Land Registry question: Title plan for first registration.

FloGently

We are making first registration of a smallholding. The existing title plan does not comply with Land Registry guidelines, and our solicitor has asked us to instruct a surveyor to obtain a "promap" of the whole property. This seems to come at considerable cost and I am struggling to understand why it is necessary, given that the LR map won't prove our exact boundaries in any case. The title plan we have is hand drawn but very clearly based on a last century 25 inch OS map. The OS field numbers are clear and hedge lines unchanged, though it is a very sketchy on the exact position of a boundary within a straggly steep bank to the road.

From the LR guidance it looks like we could submit our own paper plan, provided it is to the correct scale and the relationship to the Land Registry index OS map is clear - buying the OS fragment that relates from one of the online map providers would be much cheaper than having a surveyor visit.

What am I not getting here? Is it necessary to have professional input, and if so what should I be asking for?

Many thanks for any insights.

Land_Registry

It reads as if you’ve already read our guidance on this - see PG 40 supplement 2 which sets out our plan requirements for a first registration 
Your solicitor can presumably explain why they are asking for ‘more’ 

FloGently

Thanks for your response - gives me some confidence that I need to push for more info from our incommunicative solicitor

Could I ask how important it is from the Land Registry's point of view that we get the boundary to the road right, as I think this might be where the issue is? It's a steep bank behind our house appearing on the 2D plan with a few metres width tapering to nothing (where it's vertical). On the historic map used as the base for our plan it was grouped with a neighbour's field, but they have not registered title to it or use it at all. So if we register with a boundary on the old OS field boundary we'll show a funny wedge between us and the road with no title. Registering with the road as boundary would probably make more sense, with the assumption that highways have as much or as little of the embankment as they need, or maybe some sort of dotted line in between as it's more like the whole bank is the boundary. But superficially on the map this might look like we've changed a boundary. Is this a case where you would ask for more information or need a survey?

Land_Registry

FloGently said:

Thanks for your response - gives me some confidence that I need to push for more info from our incommunicative solicitor

Could I ask how important it is from the Land Registry's point of view that we get the boundary to the road right, as I think this might be where the issue is? It's a steep bank behind our house appearing on the 2D plan with a few metres width tapering to nothing (where it's vertical). On the historic map used as the base for our plan it was grouped with a neighbour's field, but they have not registered title to it or use it at all. So if we register with a boundary on the old OS field boundary we'll show a funny wedge between us and the road with no title. Registering with the road as boundary would probably make more sense, with the assumption that highways have as much or as little of the embankment as they need, or maybe some sort of dotted line in between as it's more like the whole bank is the boundary. But superficially on the map this might look like we've changed a boundary. Is this a case where you would ask for more information or need a survey?

It’s impossible to say but the starting point for us will be the current OS detail - if you don’t match with that then it makes a site visit/survey more likely. But that also depends on the deeds and any adjoining registered titles as well of course. 

Your starting point is defining in the best possible way the extent you legally own and are seeking to register 

FloGently

Thank you very much for this. Also big thanks to whoever does your guidelines - I've dipped into quite a few and found them all extremely clear, complete and helpful.