Pink shaded part in land registry what does it mean

user1977

123ort said:

does it mean  transfer of land happened in 1973 with some convenants and we may have to chase solicitors to chase archived copy

Reporting to you on the title is a standard part of the job, you shouldn't have to "chase" them to do it. They'll do it anyway.

123ort

thanks, what stage should the solicitors be informing me, i have asked a couple of times already , want to know  early as intend to start architects etc soon if no convenants

user1977

Once they have all the relevant information and some time before you exchange.

Land_Registry

Start with the entry that refers to the 'pink', namely 
A Conveyance of the land tinted pink on the filed plan and other land dated 4 February 1873 made between (1) Wi James Ar, W F and W N (2) James Wilkinson and (3) Jo Rob Wh contains covenants details of which are set out in the schedule of restrictive covenants hereto.
You then find the corresponding entry in the schedule of restrictive covenants, namely 
"The following are details of the covenants contained in the Conveyance dated 4 February 1873 referred to in the Charges Register:- The said John Robinson Whitley doth for himself his heirs executors administrators and assigns HEREBY COVENANT with the said William James Armitage William Fison and Walter Nicholson their heirs and assigns that no buildings or erections except private dwellinghouses with the necessary outbuildings thereto respectively shall be erected on the said closes pieces or parcels of land hereinbefore described and expressed to be hereby granted or any of them or any part thereof without the written permission of the said William James Armitage William Fison and Walter Nicholson their heirs or assigns AND that the said John Robinson Whitley his heirs or assigns will make and maintain the fence or fences on the North and East sides of the said hereditaments AND THAT the external walls of all buildings which may be erected upon the same closes pieces or parcels of land or any of them or any part thereof shall be of stone and the cost of any dwellinghouse which may be erected on the same closes piece or parcels of land or any of them exclusive of lodges stables and other necessary outbuildings shall not be less than Four hundred pounds AND THAT no bricks or tiles shall be made or burnt or any noisy or offensive trade carried on in the same closes pieces or parcels of land or any of them or any part thereof and that no fence wall shall hereafter be erected on the said hereditaments adjoining any existing or proposed road which shall exceed four feet in height above the surface of the adjoining ground without the written permission of the said William James Armitage William Fison and Walter Nicholson their heirs or assigns NOTE: The Eastern and Northern boundaries referred to do not affect the land in this title."

The title was in essence created from two sets of original deeds as land was bought and then developed by the landowner (builder) of the time 
The covenants are self-explanatory and fairly common for the time (1873). Later the Victorians were much more worried about people using properties to sell alcohol, keep chickens or run as an asylum so your covenants re the 'pink' land are a tad older
Your conveyancer will I suspect the one to at least be aware of re no noisy or offensive trade as I doubt if you are likely to be making/burning any bricks or tiles

123ort

Land_Registry said:

Start with the entry that refers to the 'pink', namely 
A Conveyance of the land tinted pink on the filed plan and other land dated 4 February 1873 made between (1) Wi James Ar, W F and W N (2) James Wilkinson and (3) Jo Rob Wh contains covenants details of which are set out in the schedule of restrictive covenants hereto.
You then find the corresponding entry in the schedule of restrictive covenants, namely 
"The following are details of the covenants contained in the Conveyance dated 4 February 1873 referred to in the Charges Register:- The said John Robinson Whitley doth for himself his heirs executors administrators and assigns HEREBY COVENANT with the said William James Armitage William Fison and Walter Nicholson their heirs and assigns that no buildings or erections except private dwellinghouses with the necessary outbuildings thereto respectively shall be erected on the said closes pieces or parcels of land hereinbefore described and expressed to be hereby granted or any of them or any part thereof without the written permission of the said William James Armitage William Fison and Walter Nicholson their heirs or assigns AND that the said John Robinson Whitley his heirs or assigns will make and maintain the fence or fences on the North and East sides of the said hereditaments AND THAT the external walls of all buildings which may be erected upon the same closes pieces or parcels of land or any of them or any part thereof shall be of stone and the cost of any dwellinghouse which may be erected on the same closes piece or parcels of land or any of them exclusive of lodges stables and other necessary outbuildings shall not be less than Four hundred pounds AND THAT no bricks or tiles shall be made or burnt or any noisy or offensive trade carried on in the same closes pieces or parcels of land or any of them or any part thereof and that no fence wall shall hereafter be erected on the said hereditaments adjoining any existing or proposed road which shall exceed four feet in height above the surface of the adjoining ground without the written permission of the said William James Armitage William Fison and Walter Nicholson their heirs or assigns NOTE: The Eastern and Northern boundaries referred to do not affect the land in this title."

The title was in essence created from two sets of original deeds as land was bought and then developed by the landowner (builder) of the time 
The covenants are self-explanatory and fairly common for the time (1873). Later the Victorians were much more worried about people using properties to sell alcohol, keep chickens or run as an asylum so your covenants re the 'pink' land are a tad older
Your conveyancer will I suspect the one to at least be aware of re no noisy or offensive trade as I doubt if you are likely to be making/burning any bricks or tiles

thats very helpful, just wish they could make it simple plain English!
it appears that this property in 1973 had some land which wasnt in original deeds transferred which is the side garden now and some restrictive convenants are possibly in original deeds which are archived, there also appears to be some role for council to mantain hedges around the front boundary
as long as there is no issue about extension we would be happy

Yorkie1

Just make sure that your solicitor, when they provide you with their report, specifically addresses this query.

Land_Registry

123ort said:

Land_Registry said:

The title was in essence created from two sets of original deeds as land was bought and then developed by the landowner (builder) of the time 
The covenants are self-explanatory and fairly common for the time (1873). Later the Victorians were much more worried about people using properties to sell alcohol, keep chickens or run as an asylum so your covenants re the 'pink' land are a tad older
Your conveyancer will I suspect the one to at least be aware of re no noisy or offensive trade as I doubt if you are likely to be making/burning any bricks or tiles

 h

thats very helpful, just wish they could make it simple plain English!
it appears that this property in 1973 had some land which wasnt in original deeds transferred which is the side garden now and some restrictive convenants are possibly in original deeds which are archived, there also appears to be some role for council to mantain hedges around the front boundary
as long as there is no issue about extension we would be happy

Plain English often means different things to different people depending on when you were born but on a serious note there are two things to remember re such wording and why it is used 
In 1873 the wording would have been 'plain english' for those able to read and write but it would also have evolved through the use of english for and in legal terms - land law has always been complicated here and the myriad of ways of describing rights/covenants and more means that there can also be a myriad of ways of interpreting it as well - it's a constant (legal) battle between legalese and a desire for current plain english for some
The other and often missed point is that historically deeds were written by hand - no such things as computers in 1873 and the clerks who drew up the legal deeds of the day were actually paid by the word - that can be a clue as to why what we might want to say in as few a words as possible was, back then, written with as many as they could fit in 
Clearly not as simple as that for all but together the need for specifics and as many words as possible is where the legalese in Deeds has come from 

bobster2

Land_Registry said:

The other and often missed point is that historically deeds were written by hand - no such things as computers in 1873 and the clerks who drew up the legal deeds of the day were actually paid by the word - that can be a clue as to why what we might want to say in as few a words as possible was, back then, written with as many as they could fit in 

Wow - this is explains a lot! Thanks.