Clause 59
Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Bill
12:00 pm
Mark Prisk (Shadow Minister (Small Businesses and Enterprise), Trade & Industry; Hertford and Stortford, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 69, in clause 59, page 37, line 31, at end insert—
‘( ) Regulations in this section may make provision for the exemption of certain service providers.’.
I hope that I have not distressed the Minister too much by not moving amendment No. 68, and I trust that he will be able to use his arguments on a later date—although, I hope, not on this clause.
The purpose of probing amendment No. 69, which relates confusingly to clause 59, is to establish from the Minister the likely provisions of subsequent statutory instruments and therefore the Government’s intentions. My understanding is that their intention is to prepare a single set of regulations for unsolicited and solicited visits. Will the Minister confirm whether that is the case and say whether current conditions for unsolicited visits will be changed in the new regulations? Will he also explain which home trades are likely to be included? He will understand the sensitivity of that point.
I think that it is fair to say that much of the problem centres on the installation of things such as home improvements or property services—double glazing, stair lifts and so on. Clearly, a typical visit by a plumber or electrician is not what we are trying to deal with. Indeed, the clause could create quite significant problems for more regular visits. Will the Minister explain how the regulations are intended to work and how the balance between the rights of consumers and those of tradesmen will be struck? I am sure that, if we reach the stand part debate, more detailed points will be made, but I should be grateful if he could respond to my amendment, which, as I said, is a probing one.