Land Registry questions

Land_Registry

papekani said:

Hi LR,

We were due to exchange contracts on our purchase this week, but a conveyancer further up the chain has just informed everyone that there a name needs removing from one of the titles before they can proceed. We don’t know exactly why the name needs removing, but assume it is a death at some point that was not registered with you.

My question to you is whether this could just be done as part of the normal conveyancing process, i.e. when the TR1 is lodged to transfer the title to the buyers of the property, rather than halting everything until the name gets removed from the title, only to then transfer the title in any case?

The solicitor involved says that they have requested that the removal gets expedited, but I understand that this could still take a couple of weeks, which will create an unnecessary and costly delay to exchange and completion. What are the current timescales for processing an expedited DJP form (assuming that’s what it is)?

Many thanks

How many ducks need to be in a line re the conveyancing is down to the conveyancer and lender (if any). Some things can be progressed as you suggest but the devil will be in the detail here so little point wondering. 

If it’s expedited then I’d expect it to be processed in a few days if it’s simply an update and everything needed is submitted. If it’s not in order then the timescale clearly gets stretched. 

papekani

Land_Registry said:

papekani said:

Hi LR,

We were due to exchange contracts on our purchase this week, but a conveyancer further up the chain has just informed everyone that there a name needs removing from one of the titles before they can proceed. We don’t know exactly why the name needs removing, but assume it is a death at some point that was not registered with you.

My question to you is whether this could just be done as part of the normal conveyancing process, i.e. when the TR1 is lodged to transfer the title to the buyers of the property, rather than halting everything until the name gets removed from the title, only to then transfer the title in any case?

The solicitor involved says that they have requested that the removal gets expedited, but I understand that this could still take a couple of weeks, which will create an unnecessary and costly delay to exchange and completion. What are the current timescales for processing an expedited DJP form (assuming that’s what it is)?

Many thanks

How many ducks need to be in a line re the conveyancing is down to the conveyancer and lender (if any). Some things can be progressed as you suggest but the devil will be in the detail here so little point wondering. 

If it’s expedited then I’d expect it to be processed in a few days if it’s simply an update and everything needed is submitted. If it’s not in order then the timescale clearly gets stretched. 

OK, thank you. I will try and find out the exact nature of the issue. In the mean time, could you check if there are any pending or expedited applications against title numbers GR109002 or GR121058 as that might offer us some additional insight?

Land_Registry

papekani said:

Land_Registry said:

papekani said:

Hi LR,

We were due to exchange contracts on our purchase this week, but a conveyancer further up the chain has just informed everyone that there a name needs removing from one of the titles before they can proceed. We don’t know exactly why the name needs removing, but assume it is a death at some point that was not registered with you.

My question to you is whether this could just be done as part of the normal conveyancing process, i.e. when the TR1 is lodged to transfer the title to the buyers of the property, rather than halting everything until the name gets removed from the title, only to then transfer the title in any case?

The solicitor involved says that they have requested that the removal gets expedited, but I understand that this could still take a couple of weeks, which will create an unnecessary and costly delay to exchange and completion. What are the current timescales for processing an expedited DJP form (assuming that’s what it is)?

Many thanks

How many ducks need to be in a line re the conveyancing is down to the conveyancer and lender (if any). Some things can be progressed as you suggest but the devil will be in the detail here so little point wondering. 

If it’s expedited then I’d expect it to be processed in a few days if it’s simply an update and everything needed is submitted. If it’s not in order then the timescale clearly gets stretched. 

OK, thank you. I will try and find out the exact nature of the issue. In the mean time, could you check if there are any pending or expedited applications against title numbers GR109002 or GR121058 as that might offer us some additional insight?

There was an application against the first title submitted yesterday and completed same day. Nothing for the second title but I can’t see any link between the two but assume there is 

papekani

Land_Registry said:

papekani said:

Land_Registry said:

papekani said:

Hi LR,

We were due to exchange contracts on our purchase this week, but a conveyancer further up the chain has just informed everyone that there a name needs removing from one of the titles before they can proceed. We don’t know exactly why the name needs removing, but assume it is a death at some point that was not registered with you.

My question to you is whether this could just be done as part of the normal conveyancing process, i.e. when the TR1 is lodged to transfer the title to the buyers of the property, rather than halting everything until the name gets removed from the title, only to then transfer the title in any case?

The solicitor involved says that they have requested that the removal gets expedited, but I understand that this could still take a couple of weeks, which will create an unnecessary and costly delay to exchange and completion. What are the current timescales for processing an expedited DJP form (assuming that’s what it is)?

Many thanks

How many ducks need to be in a line re the conveyancing is down to the conveyancer and lender (if any). Some things can be progressed as you suggest but the devil will be in the detail here so little point wondering. 

If it’s expedited then I’d expect it to be processed in a few days if it’s simply an update and everything needed is submitted. If it’s not in order then the timescale clearly gets stretched. 

OK, thank you. I will try and find out the exact nature of the issue. In the mean time, could you check if there are any pending or expedited applications against title numbers GR109002 or GR121058 as that might offer us some additional insight?

