However, whether digital records could raise the asset value on an open market is questionable, others say.
Sydney property developer Mila Mikhaleva isn’t convinced the shift to digital records will add value.
“Currently, we put disclaimers in our report stating that the lender should sign asbestos reports, cladding, etc, before making a decision. However, it would definitely help us and other professionals dealing with the building in obtaining more accurate information.”
When working in Russia, valuers regularly referred to a document known as a “building passport”—centralising the details of a property in one place, which was useful, Mila says.
CEO and co-founder of proptech industry leader Archistar Benjamin Coorey says paper-based records are inefficient, create delays and add cost to the process.
Despite being a digital advocate, he’s not convinced the shift will equate to higher asset valuations.
“I don’t anticipate that digital records would make the valuation higher or lower, but digital records can improve the valuation process, as it allows for faster decision-making and easier access to information to make decisions from,” he says.
However, Kevin Brogan, director of group risk and compliance at Herron Todd White says anything that gives buyers more certainty over the history of a building is beneficial.
“As construction costs increase, there is the potential for materials substitution to occur, and so a register that can provide a confirmation of materials provenance and compliance with appropriate standards will be valuable. Some combustible cladding materials were found to be cheaper substitutes for the specified cladding, for example,” Brogan says.
A market response from insurers is yet to be seen, but better transparency could result in better products in the future.
Article Source: www.theurbandeveloper.com