top of page
The Property Industry Is Going Remote — But Is It For The Better?

The Property Industry Is Going Remote — But Is It For The Better?

11 February 2026

Toby Patrick

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

Let’s face it, the world is going remote. Remote jobs, remote companies and even remote industries are quickly becoming the norm in business. There are both challenges and opportunities that come with this, which will differ from one case to the next. Today, we’re going to take a look at the property industry, an industry that is going nowhere but one that is certainly evolving. A large part of this evolution is seeing the property market become increasingly remote; it’s even possible to go through the whole process of buying a property without any human contact. In this article, we’re going to explore this shift and discuss whether this change is for better or for worse.


Red brick apartment building with black railings and small balconies. Potted plants line the front. A clear sky and lampposts in view.

A Quiet Shift

Some industries’ move to operating remotely has happened quite drastically, brought about by the need to work from home during the pandemic. But in the case of property, it’s been heading this way long before lockdown. Online-only estate agents emerged over ten years ago, and virtual viewings grew in popularity prior to them becoming the norm during COVID. While some industries are shifting towards virtual because it’s “on-trend”, the property industry’s move is one that offers genuine benefits in the form of speed, cost and convenience.


The Dangers Of A Remote Property Industry

Where there’s opportunity, there is often danger too. The convenience of using a remote agent or conveyancer is balanced out by the rise of remote providers who hide behind faceless personas to offer substandard services. If we travel back to the start of the 21st century, buyers had to meet with their solicitor, estate agent and so on. Nowadays, deals can be done over the phone or via email, and while this offers convenience, it also creates ambiguity around the work being completed and who is to be held accountable when mistakes occur. It must be said that in most cases, remote service providers do offer efficiency and convenience, but the small selection of bad actors in the industry is preventing remote workers from gaining 100% trust over those who still deal face-to-face with clients.


The Case for Hybrid Approaches

If physical environments provide trust and remote ones offer convenience, then the ideal solution possibly lies in a combination of the two, which is probably where we’re currently at. A hybrid offering in the property industry combines technology with human judgment, providing both speed and accuracy. Take a property valuation for example, AVMs have allowed us to get near instant valuations for properties, but often fall short in terms of accuracy when compared with a RICS valuation, which is carried out by a chartered surveyor. A RICS desktop valuation however offers the best of both worlds, using vast quantities of data but also the expertise of a qualified human.  


Remote Isn’t The Problem

Ultimately, just because something is remote doesn’t mean it should be avoided. That includes services within the property sector, and we’re not saying you should avoid remote agents or advisors. However, when there is a lot to lose, like there is when buying or selling a property, it’s imperative that you do your due diligence. And remember, if something seems too good to be true, it probably is!


Current Most Read

The Property Industry Is Going Remote — But Is It For The Better?
US Naval Pursuit and Seizure of Oil Tanker in the Indian Ocean: What It Means
Discover the Latest UK Cinema Trends and Film Industry News

US Naval Pursuit and Seizure of Oil Tanker in the Indian Ocean: What It Means

  • Writer: Paul Francis
    Paul Francis
  • 2 days ago
  • 4 min read

United States military forces have carried out a striking maritime operation, boarding a sanctioned oil tanker in the Indian Ocean after a months-long chase that began in the Caribbean Sea. The vessel, named the Aquila II, was tracked and intercepted as part of an ongoing US effort to enforce sanctions and stem the flow of illicit crude linked to sanctioned nations and entities.


Aerial view of a large tanker ship with illuminated deck cruising on calm ocean waters at dusk, creating a peaceful and serene mood.

This operation represents a significant escalation in a broader enforcement campaign that now stretches across oceans and challenges traditional views of sanctions policy. It also highlights the complex intersection of geopolitics, naval power, and international trade in an era of heightened pressure on Russia and Venezuela.


