Wondering if this is suspicious, re buyer?

bobster2

Jellynailer said:

Re the utility bills, how likely is it for someone without these to have the wherewithal to fund a house purchase?  Its not impossible e.g. has been living abroad but so did I and could produce my bills from the other country.  However, on the probability scale, I still endorse the OP's concerns in the absence of further information.

Many completely innocuous reasons for having non-utility bills in your name (e.g. mobile phone), but no utility bills in your name. E.g.

• Just moved back to UK from overseas.
• Houseshare with bills in someone else's name
• Renting (e.g. as lodger) with bills in landlords name.
• Cohabiting with bills in spouses name
• Living with parents - bills in their name.
• Paying stuff on an app, e-billing and simply haven't worked out how to get a "bill" in a printable form.

Land_Registry

Just adding a very general comment around 'property fraud' and three ways to help you to help protect your property from fraud
The first is the free Property Alert service already mentioned - it works as suggested by others and hopefully you only get a 6 month notification to confirm no significant applications have been made. Unless you do it just before submitting one of your own of course.
Key points to make re the alert are that (1) it does not provide you with carte blanche powers to stop such an application. It is aimed at alerting you to such an application and for you to make your own enquiries as appropriate. Hence the alert only confirms a significant application has been made and who by. It does not explain what's been applied for and your first step, if you are uncertain as to what that person/firm might be applying for is to take legal advice/contact them direct yourself to investigate if unaware of what might have triggered their application. 
Third parties for example may have a legitimate reason for making such an application eg debts, interests, trusts, option agreements and so on and when they do the process will invariably involve the registered owner(s) being notified as part of that registration process anyway. If you aren't sure and don;t want to contact them then you can apply for a non-priority search (form OS3) to confirm what the application is actually for.
And 2) it's important that as a registered owner you keep your contact address on the register up to date as that's the address we will use when contacting you re that specific application. The Alert service relies on your email address only.
The second is the Restriction option - aimed primarily at absent owners so landlords or owners with second homes to name but two main examples. It's not aimed at owners who actually live in the property hence the fee charged if such a home-living owner applies
Key points to make re the restriction are that 1) it can be an issue (that's what it's for though) when you might be legitimately trying to deal with the property, especially in a remortgage scenario. The restriction always needs to be complied with so you need a conveyancer to confirm your identity etc and often on a remortgage the conveyancer acts for the lender and may not be willing to provide that confirmation for you. You then have to find another conveyancer to help you comply with the restriction.
And 2) do consider the restriction option carefully before applying for it. The alert and up to date address options are strongly recommended for peace of mind and maybe considered by most as being sufficient if you are living in the property and are careful with your personal identity etc. The restriction is always an option but perhaps for most an extra for when they might for example feel that they feel particularly vulnerable or have been a victim of fraud or perhaps been burgled and personal identity docs have been taken 
And finally, there are numerous advocates of the Property Alert service on MSE which is fantastic and it does serve a very important purpose to those that use it. The fact that you never get an actual alert is ultimately what you want though so always good to read that is the case 

Jellynailer

Land Registry info is SO helpful.  Thank you. 

Is there any chance that a code system could be used so that changes to registrations will only be processed by LR if the code is supplied only to the current registered owner (with a note to advise that it is kept with their will)? 

RHemmings

Jellynailer said:

Land Registry info is SO helpful.  Thank you. 

Is there any chance that a code system could be used so that changes to registrations will only be processed by LR if the code is supplied only to the current registered owner (with a note to advise that it is kept with their will)? 

What happens when home-owners lose the code? As will happen all the time. 

BTW: I'm signed up to alerts for my own property, and a number of properties that I'm nosey about. I don't know if the latter is considered mis-use of the system. 

EssexHebridean

bobster2 said:

Jellynailer said:

Re the utility bills, how likely is it for someone without these to have the wherewithal to fund a house purchase?  Its not impossible e.g. has been living abroad but so did I and could produce my bills from the other country.  However, on the probability scale, I still endorse the OP's concerns in the absence of further information.

Many completely innocuous reasons for having non-utility bills in your name (e.g. mobile phone), but no utility bills in your name. E.g.

• Just moved back to UK from overseas.
• Houseshare with bills in someone else's name
• Renting (e.g. as lodger) with bills in landlords name.
• Cohabiting with bills in spouses name
• Living with parents - bills in their name.
• Paying stuff on an app, e-billing and simply haven't worked out how to get a "bill" in a printable form.

Yes - a very good list of possible - and perfectly innocuous - reasons. Re the BIB - in fact that one is almost a red herring - as the requirement for a utility bill to be acceptable is that is has been sent hard copy, in the post, and be within 3 months old. These days almost nobody gets their standard utility bills sent through the post, and so this requirement is really hard to meet for a lot of folk. The exception to the 3 month rule is a council tax bill - but not everyone has that in their name, either! 

