Land missing from title-future lending problems?

Brodiebobs

We are buying a property, using a bridging loan, as its being sold under auction conditions.

The property has two separate title deeds and the current owners have lived there since the 50’s. They bought the second title in the 70’s (im mentioning this as its before it all went digital) which is ajoining and used as a driveway/garden. 

When overlayed on each other they appear to line up, but when my solicitor has searched the land registry using “map search” they do not and there is a triangular section “missing” comparing it to whats on the ground it appears to be about 1m wide by 2m long.
There is no title so no one else owns it, and the lender is ok with it, but my solicitor has said if it was a ‘normal’ mortgage she thinks the lender would have decline, and has warned that if we were ever to resell we would potentially have issues. She believes this is why its gone to auction. 

We do hope to remortgage to pay off the bridge so this has scared me now. She advised the only option would to be to claim adverse possession but we would have to live there 21 years before we could do this! She also laughed and said in theory the current owners could do this after we bought it and then it would affectively landlock the property as its across the top of the driveway. I dont think they would.. but its a terrifying thought 🥴

Im wondering if anyone has come across this before, and if it would be worth contacting the land registry to see if it can be corrected inline with the historic paper titles the current owner has. 

user1977

Has your solicitor suggested it can be "corrected" by the Land Registry? 

Not sure from your description how this area would make the property landlocked - can you do us a diagram? Surely the original title for the house wasn't landlocked?

Brodiebobs

Thanks.

Solicitor hasnt suggested anything, her comment was it isnt affecting our purchase, she just had to warn me it could be an issue going forward. She said “map search” is the definitive so even if the historical paper deeds show otherwise she has to use whats on there. 

The house didnt have vehicular access before they bought the land to make a driveway, it just had a pedestrian gate to the front.

Ive done a picture, hashed is the missing, so in theory we wouldnt be able to park outside the house, or in the garage. 

user1977

Brodiebobs said:

There is no title so no one else owns it

Hopefully that isn't what your solicitor has told you - there may be no registered title, which means...nobody owns with a registered title. But it doesn't mean nobody owns it...

Who did the sellers buy the extra plot from? Is it not possible that that party still owns this area? Or it's otherwise still owned by whoever originally owned the area before it was developed.

None of which means there's any practical difficulty of course, especially if nothing has happened for the last half century - you (or the sellers) should easily be able to obtain title indemnity insurance protecting you against the highly unlikely event of somebody popping out of the woodwork and wanting to occupy this wedge.

silvercar

Any input @Land_Registry?

GDB2222

If your solicitor has warned you that the property may be unmortgagable, and assuming that your solicitor is right, how do you propose to pay for it in the long run? 

Brodiebobs

user1977 said:

Brodiebobs said:

There is no title so no one else owns it

Hopefully that isn't what your solicitor has told you - there may be no registered title, which means...nobody owns with a registered title. But it doesn't mean nobody owns it...

Who did the sellers buy the extra plot from? Is it not possible that that party still owns this area? Or it's otherwise still owned by whoever originally owned the area before it was developed.

None of which means there's any practical difficulty of course, especially if nothing has happened for the last half century - you (or the sellers) should easily be able to obtain title indemnity insurance protecting you against the highly unlikely event of somebody popping out of the woodwork and wanting to occupy this wedge.

Thanks… yes thats what the solicitor told me.

The missing part is on the original house deed (according to mapsearch) as the boundary line is on an angle, as opposed to the straight line on the driveway title. 

Interesting about the indemnity. I asked about this myself and she said it couldnt cover this? 

Brodiebobs

GDB2222 said:

If your solicitor has warned you that the property may be unmortgagable, and assuming that your solicitor is right, how do you propose to pay for it in the long run? 

Thats why im asking, as thats what im worried about. 

We have a house sale that will pay off 60% of the bridge but we will need a small mortgage for the balance. 

This is from an email from her, we subsequently refered to the lender and they have ok’d it. 

“For clarity, the white bit does not belong to anyone and this could be part of the access but it is unclear. Even if you are happy to proceed on this basis we would need confirmation you are happy for us to refer this to the lender to confirm they are also happy to proceed on this basis. Please note that this could impact any future remortgage or sale”

user1977

Brodiebobs said:

user1977 said:

Brodiebobs said:

There is no title so no one else owns it

Hopefully that isn't what your solicitor has told you - there may be no registered title, which means...nobody owns with a registered title. But it doesn't mean nobody owns it...

Who did the sellers buy the extra plot from? Is it not possible that that party still owns this area? Or it's otherwise still owned by whoever originally owned the area before it was developed.

None of which means there's any practical difficulty of course, especially if nothing has happened for the last half century - you (or the sellers) should easily be able to obtain title indemnity insurance protecting you against the highly unlikely event of somebody popping out of the woodwork and wanting to occupy this wedge.

Interesting about the indemnity. I asked about this myself and she said it couldnt cover this? 

Why not? Pretty commonplace solution to this sort of thing. I wouldn't expect lenders to be particularly bothered if it's covered by insurance, especially if it isn't as fundamental as e.g. land on which part of the house has been built, or literally landlocking it.

Brodiebobs

Thanks User1977.

I will persue the indemnity option, with them again. 

Land_Registry

First point to make here is that MapSearch is simply a tool to enable users to identify title numbers. It is not definitive re the registered extents of those titles or unregistered land. 
Users and clients should then rely on the actual title plans for the title numbers identified and if there is uncertainty involved complete a search of the index map to see what that reveals.
I imagine the solicitors have done all of this and confirmed that the land you are referring to is unregistered and not included in either title. Do not rely on MapSearch alone
If the registered information is as shown, and the 'missing' land is unregistered, an application to register the land for the first time based on the owners claim of legal ownership should be submitted.
If the owners have been there for such a long time and the land is clearly within their curtilage then the registration should not be an issue. It will however, even with expedition, take a while to complete as there will be a site visit/survey and wider checks needed. That can mean a wait of 2-3 months.
Any lender would rely on the legal advice provided and their own mortgage offer algorithm may say NO based on the increased risk associated with the lack of certainty re the ownership of the land in question