Land Registry questions

Martin22_2

Hi, I have had conflicting advice from various solicitors so asking here! 2 siblings are buying out the 3rd of an inherited home. As money is changing hands then we know we need to pay SDLT. Both buying siblings are executors holding probate, the 3rd is a beneficiary who just wants £. The property is still in our late fathers name. There is no mortgage and no need for one for the buy out. Do we complete the SDLT and pay the tax, then send the SDLT5 with the AP1 and Assent form...or with a TR1? Or do we do the AP1 and Assent (AS1) and then do the SDLT?
Thanks

wookie66

Hi

As an executor I'm currently processing a transfer of title following the death one of the named person on a property title

One of the other named person on the title deed is an elderly housebound person who is unwell and unable to attend local solicitors or Land Registry offices to complete and sign ID1 form

What options are available in such a scenario for them to be ID verified

Thanks

thomasbottom

Hi again
Following on from my saga of the boundary line on the Landmark search map it looks as though part of what my buyer was saying is correct.
I'll try and list it....
Title plan issued 1977 showing outline including pig sty attached to old stables
1988 pig sty knocked down. Land Registry didn't do a new site plan which is normal
1990 bungalow built. outline showing on title still included pig sty which is why the Landmark plan shows a red line through the bungalow as that's partly where the pigsty was.
So effectively the boundary line needs to be moved over to jut up to where the old stables building now is.
I have also spoken to the original owner of the land which they had the bungalow built on and they also confirmed they would do what they could to help but I really need to know how long this could take to get rectified? I am going to lose this sale by the looks of it which I'm in absolute bits about.
As an alternative to losing the sale is there anything that can be put in place such as indemnity insurance while the correct outline is done?
Also because of the 1977 plan not having sizes on it and just the outline I never noticed when I bought. There was no sizes to check what was the meterage on the bit in question.
Please please help. Thanks again.

Land_Registry

Martin22 wrote: »

Hi, I have had conflicting advice from various solicitors so asking here! 2 siblings are buying out the 3rd of an inherited home. As money is changing hands then we know we need to pay SDLT. Both buying siblings are executors holding probate, the 3rd is a beneficiary who just wants £. The property is still in our late fathers name. There is no mortgage and no need for one for the buy out. Do we complete the SDLT and pay the tax, then send the SDLT5 with the AP1 and Assent form...or with a TR1? Or do we do the AP1 and Assent (AS1) and then do the SDLT?
Thanks

SDLT first. And as it's not a straight Assent to the beneficiaries I'd suggest a Transfer using TR1 is the way to go as it provides for the 'consideration' payment being made

Land_Registry

wookie66 wrote: »

Hi

As an executor I'm currently processing a transfer of title following the death one of the named person on a property title

One of the other named person on the title deed is an elderly housebound person who is unwell and unable to attend local solicitors or Land Registry offices to complete and sign ID1 form

What options are available in such a scenario for them to be ID verified

Thanks

You should contact us with the specific details to see what alternative arrangements might be made

However I suspect, but very dependent on the specifics involved, that we may expect a conveyancer to visit them to complete the verification process.

Note - the transfer would be by the surviving joint owner so I assume you are helping them rather than also transferring title

Land_Registry

thomasbottom wrote: »

Hi again
Following on from my saga of the boundary line on the Landmark search map it looks as though part of what my buyer was saying is correct.
I'll try and list it....
Title plan issued 1977 showing outline including pig sty attached to old stables
1988 pig sty knocked down. Land Registry didn't do a new site plan which is normal
1990 bungalow built. outline showing on title still included pig sty which is why the Landmark plan shows a red line through the bungalow as that's partly where the pigsty was.
So effectively the boundary line needs to be moved over to jut up to where the old stables building now is.
I have also spoken to the original owner of the land which they had the bungalow built on and they also confirmed they would do what they could to help but I really need to know how long this could take to get rectified? I am going to lose this sale by the looks of it which I'm in absolute bits about.
As an alternative to losing the sale is there anything that can be put in place such as indemnity insurance while the correct outline is done?
Also because of the 1977 plan not having sizes on it and just the outline I never noticed when I bought. There was no sizes to check what was the meterage on the bit in question.
Please please help. Thanks again.

I don't quite follow and my immediate reaction is that the registered extent does not just change if the building changes and isn't 'just moved over'. If they have built on land not included in the title/ownership, and that's how I have read it, then that's a much bigger issue.

If they are applying to correct it and think that's all that's needed then timescales could be as short as 2/3 weeks but until an application is made we can't really know.

We don't deal with insurance so you'd need to rely in your solicitor there. But that's really for the buyer to decide on

thomasbottom

Land_Registry wrote: »

I don't quite follow and my immediate reaction is that the registered extent does not just change if the building changes and isn't 'just moved over'. If they have built on land not included in the title/ownership, and that's how I have read it, then that's a much bigger issue.

If they are applying to correct it and think that's all that's needed then timescales could be as short as 2/3 weeks but until an application is made we can't really know.

We don't deal with insurance so you'd need to rely in your solicitor there. But that's really for the buyer to decide on

Thanks for getting back to me.
I'm not sure how else to explain it without you seeing the plan. Would you be able to have a look at it for me please?

Land_Registry

thomasbottom wrote: »

Thanks for getting back to me.
I'm not sure how else to explain it without you seeing the plan. Would you be able to have a look at it for me please?

If you post the title number then yes

thomasbottom

Land_Registry wrote: »

If you post the title number then yes

Thanks so much.
DY188407
You will see where the building next door goes in a bit like a bottle neck. That is the old pig sty which was knocked down. I also have the original plans for the bungalow from the planning application which was approved to scale and on there you can also see there was no pig sty. I can send you that if you need to see it. The Council and building inspector surely would not have approved the scale if the pig sty was still there otherwise the whole footprint of the building would have not fitted it to the plot.

Land_Registry

thomasbottom wrote: »

Thanks so much.
DY188407
You will see where the building next door goes in a bit like a bottle neck. That is the old pig sty which was knocked down. I also have the original plans for the bungalow from the planning application which was approved to scale and on there you can also see there was no pig sty. I can send you that if you need to see it. The Council and building inspector surely would not have approved the scale if the pig sty was still there otherwise the whole footprint of the building would have not fitted it to the plot.

So the 'new building' now extends into the neck of the bottle, which was the pig sty.

If so then effectively they have built on the adjoining title DY188406.

So it would not be a case of simply moving or rectifying the red line on the title plan but would require the registered owners of that adjoining title to transfer the additional land, with the extension on it, to you for example.

The council planning process would not check or account for the fact that the builder was using someone else's land.

When you bought the property your conveyancer would normally provide you with a copy of the title plan and ask you to check/confirm that it matched the reality on the ground. If, and I assume the whole of the building now shown on the OS detail (same as Landmark I imagine) is what you 'live in', then that is a significant difference.

You'll need to work this through with your conveyancer now to identify how it was allowed to happen and how to resolve it. As explained, and if I have understood correctly, the property now stands on two titles, one which you own and one which you do not. That would not be a simple correction of the plan and would require a legal transfer of ownership.

How that is achieved and at what cost and who might be liable for that cost is something your conveyancer should assist with. We would be involved in the outcome, namely an application as and when submitted.

Sorry, not the reply you were hoping for