There was an application against the first title submitted yesterday and completed same day. Nothing for the second title but I can’t see any link between the two but assume there is 

Thanks, that's really helpful. There is no link apart from them both being in the same chain. Hopefully that means whatever issue got identified has now been resolved, so things can start moving again.

TimmyG1964

We have 2 properties on one title.

One half is our home and the other a holiday let. They have separate entrances, gas and electric but a shared water meter and there is no internal access between them. Our home is registered for council tax and the holiday let registered separately for business rates.

We're looking to remortgage in the not too distant future. We would like to pay off the holiday let and remortgage our home as a straight forward residential property the interest rate will be lower. 

Are we able to split the titles? If we are, how do we go about it? I assume as this isn't classed as urgent it will take some time. Does anyone have an idea of how long?

Land_Registry

TimmyG1964 said:

We have 2 properties on one title.

One half is our home and the other a holiday let. They have separate entrances, gas and electric but a shared water meter and there is no internal access between them. Our home is registered for council tax and the holiday let registered separately for business rates.

We're looking to remortgage in the not too distant future. We would like to pay off the holiday let and remortgage our home as a straight forward residential property the interest rate will be lower. 

Are we able to split the titles? If we are, how do we go about it? I assume as this isn't classed as urgent it will take some time. Does anyone have an idea of how long?

Yes on application using form AP1, suitable plan to show the split and a registration fee of £40. The application needs to explain, as here, the reasons for the request. 

Wait times are long so once submitted, if there’s an urgency, you should request expedition to shorten that wait time markedly. 

If you are remortgaging the lender(s) involved may insist you use a solicitor. 

NAC321

Hi LR,

I have a leasehold terraced house. There is a right of way of access as noted on the leasehold (not the title registry) down the top left hand side of the garden, which would have been for access to an outdoor WC (noted on the leasehold diagram but no longer in place). The WCs (two, one for my property and one of the left hand side property) would have been in the garden of the left hand side property, so on the title deeds there is a rectangle inputting into their garden from my garden (to denote ownership of the toilet I suppose that is no longer in situ).

The neighbours wish to update the land registry. Firstly I think they wish to amend the boundary to reclaim what would have been the WC of my property’s land. I have no issue with this as their fence currently blocks my access of this land, and it’s such a small amount of land awkwardly situated I (or any future owners) wouldn’t wish to claim it, so I wouldn’t be concerned about it affecting the value of the house or causing issues in future. I wouldn’t though of course contribute to any legal costs to get this updated! I imagine any claim would succeed under adverse possession in any case. Although presumably the freeholder and my mortgage lender would need to get involved. 

What I’m more concerned about however is they appear to be misunderstanding that the right of way access to the (non existing) toilets is actually “shared land” - currently they store their bins there (along mine).

My main concern is them potentially making an application to land registry to claim the right of way land, either saying it’s shared between the two properties or perhaps even an outright claim expanding the WC land. 

There are a few questions that arise that I’d like your insight please:

1. What is the process for boundary applications - if they made an application to ask land registry to note the right of way land is “shared”, would I be notified, so I could object? My concern is as I am the leaseholder not the freeholder I may not be notified of any boundary change requests? 
2. Is it even possible for land to be shared the way they think it is between two or more properties/titles? 
3. Is it possible to remove the right of way to the toilet, given it’s no longer in place? I presume it’s a non starter if they don’t consent, but if they did then what would be the process for this (I assume at this point a solicitor may need to be involved…)

I’m hoping it can be resolved fairly amicably but having the knowledge about how these things are processed if a claim was made will enable me to prepare my engagement with them to hopefully clarify their misunderstanding on a right of way not being the same as shared land. 

silvercar

NAC321 said:

Hi LR,

I have a leasehold terraced house. There is a right of way of access as noted on the leasehold (not the title registry) down the top left hand side of the garden, which would have been for access to an outdoor WC (noted on the leasehold diagram but no longer in place). The WCs (two, one for my property and one of the left hand side property) would have been in the garden of the left hand side property, so on the title deeds there is a rectangle inputting into their garden from my garden (to denote ownership of the toilet I suppose that is no longer in situ).

The neighbours wish to update the land registry. Firstly I think they wish to amend the boundary to reclaim what would have been the WC of my property’s land. I have no issue with this as their fence currently blocks my access of this land, and it’s such a small amount of land awkwardly situated I (or any future owners) wouldn’t wish to claim it, so I wouldn’t be concerned about it affecting the value of the house or causing issues in future. I wouldn’t though of course contribute to any legal costs to get this updated! I imagine any claim would succeed under adverse possession in any case. Although presumably the freeholder and my mortgage lender would need to get involved. 

What I’m more concerned about however is they appear to be misunderstanding that the right of way access to the (non existing) toilets is actually “shared land” - currently they store their bins there (along mine).

My main concern is them potentially making an application to land registry to claim the right of way land, either saying it’s shared between the two properties or perhaps even an outright claim expanding the WC land. 

