Locating owner of unregistered land

TripleH

Is the land a little pocket in itself surrounded by land owned by other parties that are not the Trustee?

If so why not make an offer for a token amount plus you'll pay the legal fees of the other side?

If you are wanting to buy it try making your offer seem as easy as possible for them to accept. It may be they haven't sold because they lacked the enthusiasm to sell it.

At the end of the day, they can only say no (no guarantee that they would sell).

topoftherock

AdrianC said:

topoftherock said:

AdrianC said:

There is no other way.

The owner may not even know they're the owner.
The owner is the person in possession of the paper title deeds.
Maybe they've been lost.
Maybe they're in a solicitor's vaults.
Maybe the last person who knew they were the owner has died and they've been inherited by somebody who doesn't know the estate they inherited included that land.
Maybe they died intestate with no heirs and the estate is bona vacantia.
Maybe they were owned by a company that went bankrupt and whose assets were passed to their main creditor, the tax man.

Thanks for the reply. I’m pretty sure the two adjacent cottages had 99-year leases with the estate, before buying their freeholds. Almost everyone I speak to locally bought their freeholds from the same estate (including mine). 

I actually contacted them a couple of months ago, and they told me about land that they still own locally (which didn’t include  this land).

They said they’ve abandoned little bits of scattered land many years ago.  

Therefore, I’m fairly confident they are the owners.

But if they’ve abandoned this land (just like many parts) does that mean it’s highly likely they’ve disposed of the paper title deeds or simply lost them? 

"Abandoned" simply means they don't use it.

They still own it. Perhaps they'd sell it to you, but can't find the paperwork. It's probably not actually on a separate title, just part of the same freehold as the rest of the estate.

But if you think there's value in developing it, what can you add to that that they can't just do directly? Perhaps they don't WANT that land developing?

Thanks for your input. I think any piece of land where I live is valuable, as houses are being built very frequently. Well, now I’ve found out there were 5 small houses on the land, I don’t see why it couldn’t be Built on again. 

topoftherock

topoftherock said:

AdrianC said:

topoftherock said:

AdrianC said:

There is no other way.

The owner may not even know they're the owner.
The owner is the person in possession of the paper title deeds.
Maybe they've been lost.
Maybe they're in a solicitor's vaults.
Maybe the last person who knew they were the owner has died and they've been inherited by somebody who doesn't know the estate they inherited included that land.
Maybe they died intestate with no heirs and the estate is bona vacantia.
Maybe they were owned by a company that went bankrupt and whose assets were passed to their main creditor, the tax man.

Thanks for the reply. I’m pretty sure the two adjacent cottages had 99-year leases with the estate, before buying their freeholds. Almost everyone I speak to locally bought their freeholds from the same estate (including mine). 

I actually contacted them a couple of months ago, and they told me about land that they still own locally (which didn’t include  this land).

They said they’ve abandoned little bits of scattered land many years ago.  

Therefore, I’m fairly confident they are the owners.

But if they’ve abandoned this land (just like many parts) does that mean it’s highly likely they’ve disposed of the paper title deeds or simply lost them? 

"Abandoned" simply means they don't use it.

They still own it. Perhaps they'd sell it to you, but can't find the paperwork. It's probably not actually on a separate title, just part of the same freehold as the rest of the estate.

But if you think there's value in developing it, what can you add to that that they can't just do directly? Perhaps they don't WANT that land developing?

Thanks for your input. I think any piece of land where I live is valuable, as houses are being built very frequently. Well, now I’ve found out there were 5 small houses on the land, I don’t see why it couldn’t be Built on again. 

They don’t have the time to check out all their land, and they’ve  got much bigger  fish to fry. This land is peanuts compared to the land they still own or once owned. That’s what I would a say. 

topoftherock

gettingtheresometime said:

topoftherock said:

user1977 said:

Some context would help us provide more advice. What does the land look like? Has it ever been used for anything? Have you checked old maps? Asked the neighbours?

If it's large enough for two houses, it seems less likely that it's simply been forgotten about. Or that you're the first to think about it.

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I don’t think I’m the first person  to think about it. But where I live (South Wales valleys), you’ll be surprised how much land is still unregistered.

I think a lot of the land  owners (usually trustees of an estate that practically owned all the local land when almost all houses had original 99-year leases)  abandoned bits of land scattered around these valleys; after the vast majority of people bought their freeholds in the 80s and 90s. 

I don’t think this land has ever been built on, but I’d need to check old maps to confirm. Where would be the best place to find old maps?