Great comprehensive info posted by @Land_Registry - I will add to their point regarding keeping contact details up to date that you can have both a postal address AND an email address listed too - this is a good option where someone doesn't trust the postal system entirely, or is concerned that someone they live with could intercept post. Jellynailer said:

Land Registry info is SO helpful.  Thank you. 

Is there any chance that a code system could be used so that changes to registrations will only be processed by LR if the code is supplied only to the current registered owner (with a note to advise that it is kept with their will)? 

I wouldn't imagine so - mainly because as the LR have explained, there really is no need for this. It's simply overcomplicating things and introducing more potential issues for homeowners into the mix. 

Land_Registry

Jellynailer said:

Land Registry info is SO helpful.  Thank you. 

Is there any chance that a code system could be used so that changes to registrations will only be processed by LR if the code is supplied only to the current registered owner (with a note to advise that it is kept with their will)? 

Such ideas/suggestions are always welcome but it's important to remember that we are a 'land' registry rather than a 'people' registry. That may read oddly but it's important to remember that the idea relies on the person here and not the property and until we for example progress ways in which we (that's all of us and government) are able to safely and securely nail down digital and personal identities it's very hard to make such ideas work in reality.
Property fraud, like many other types of fraud, rely on the fraudster being able to steal an individual's identity for example. So a personal code is unique to the individual so also susceptible to being stolen and used in a fraudulent way.
It's a similar issue to why the 'Tell us once' process doesn't include property updates as knowing IF the named individual is one and the same as the person registered as the owner does not currently exist.
Hence why keeping your contact details up to date and using the free Property Alert Service are invariably sufficient to help you prevent you/your property being a victim of fraud.

Land_Registry

RHemmings said:

Jellynailer said:

Land Registry info is SO helpful.  Thank you. 

Is there any chance that a code system could be used so that changes to registrations will only be processed by LR if the code is supplied only to the current registered owner (with a note to advise that it is kept with their will)? 

What happens when home-owners lose the code? As will happen all the time. 

BTW: I'm signed up to alerts for my own property, and a number of properties that I'm nosey about. I don't know if the latter is considered mis-use of the system. 

It's not a mis-use and simply a 'different' way of using the service. The alert provides enough information for the owner or interested party to know who has submitted a significant application and to go from there. I guess it is 'nosey' in some ways but knowing such minimal information isn't that 'nosey' really 

Jellynailer

Gosh the discussion re Land Registry continues to be so useful.  I will inform my son who is my heir.  I have already warned him not to let the property due to the danger it could be sold without him knowing (he lives some distance away.  As I understand it, in a rental case a fraudster could have genuine utility ID for the property address and does not need to register with LR because s/he has already banked the money and scarpered so it is only when the new owner registers their title after completion that the fraud comes to light.

I trust if the above is not right, corrections will follow.  In the meantime, I hope the OP does not mind that her thread has been somewhat taken over by the by now long discussion.

Land_Registry

Jellynailer said:

Gosh the discussion re Land Registry continues to be so useful.  I will inform my son who is my heir.  I have already warned him not to let the property due to the danger it could be sold without him knowing (he lives some distance away.  As I understand it, in a rental case a fraudster could have genuine utility ID for the property address and does not need to register with LR because s/he has already banked the money and scarpered so it is only when the new owner registers their title after completion that the fraud comes to light.

I trust if the above is not right, corrections will follow.  In the meantime, I hope the OP does not mind that her thread has been somewhat taken over by the by now long discussion.

The restriction (form LL) option is the one aimed directly at absent landlords for example. Certainly one to consider for your son but do recommend that he considers it carefully before applying. It, deliberately, puts in place an additional hurdle to overcome when selling/remortgaging or perhaps varying/granting a lease. As those often involve a conveyancer then often dealt with efficiently by a genuine owner who is well know to their conveyancer of choice.
Ensuring, as an absent landlord, that he has the best contact addresses (inc email) on the register is also worth proper consideration along with the alert of course.

EssexHebridean

Utility bills are not in any way a valid document to prove ownership of a property, utility bills have only one use in a conveyancing transaction and that is as a proof of address as part of ID checks.  @Jellynailer the information you are giving your son (and putting into this thread)  is not only false, it is also scaremongering, and will not be of any help to him or indeed anyone else. There are many reasons why he would probably not best advised to be letting out property - but those mostly relate to the fact that being an amateur landlord can end up with you getting in a lot of problems, and nothing to do with tenants being able to fraudulently steal his property. 


As for the OP, hopefully the corrections of information being given are at least proving helpful and reassuring to her.