What Happened to the Aquila II

In early February 2026, US forces successfully boarded the Aquila II after tracking the ship from Caribbean waters to the Indian Ocean. According to the Pentagon, the tanker was under sanction and had attempted to evade monitoring by turning off its transponder — a tactic known in shipping as “going dark”.


The boarding was carried out without reported conflict, with naval vessels and helicopters deployed to intercept the vessel. While the ship is now being held by US authorities, its final legal status and any potential prosecution or forfeiture proceedings have not yet been resolved publicly.


The Aquila II had been under US sanctions for transporting Russian and Venezuelan oil in violation of a quarantine imposed by the US, and had also been previously designated by the UK for sanctions linked to Russian oil shipments.


Part of a Broader Enforcement Campaign

This operation is not an isolated incident. In late 2025 and early 2026, the United States significantly expanded maritime pressure on oil shipments tied to sanctions against Venezuela and Russia. The expansion included a naval blockade around sanctioned oil tankers near Venezuela and multiple high-profile ship seizures in the Caribbean, the Atlantic, and now the Indian Ocean.


In December 2025, the US announced what it termed a blockade of sanctioned oil tankers trading in or out of Venezuelan ports. Military and Coast Guard assets were deployed across the Caribbean and nearby sea lanes. Several oil tankers linked to sanctions evasion, including a vessel known as Skipper, were seized off the Venezuelan coast amid growing international attention.


In early January 2026, a Russian-flagged tanker was also intercepted and seized in the North Atlantic after a lengthy pursuit, illustrating how broadly the campaign has extended beyond Caribbean waters.


The pursuit and boarding of the Aquila II marks one of the farthest known interdictions linked to this sanctions enforcement, illustrating the global reach of the operation.


What the US Says It Is Trying to Achieve

The US has framed these operations as necessary to uphold economic sanctions and prevent sanctioned oil from entering global markets through deceptive means. By targeting what has been described as part of a “shadow fleet” of vessels that evade monitoring and transport crude under false documentation or flags, the US aims to close supply routes that undermine sanctions regimes.


US defence officials, including the Secretary of Defense, have made clear that enforcing these measures is a priority, stating that vessels running from sanctions will be pursued wherever they go.


Sanctions on Venezuela and Russia

Sanctions on Venezuelan oil have been part of US policy for years, but they intensified following political upheavals in Venezuela. The Trump administration escalated pressure after a high-profile raid that resulted in the capture of then-President Nicolás Maduro in January 2026, and the broader campaign since has been framed as part of a push to weaken that regime’s economic base.


Sanctions on Russian oil exports have similarly targeted a network of tankers and supporting entities that operate outside standard trade channels. These measures are part of wider efforts by the US, the UK, and other allies to reduce revenue streams that support Russia’s economy amid ongoing geopolitical tensions.


The resulting pressure has also fed into diplomatic tensions. Russia has publicly criticised US enforcement actions as hostile and part of an overly aggressive sanctions policy, even as international partners like the European Union coordinate further restrictions on maritime services tied to Russian crude.


Legal and Geopolitical Questions

These actions raise complex questions about maritime law, international norms, and the balance between sanctions enforcement and sovereign rights. Critics have argued that aggressive interdictions far from territorial waters blur the lines between law enforcement and acts of naval coercion, while supporters emphasise the need to uphold sanctions and cut off financial lifelines to sanctioned regimes.


The US maintains that its operations are backed by existing sanctions authorities and legal frameworks, but the debate over legality and precedent is likely to continue as similar operations unfold.


What Comes Next

As of February 2026, the Aquila II situation is still developing. What is clear is that the campaign to enforce sanctions on oil shipments tied to Venezuela and Russia is far from over. With multiple vessels detained and navies deployed across vast oceanic regions, the issue has become a global naval priority for the US and its allies.


The diplomatic fallout, impact on global oil markets, and larger strategic implications will be subjects of ongoing attention in the weeks and months ahead.

bottom of page