Land Registry questions

da_rule

Land_Registry said:

MEA3583_2 said:

da_rule said:

MEA3583_2 said:

I'm dealing with the estate of my late Uncle, and recently posted a couple of very specific questions to the Land Registry as follows:
"Dear Land Registry,
Apologies for having to contact you at this very busy time. I am dealing with the estate of the above title, given the recent death of my uncle and could not find the specific answers I was looking for in the guide regarding deaths.
This title is currently registered as tenants in common between my late uncle and his wife at 50% each. His portion (50%) is to be split and transferred according to his will as 'tenants in common' to his two children, each taking 25% each, with his wife retaining her current 50%. His wife will apply for Probate if required, as she is executor.
I have two questions relating to this:
. What specific forms do I need to process this scenario (I could not find any guidance for passing on his 50% on and splitting it into 2 x 25% tenants in common.)
2. Will probate be required for this? (I've assumed that it will and am in the process of making an application).
Many thanks you for your help"

The response I got back from LR was :"Please see practice Guide 6 below which explains our requirements
link..

I'm still no clearer in finding the answer I was looking for by following that link, Can anybody help explain in simple terms? 

Thank you!

Is the land registered? If so you’ll need to complete an AS1, AP1 and ID1’s for the beneficiaries. You’ll need probate and have to send a copy to the Land Registry (so make sure you pay for a few copies of the grant when you apply for it). 

If the land isn’t registered the assent will trigger first registration. You’d again need an AS1 and ID1’s but you’d also need a FR1 and to be able to deduce (prove) title (i.e. you’d need to send the deeds to the Land Registry). 

Thanks so much for your help, I really appreciate it. The land is registered yes, and I've bought the titles online. It has both my late uncle and aunt as owners with a tenants in common restriction. I am applying for Probate too. I've done it previously for another relative, but that was just a simple transfer of Joint Tenants, not TIC. Assume one of those forms allows me to specify the % ownership of each? e.g. 50% (aunt as present), 25% each to beneficiaries (from deceased's 50%)?
Also, my aunt is going to be the only executor that will apply for probate. Is that sufficient to deal with this?

If I have read this correctly then the property is registered in the joint names of your late uncle and your, still alive, aunt. As such the legal ownership has passed to your aunt so if it’s to be transferred to her and the beneficiaries then she needs to transfer it using forms AP1, TR1 and ID1s as appropriate. 

Probate is not required and the transfer would be by her to her + beneficiaries 

The % split you refer to relates to their beneficial ownerships. The form A restriction was presumably applied for to protect that split and the interests of the beneficiaries in his %share. 

If a new split is to be agreed then that can be done and the form A left in place to protect any new split/interests created. If they want to specify the % split in the TR1 they can do. Such arrangements are often recorded in much more detail as well e.g wills, trust deed or otherwise but we don’t then register such details as the form A restriction is invariably sufficient from a registration/legal ownership perspective 

I would disagree with the Land Registry rep on this point. One of the main reasons property is owned as tenants in common (rather than joint tenants) is that it prevents a deceased owners share from automatically passing to any surviving owner(s) and instead allows the deceased owner to specify a beneficiary via their will (or through the intestacy rules). If the Land Registry reps interpretation was correct (which it isn’t) there would be no difference between the two types of joint ownership. 

You would complete the AS1 (you could use a transfer deed instead, but the AS1 is the correct form). At box 6 you’d put all 3 of your names (including your aunt) and at box 10 you’d select the third option and detail the ownership split. 

MEA3583_2

da_rule said:

I would disagree with the Land Registry rep on this point. One of the main reasons property is owned as tenants in common (rather than joint tenants) is that it prevents a deceased owners share from automatically passing to any surviving owner(s) and instead allows the deceased owner to specify a beneficiary via their will (or through the intestacy rules). If the Land Registry reps interpretation was correct (which it isn’t) there would be no difference between the two types of joint ownership. 

You would complete the AS1 (you could use a transfer deed instead, but the AS1 is the correct form). At box 6 you’d put all 3 of your names (including your aunt) and at box 10 you’d select the third option and detail the ownership split. 