There are a few questions that arise that I’d like your insight please:

1. What is the process for boundary applications - if they made an application to ask land registry to note the right of way land is “shared”, would I be notified, so I could object? My concern is as I am the leaseholder not the freeholder I may not be notified of any boundary change requests? 
2. Is it even possible for land to be shared the way they think it is between two or more properties/titles? 
3. Is it possible to remove the right of way to the toilet, given it’s no longer in place? I presume it’s a non starter if they don’t consent, but if they did then what would be the process for this (I assume at this point a solicitor may need to be involved…)

I’m hoping it can be resolved fairly amicably but having the knowledge about how these things are processed if a claim was made will enable me to prepare my engagement with them to hopefully clarify their misunderstanding on a right of way not being the same as shared land. 

A diagram would help. Could you offer them you the land previously occupied by your WC in return for extinguishing the RoW? Or do they genuinely have need for a RoW? 

Without a map it’s difficult, but is there a possibility that you would want a garden room in the future and the water and sewerage supply to the old WC may prove useful? If so giving back the land may mean you losing the access. I’m assuming the WC isn’t so old that it didn’t have water and waste, but I may be wrong.

NAC321

silvercar said:

A diagram would help. Could you offer them you the land previously occupied by your WC in return for extinguishing the RoW? Or do they genuinely have need for a RoW? 

Without a map it’s difficult, but is there a possibility that you would want a garden room in the future and the water and sewerage supply to the old WC may prove useful? If so giving back the land may mean you losing the access. I’m assuming the WC isn’t so old that it didn’t have water and waste, but I may be wrong.

Thanks silvercar. I’m a bit reluctant to put a diagram (I have two - the land registry map simply showing the boundary and the leasehold that colour codes the right of way) as in the 1% chance my neighbour finds this post I don’t wish to sour relations! I may be able to message it to you if you do think it would help?

Both toilets are long gone and there is a fence (theirs) that in essence blocks me from what is technically my WC land, which is a square of their garden adjacent to my garden, so I don’t think you could argue a right of way practically anymore for them to their toilet (legally I assume it still exists)

ROW is my land but one toilet is their land (now just their garden), my toilet would have been right next to theirs and my land (a square surrounded by three sides of their garden). ROW currently dead ends between their fence, my fence, my shed (and is filled by bins!). 

From what I googled it seems even with their consent the ROW is very difficult to remove. It’s such a small bit that’s a ROW (basically only room for the bins) I’m not bothered. I guess if it was legally removed it means I could include the ROW as part of the rest of my garden (as this but is fenced off separately). So it could open up more “landscaping” options for me which could be nice.

the garden is not big enough for anything large, you could maybe consider a larger shed to replace my existing shed but it would still not really need the WC land unless you wanted a very odd shape? As long as the shed was placed on or near the boundary I think the waste pipes issue isn’t an issue (practically it wouldn’t occur in any case due to the garden size)!

in brief I’d be more than happy to swap extinguishing the ROW for them getting “my” WC land but I don’t think it’s as simple as that. I believe it’s very difficult to get ROW extinguished and it’s not worth thousands on the legal fees etc. There’s also the freeholder and the mortgage lender (presumably on both sides) who would have a say presumably so even if I’m ok with it others may not be.

I’m more concerned about clarifying that a ROW does not permit them to store their bin there, that a ROW is not the same as shared land, and that just because the toilets don’t exist anymore it doesn’t mean the land registry title is incorrect/outdated and requires rectification.

I essentially want to ensure that if my neighbours do pursue a claim on wither the WC land or more importantly the ROW land (which hopefully they won’t!) I will be given notice by land registry so I can object if required.

I’m just baffled by it all as even if you think logically - if it was their land, or even shared land (which I don’t think exists!) then there would have been no need for the leasehold to stipulate ROW otherwise they could use as they please! The ROW basically proves it’s my land fully! 

If someone is able to advise on my first question in my original post that would be very helpful and appreciated! 

propertyrental

Removal of an erroneous restriction.

The title of the property I'm buying has 2 restrictions, in slightly different names, one of which all agree was entered in error.

2 RESTRICTION:-Except under an Order of the Registrar no transfer or

lease is to be registered unless the transferee or lessee (as the case

may be) has produced a certificate of compliance with the provisions of

paragraph 17 of Schedule 3 to a Transfer dated 17 December 1999 made

between ABC Limited (1) XYX Limited (2) and John & Johanna Smith (3).

3 RESTRICTION:-Except under an Order of the Registrar no transfer or

lease is to be registered unless the transferee or lessee (as the case

may be) has produced a certificate of compliance with the provisions of

clause 17 of Schedule 3 to the Transfer dated 17 December 1999 made
between ABC South-East Limited (1) XYZ (2) and John & Johanna Smith(3)
from the Management Company or their appointed Managing Agents.

The options seem to be

1. For the Managing Agents to submit form RX2 to HMLR confirming that this is a duplicate restriction which does not apply and should be removed.
2. For my solicitor to accept the completed form RX2 duly signed and then to lodge it with HMLR together with his application for change of owner.

Option 1 may take 5 - 6 months and the chain and my purchase would collapse. Is this correct?

Option 2 would leave me vulnerable in case the LR raised objections and did not remove the restriction.  Is this correct?