I don’t want to ask the neighbours, just in case they take my idea. (In this the case, there are only two cottages next to the land). 

The land is relatively flat, rectangular  and I know it’s never been used for at least 30 years. There is a bus stop directly in front, but I see this is an advantage and can’t see why this would prevent building. 

Can I suggest before you do anything, you have a look at what's involved at building houses, especially in Wales.

Thanks for your message. Please can you elaborate on what you mean? I see houses being built all the time where I  live. This would be a long term investment, not something short term. 

topoftherock

AdrianC said:

So you're asking them to sell to you for a below-market value on the basis that they don't really need it...?

I’d make an offer on the basis that they don’t need it yes. If they needed it, it would have sold  years ago surely. When  did I say below-market value? 

topoftherock

TripleH said:

Is the land a little pocket in itself surrounded by land owned by other parties that are not the Trustee?

If so why not make an offer for a token amount plus you'll pay the legal fees of the other side?

If you are wanting to buy it try making your offer seem as easy as possible for them to accept. It may be they haven't sold because they lacked the enthusiasm to sell it.

At the end of the day, they can only say no (no guarantee that they would sell).

The land is situated on the main road running through the village on a banking.

There are two houses next to the land (semi detached)  and then the rest of it is trees (on this side of the road there were many houses right along it  decades ago, but were pulled down).

 The other side of the road consists of terraced houses and some social  housing estates. When you say token amount, do you mean very low? I’m not sure what offer to make.

 I know that the trust/estate has to pay insurance for their land. Does the insurance they pay each year increase depending on the size of their land in total? 

Wouldn’t  it be better for them to sell, as their insurance premiums would reduce And the land is Just sitting there, doing nothing? 

Section62

topoftherock said:

Well, now I’ve found out there were 5 small houses on the land, I don’t see why it couldn’t be Built on again. 

As someone said upthread, you need to find out why the old houses were demolished.  There could be many reasons why - and some of those could effectively prevent building on it again.  The effects of old mining activity might be my first suspicion, or contaminated land.  The costs of remediation can easily make development non-viable, especially if there is other unaffected land nearby.

topoftherock said:

They don’t have the time to check out all their land, and they’ve  got much bigger  fish to fry. This land is peanuts compared to the land they still own or once owned. That’s what I would a say.

The amount of land someone has isn't really relevant to whether or not they might want to sell some.  What's more important is the value of the land and whether they are interested in selling. Two or three building plots on one small piece of land with road access can be worth much more than many acres of not-much-use open land.

One of the great things about land ownership (as a store of wealth) is you don't need to spend time checking it out. It just sits there doing not very much (except hopefully increasing in value) so long as nobody tries to steal it, or dump rubbish on it.


More information about the ownership would be needed to be definite, but the owner being a 'trustee' might put a spanner in the works for you as trustees are generally limited (by law) in some of the actions they can take.  Whilst a direct owner might decide the land is a PITA and be happy to be rid of it at any price, trustees (and their advisors) have a duty to protect the interests of the trust - which might mean that sale of the land to you at anything less than full market value (having regard to future development potential) is a non-starter.

And unless you can get the land for less than market value you would probably find better investments elsewhere (out of scope of this board) because there is no guarantee you will be able to sell the land for development, and when it comes to selling your property the next buyer might have no interest in having so much land. Getting back what you paid for it is uncertain, so poses an investment risk.

babyblade41

I think you are treading on very unstable ground with this idea ..literally.

Someone will own it and unless you have been maintaining and fenced it off for 12 years adverse possession is a no go.  Even if you could it would have to go to surrounding neighbours to see if they object.

You'd be surprised how many would  and probably would know who the real owners are , it may be part of the crown by  now 

Any land that is viable for building on will normally have been earmarked to large builders so I doubt very much that this will be a viable option 

Slithery

topoftherock said:
If they needed it, it would have sold  years ago surely. 

That makes no sense whatsoever. Surely if they needed it the last thing they would do is sell it?

AdrianC

topoftherock said:

AdrianC said:

So you're asking them to sell to you for a below-market value on the basis that they don't really need it...?

I’d make an offer on the basis that they don’t need it yes. If they needed it, it would have sold  years ago surely. When  did I say below-market value? 

You said...

topoftherock said:

My idea, is to buy the land and sell it on down the line 

...so I assumed there would be a margin of profit in this for you, after all the purchase costs.

Which would therefore require it to be bought below market value, wouldn't it?