That sounds more like what I was expecting. As it was tenants In Common, I had assumed my aunt would not automatically take ownership, hence the probate application. Indeed her late husband's 50% will not go to her at all, but to his two children. That being the case, does my aunt's existing TIC share (50%) still have to be recorded on the AS1 form, as well as the two children's 25% each, as my aunt is not a beneficiary here? Or is the AS1 form just for my late uncle's 50%, in which case I would not mention my aunt's existing share, and put down 50% each for his two children (i.e. they are taking 50% each of his half)?
One final point, I was going to tick the 'Full Title Guarantee' as there are no mortgages, loans, or rights of way. Would there be any issues therefore?
Thanks again, 

da_rule

MEA3583_2 said:

da_rule said:

I would disagree with the Land Registry rep on this point. One of the main reasons property is owned as tenants in common (rather than joint tenants) is that it prevents a deceased owners share from automatically passing to any surviving owner(s) and instead allows the deceased owner to specify a beneficiary via their will (or through the intestacy rules). If the Land Registry reps interpretation was correct (which it isn’t) there would be no difference between the two types of joint ownership. 

You would complete the AS1 (you could use a transfer deed instead, but the AS1 is the correct form). At box 6 you’d put all 3 of your names (including your aunt) and at box 10 you’d select the third option and detail the ownership split. 

That sounds more like what I was expecting. As it was tenants In Common, I had assumed my aunt would not automatically take ownership, hence the probate application. Indeed her late husband's 50% will not go to her at all, but to his two children. That being the case, does my aunt's existing TIC share (50%) still have to be recorded on the AS1 form, as well as the two children's 25% each, as my aunt is not a beneficiary here? Or is the AS1 form just for my late uncle's 50%, in which case I would not mention my aunt's existing share, and put down 50% each for his two children (i.e. they are taking 50% each of his half)?
One final point, I was going to tick the 'Full Title Guarantee' as there are no mortgages, loans, or rights of way. Would there be any issues therefore?
Thanks again, 

Box 6 makes it clear that you need to record all owners, so would include your aunt and then you would include the split at box 10. 

Full or limited title won’t make much of a difference in this instance. Your aunt can probably give full title guarantee as she knows the property and knows that any rights affecting the property are recorded (or that you are informed of them). 

Land_Registry

You are of course entitled to disagree and/or make an application as you wish. 

The most important point I would however make is that IF the property is registered in their joint names then your AS1 will be rejected. You cannot assent a half share, which is what you are in effect trying to do. 

An assent is used by an executor to transfer the legal ownership from a deceased’s estate to their beneficiaries. As the property/legal ownership is not part of your uncle’s estate probate is not needed and you can’t assent anything.

We don’t register owners as tenants in common as suggested. We register a form A restriction when applied for. 

So in this case the legal ownership has passed to the surviving joint owner, your aunt. That doesn’t mean she’s the sole legal and beneficial owner. It simply means she is the sole surviving registered legal owner. 

So if you want to register your late uncles’s beneficiaries as joint legal owners as well then you need your aunt to transfer (TR1) the legal ownership to herself and the beneficiaries 

There are other options including leaving the title as it is, namely in her sole name and with the form A restriction in play to protect the beneficial interests. 

What’s best for all will depend on the circumstances inc what happens when your aunt or beneficiaries pass away and/or perhaps whether the beneficiaries already own property etc. 

We don’t know what options exist or why someone might transfer in these cases. We deal with the end decision, namely the transfer if applied for. But we can’t register an assent in this case. 

So my advice would be to get your aunt and beneficiaries to sit down with a legal/financial adviser to discuss what’s best for all here including not only the legal ownership/registered title but also everyone’s beneficial ownership and % shares 
Please do come back and post what happens next and why as it will help others reading this thread to understand how things can play out. 

It would be especially interesting as well to understand how everyone deals with their beneficial interests, namely their % shares going forward 

POPPYOSCAR

MEA3583_2 said:

da_rule said:

I would disagree with the Land Registry rep on this point. One of the main reasons property is owned as tenants in common (rather than joint tenants) is that it prevents a deceased owners share from automatically passing to any surviving owner(s) and instead allows the deceased owner to specify a beneficiary via their will (or through the intestacy rules). If the Land Registry reps interpretation was correct (which it isn’t) there would be no difference between the two types of joint ownership. 

You would complete the AS1 (you could use a transfer deed instead, but the AS1 is the correct form). At box 6 you’d put all 3 of your names (including your aunt) and at box 10 you’d select the third option and detail the ownership split. 

That sounds more like what I was expecting. As it was tenants In Common, I had assumed my aunt would not automatically take ownership, hence the probate application. Indeed her late husband's 50% will not go to her at all, but to his two children. That being the case, does my aunt's existing TIC share (50%) still have to be recorded on the AS1 form, as well as the two children's 25% each, as my aunt is not a beneficiary here? Or is the AS1 form just for my late uncle's 50%, in which case I would not mention my aunt's existing share, and put down 50% each for his two children (i.e. they are taking 50% each of his half)?
One final point, I was going to tick the 'Full Title Guarantee' as there are no mortgages, loans, or rights of way. Would there be any issues therefore?
Thanks again, 

So you accept this from a stranger on a forum rather than from someone who actually works in Land Registry?

