmove and Zoopla use automated valuation models to generate instant price estimates. Developers apply data modelling to assess planning risk before committing to land. Conveyancers are increasingly supported by software that reviews contracts, flags clauses and cross-checks lender requirements.
The engine room is far more digital than it was even a few years ago.
Yet speed and understanding are not the same thing.
An algorithm can calculate an average value based on recent sales in a postcode. It may not recognise that one particular block has unresolved cladding issues or a lease term that is quietly shortening. It will not sense the practical implications of a planning condition that looks minor yet causes real-world friction.
Context remains stubbornly human.
In conveyancing, we are often told that technology will streamline the process. There is certainly more automation. Titles can be compared digitally. Data can be extracted in seconds. Risk flags can be raised almost instantly.
At the same time, the volume of available information has expanded dramatically. Software can pull in everything. Refining what genuinely matters still relies on professional judgement. More data does not automatically mean fewer queries. In some cases, it creates the opposite effect - more material to review, more angles to consider, more compliance to evidence.
That tension is visible in building safety too. Since the Building Safety Act 2022, digital record-keeping expectations have grown. AI systems can catalogue documents, track remediation progress and model risk scenarios.
What they cannot do is carry responsibility.
They cannot weigh the lived experience of residents against cost modelling. They cannot interpret the subtleties of proportionate risk. They cannot absorb the consequences of a wrong judgement.
In lettings and management, AI tools are answering tenant queries and predicting maintenance issues. Dynamic pricing systems adjust rents based on demand patterns. Efficiency improves and administrative time reduces.
Structural issues - court delays, policy shifts, regulatory pressure - remain beyond the reach of automation.
So can AI really fix property?
It can improve parts of it. It can reduce duplication, highlight anomalies and surface patterns that might otherwise be missed. It can support smaller firms with analytical power once reserved for large corporates.
What it cannot do is replace judgement, local knowledge and professional instinct.
In the world of searches and interpretation, a document may arrive faster. Understanding the local quirk behind it still depends on experience. Recognising when something does not quite sit right is rarely algorithmic.
Perhaps that is where the balance lies. AI strengthens the engine. It does not replace the driver.
Property remains a human system - built on trust, risk, regulation and emotion as much as data. Technology can help process complexity. People must still interpret it.
Join Gareth and Hamish on Property Matters as they explore where AI genuinely adds value and where professional judgement remains irreplaceable.
Watch live or catch up here:
https://www.youtube.com/@SpillingTheProper-Tea
For content enquiries:
For podcast/media info: