Land Registry questions

castlebar · 1 January 2018 at 8:53PM

Thankyou for the reply I will try to clarify a few points.At the time of the divorce Mr.& Mrs.A were beneficial joint tenants of the property,the court ordered Mr.A to convey all his estate and interest in the property,to his ex wife and her new husband for the sum of £6,000.The title was transferred to the new owners as tenants in common.As this happened in 1996 long after compulsory registration had been introduced in the district affected by this transfere is it possible it did not need to be registered because of the court order,or the fact Mrs A was a joint tenant prior to the divorce and a tenant in common after.

Land_Registry · 2 January 2018 at 11:24AM

castlebar wrote: »

Thankyou for the reply I will try to clarify a few points.At the time of the divorce Mr.& Mrs.A were beneficial joint tenants of the property,the court ordered Mr.A to convey all his estate and interest in the property,to his ex wife and her new husband for the sum of £6,000.The title was transferred to the new owners as tenants in common.As this happened in 1996 long after compulsory registration had been introduced in the district affected by this transfere is it possible it did not need to be registered because of the court order,or the fact Mrs A was a joint tenant prior to the divorce and a tenant in common after.

Neither the court order or how the beneficial ownership was held before or after should have impacted on the need to register

castlebar · 4 January 2018 at 8:27PM

Would I be right in saying that if the deed of conveyance was executed but not registered with land registry,for 20+years,it would now be void and the ownership of the property would revert back to the previous conveyance.

Land_Registry · 5 January 2018 at 9:23AM

castlebar wrote: »

Would I be right in saying that if the deed of conveyance was executed but not registered with land registry,for 20+years,it would now be void and the ownership of the property would revert back to the previous conveyance.

That's a legal matter really but from a registration perspective by not registering the change of ownership the legal title invariably remains in the hands of the seller

However you refer to it as a 'conveyance' so that will relate to unregistered land/property. If that was dated/executed prior to the date upon which compulsory registration was introduced in the area, then it should still be legally valid.

luckypotato · 5 January 2018 at 11:00AM

Hi,

I have already posted this elsewhere but would appreciate a reply from the Land Registry. Many thanks in advance.

My partner and I are in the process of buying a house. We love it. It's a 1930s semi. We have received draft contracts, etc from our conveyancer. The current land registry plan, with boundaries highlighted in red, seems accurate and shows the plot and back garden area that we were expecting.

However, looking at the original title deed from the 1930s with attached plan, with the land highlighted in green shows a much smaller back garden area. It 'appears' as if the house we are looking to buy has somehow eaten into next door's back garden. Is it vital we find an explanation for this? Which plan is correct and should we be concerned?

Any advice greatly appreciated. Many thanks.

Land_Registry · 5 January 2018 at 12:54PM

luckypotato wrote: »

Hi,

I have already posted this elsewhere but would appreciate a reply from the Land Registry. Many thanks in advance.

My partner and I are in the process of buying a house. We love it. It's a 1930s semi. We have received draft contracts, etc from our conveyancer. The current land registry plan, with boundaries highlighted in red, seems accurate and shows the plot and back garden area that we were expecting.

However, looking at the original title deed from the 1930s with attached plan, with the land highlighted in green shows a much smaller back garden area. It 'appears' as if the house we are looking to buy has somehow eaten into next door's back garden. Is it vital we find an explanation for this? Which plan is correct and should we be concerned?

Any advice greatly appreciated. Many thanks.

It's the title plan you would refer to to understand what extent you are buying.

If you want to understand how the title 'grew' to it's current extent then something you can ask the selelr but they me unaware. But also worth asking your solicitor for their thoughts as well

luckypotato · 5 January 2018 at 1:37PM

It's the title plan you would refer to to understand what extent you are buying.

If you want to understand how the title 'grew' to it's current extent then something you can ask the selelr but they me unaware. But also worth asking your solicitor for their thoughts as well

Sorry - just to clarify, do you mean the current official copy of the title plan and not the original from the 1930s to understand what we are buying.

I have a niggliing (possibly irrational) worry that a future owner of next door may try to claim the land in the back garden is rightly theirs if we cannot discover how it came to be ours... if that makes sense. Thanks again.

Land_Registry · 5 January 2018 at 1:41PM

luckypotato wrote: »

Sorry - just to clarify, do you mean the current official copy of the title plan and not the original from the 1930s to understand what we are buying.

I have a niggliing (possibly irrational) worry that a future owner of next door may try to claim the land in the back garden is rightly theirs if we cannot discover how it came to be ours... if that makes sense. Thanks again.

The registered title plan. The conveyance plan is simply a plan to that particular conveyance and relevant to that time, namely 1930 and what was being conveyed.

If oyu have concernes that the registered title is incorrect then you should raise that with your solicitor/the seller as appropriate. But it is the registered title you are buying and not the land defined by the 1930 conveyance

luckypotato · 5 January 2018 at 1:44PM

The registered title plan. The conveyance plan is simply a plan to that particular conveyance and relevant to that time, namely 1930 and what was being conveyed.

If oyu have concernes that the registered title is incorrect then you should raise that with your solicitor/the seller as appropriate. But it is the registered title you are buying and not the land defined by the 1930 conveyance

Perfect - thank you very much. This puts my mind at ease. The registered title plan is exactly how we see the land.

spendinglikemad · 5 January 2018 at 5:57PM

Land_Registry wrote: »

All a question of how the error occurred, who is affected and how it can be corrected.

Best case scenario is that we got it wrong, the land is unregistered and the land is clearly in your ownership. No registration fee normally and reasonably quick, a few weeks.

If the error was in the deeds/conveyancing so the land was never included but the boundaries put up to include then much longer and a fee, minimum £40 but if we have to do a survey/inspection then can include an extra £90 fee. Timescale 3 months minimum

Identifying what has happened and why is crucial to understand how to get the land registered/included

If an application is made and there is a definite and confirmed buyer then the 'wait time' can be shortened in the latter case to a few weeks also

The devil is all in the detail though so all depends on what's wrong, how it happened and how you try to correct it/market it. Your solicitor can then help with possible next steps

Thank you - our solicitor has confirmed to us (and discussed with the buyers solicitor) that we should apply for adverse possession of the land and the forms have been completed. What are the current estimated timings for this to be completed at the land registry?

Thanks

SLM

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Land Registry questions

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free