The mind boggles!!

MEA3583_2

POPPYOSCAR said:

So you accept this from a stranger on a forum rather than from someone who actually works in Land Registry?

The mind boggles!!

I AM accepting LR advise thank you, I was just asking for clarification and they have explained it well. When I dealt with a similar transfer on death of a parent, I was told by the solicitor I needed probate to do it. Obviously that wasn't the case, so it was just a big cost to me that I didn't need.

MEA3583_2

Land_Registry said:

You are of course entitled to disagree and/or make an application as you wish. 

The most important point I would however make is that IF the property is registered in their joint names then your AS1 will be rejected. You cannot assent a half share, which is what you are in effect trying to do. 

An assent is used by an executor to transfer the legal ownership from a deceased’s estate to their beneficiaries. As the property/legal ownership is not part of your uncle’s estate probate is not needed and you can’t assent anything.

We don’t register owners as tenants in common as suggested. We register a form A restriction when applied for. 

So in this case the legal ownership has passed to the surviving joint owner, your aunt. That doesn’t mean she’s the sole legal and beneficial owner. It simply means she is the sole surviving registered legal owner. 

So if you want to register your late uncles’s beneficiaries as joint legal owners as well then you need your aunt to transfer (TR1) the legal ownership to herself and the beneficiaries 

There are other options including leaving the title as it is, namely in her sole name and with the form A restriction in play to protect the beneficial interests. 

What’s best for all will depend on the circumstances inc what happens when your aunt or beneficiaries pass away and/or perhaps whether the beneficiaries already own property etc. 

We don’t know what options exist or why someone might transfer in these cases. We deal with the end decision, namely the transfer if applied for. But we can’t register an assent in this case. 

So my advice would be to get your aunt and beneficiaries to sit down with a legal/financial adviser to discuss what’s best for all here including not only the legal ownership/registered title but also everyone’s beneficial ownership and % shares 
Please do come back and post what happens next and why as it will help others reading this thread to understand how things can play out. 

It would be especially interesting as well to understand how everyone deals with their beneficial interests, namely their % shares going forward 

Thank you very much for your help.

Land_Registry

MEA3583_2 do let us know how it plays out and what choice aunt/beneficiaries make here and why? 

On the probate issue it can be required for dealing with the deceased’s estate even though the property, as it’s jointly owned, doesn’t form part of their estate.
The TIC in this case and JTs in your other example don’t impact on the legal ownership so probate should not have been needed to transfer the legal ownership. 

MEA3583_2

Land_Registry said:

MEA3583_2 do let us know how it plays out and what choice aunt/beneficiaries make here and why? 

On the probate issue it can be required for dealing with the deceased’s estate even though the property, as it’s jointly owned, doesn’t form part of their estate.
The TIC in this case and JTs in your other example don’t impact on the legal ownership so probate should not have been needed to transfer the legal ownership. 

I've spoken to my aunt briefly this morning, and she wishes herself and her two children to be recorded as the legal owners 50%, 25%, 25% so that is what I'll do. Neither of the children have any property of their own in any case, or any other significant assets that need to be considered here.
Re: probate, I have spoken to the banks that my uncle had accounts with, and all they require is the death certificate, so on that basis I will no longer make an application. Thanks for making this clear, as it will save a significant amount of time and money (if only I'd known it when I dealt with  my late mother's estate, but unfortunately I was ill advised at the time). I believe I will still have to complete an IHT205 to show that no taxes are payable, though I of course will now discount the property value from this as you have explained that this is now automatically now with my aunt.
Thanks again so much

SIMR

Hi - We moved in to our new house three years ago. At the rear of our property was a 20m x5m area of scrub that the previous owners had said belonged to them. They had filled it with hawthorn and blackthorn to act as a shield from the winds. I've spent time making it look much better but an elderly neighbour has said it never belonged to them. When I went back to look at the Title Plan this does not show up, but on the map the estate agent provided this has been shaded in as belonging to our property. I have requested a copy of ownership from the Land Registry and received a report that said "no registered estate, caution against first registration or application for first registration or application for a caution against first registration is shown on the index map in relation to the Property. We therefore hold no records in respect of the Property," I am embarrassed to say I've been following paperwork from the estate agent rather than the actual Title Deeds.
I would like to find the original owner to purchase the land from them - does this mean that the person who put the caution there would be the owner? Also, can I find out who has put the caution on so I can contact them about it? Finally, I've been reading that if the previous owner had been using this land as their own for so long that we may be able to claim it? Although how would this be possible if there is a caution on it?

Any help would be appreciated thank you!