4 ms·

A centralised register of all property is not an unalloyed public good. Maybe hold onto your paper records somewhere safe, just in case of fire (or worse). http

by hyko 8y ago

A centralised register of all property is not an unalloyed public good. Maybe hold onto your paper records somewhere safe, just in case of fire (or worse). https://web.archive.org/web/20070819153935/http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/buncefield+fire+destroyed+crime+data/683952 https://web.archive.org/web/20070819153935/http://www.channe...

Spare_account 8y ago
Your second sentence doesn't wholly align with your first. Exclusively storing any data set in a single location is a bad idea, yes. But that's not an argument against a centralised register of all land ownership. My property is registered with the Land Registry but I keep a copy of the documents and my solicitor keeps the same in their files.
- hyko 8y ago
  You’re right, that was an illogical argument. However, it’s important to recognise that the Land Registry as it exists isn’t just a public copy of the data (useful for research, public policy etc.) - it’s the single source of truth about land ownership. Once your land is registered, ownership disputes operate differently, whether you’re holding the deeds or not. And I am not a lawyer btw so take all this with a pinch of salt :)
stevekemp 8y ago
I used to live in Scotland, and when I paid off my mortgage I received "the deeds". I had very little idea what to expect, but it turned out to be a bundle of papers almost three inches thick, detailing every sale since the property had been built in 189x. Having the paper-records was fascinating, and I seeing the initial owners staying there for 10-20 years, then a few periods where the property changed hands every 1-3 years, for ever increasing sums of money. At the time I received them I was told "Yeah you don't need these, really, they're registered in the Scottish land registry". But when I came to sell the place - from abroad, no less - the first demand from the solicitors who I'd hired to manage the sale was "Please mail us the deeds". I was almost tempted to keep them and say "Sorry, they're lost" to see what would happen. But selling a property from a foreign country was enough of a hassle that I didn't go through with it. I do wish I'd taken photographs though, as the legalese was very nice to read.
- 7952 8y ago
  Not sure about Scotland, but in England you need the deeds to definitively define the boundary. What you see on the land registry map is just an interpretation based on available data. They do not actually know precisely where the boundary is located.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Do they not have their own copies of the deeds? In the states, the local county recorder has all of that deed data on file, and when property is transferred a surveyor is engaged to confirm ground truth matches what the recorder states.

by hyko 8y ago

Spare_account 8y ago

Your second sentence doesn't wholly align with your first. Exclusively storing any data set in a single location is a bad idea, yes. But that's not an argument against a centralised register of all land ownership. My property is registered with the Land Registry but I keep a copy of the documents and my solicitor keeps the same in their files.

hyko 8y ago
You’re right, that was an illogical argument. However, it’s important to recognise that the Land Registry as it exists isn’t just a public copy of the data (useful for research, public policy etc.) - it’s the single source of truth about land ownership. Once your land is registered, ownership disputes operate differently, whether you’re holding the deeds or not. And I am not a lawyer btw so take all this with a pinch of salt :)

stevekemp 8y ago

I used to live in Scotland, and when I paid off my mortgage I received "the deeds". I had very little idea what to expect, but it turned out to be a bundle of papers almost three inches thick, detailing every sale since the property had been built in 189x. Having the paper-records was fascinating, and I seeing the initial owners staying there for 10-20 years, then a few periods where the property changed hands every 1-3 years, for ever increasing sums of money. At the time I received them I was told "Yeah you don't need these, really, they're registered in the Scottish land registry". But when I came to sell the place - from abroad, no less - the first demand from the solicitors who I'd hired to manage the sale was "Please mail us the deeds". I was almost tempted to keep them and say "Sorry, they're lost" to see what would happen. But selling a property from a foreign country was enough of a hassle that I didn't go through with it. I do wish I'd taken photographs though, as the legalese was very nice to read.

7952 8y ago
Not sure about Scotland, but in England you need the deeds to definitively define the boundary. What you see on the land registry map is just an interpretation based on available data. They do not actually know precisely where the boundary is located.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Do they not have their own copies of the deeds? In the states, the local county recorder has all of that deed data on file, and when property is transferred a surveyor is engaged to confirm ground truth matches what the recorder states.