5 ms·

I'm not a lawyer but the article implies that once the title is transferred, the new owner owns it! There might be liability with the Solicitor or the Land Regi

I'm not a lawyer but the article implies that once the title is transferred, the new owner owns it! There might be liability with the Solicitor or the Land Registry, otherwise it would appear to be incredibly unfair!

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
The article says "The Land Registry paid out a total of £3.5m in compensation for fraud last year." which tends to imply they have some liability.
- pdmccormick 5y ago
  I wonder if that means they don't pay all that much compensation on a case by case basis, or if there isn't that much fraud occurring to begin with.
  - pmyteh 5y ago
    I suspect they'd rather you claimed against the fraudster or a solicitor, with the compensation fund as a backstop. If that is the case, it could be neither: just that most people get recompensed elsewhere.
pmyteh 5y ago
That's right, I think. The property can be recovered from the fraudster, but not from an innocent subsequent purchaser. There is at least some form of compensation scheme by the Land Registry. And 'selling on behalf of someone who isn't the actual owner' certainly can found a liability claim on the solicitor.
- Causality1 5y ago
  That's wild. Is there any other case where someone gets to keep stolen property as long as they didn't know it was stolen? I have to say if I was in the victim's position, my reaction would probably land me in prison for longer than the fraudster.
  - White_Wolf 5y ago
    I second that. If I'd end up losing my house to something like this... Let's just say nobody would get it by the end of it.
    - pydry 5y ago
      If you're implying what I think you're implying it would probably end with you in prison.
      - reificator 5y ago
        Losing the singular most expensive item you own, that typically contains the rest of your property, with no warning… that tends to end with you on the street which some may feel worse than prison. I’m not condoning that choice but recognize the consequences are particularly low when you’re already at the bottom.
      - White_Wolf 5y ago
        mate.. it's a matter of perspective. for people that have nothing left... prison doesn't sound that bad. If I have to choose between ending up on the streets again or prison... I'm pretty sure I'd chose prison this time around. I was young and lucky the first time. Now...
      - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
        Part of his point is that's not really much of a deterrent if you've already lost everything.
  - lazide 5y ago
    I think it’s more ‘if someone goes through an expensive and extensive legal process to purchase at great expense, some real property, starts taking it as their own in good faith, then later what may be the prior legal owner, but who was not who did all the legal paperwork comes back to me and claims fraud - do I have to move?’ The issue is there are scenarios where the person writing the article may not actually be the legit owner - maybe they are delusional, or were squatting, or whatever. Maybe they are in league with the person who took off with the money, etc. And the person who bought it is out real money on the meantime and is trying to make a home in good faith - it’s a pretty bad situation all around.
tialaramex 5y ago
The Land Registry is the final arbitor of who owns what in England and Wales. So yes, right now the Registry says this New Owner owns this property, there is no way to contest this in a court of law, the official Land Registry paperwork is de jure supreme, it has the same legal effect as if an Officer from the Registry was in Court to say yup, that's who owns this property says the Crown. But, of course what we've got here is apparently Fraud. Presumably the likely legal outcome is that the actual sale price or, if higher, fair market value, must go to the previous legitimate owner. Unless the new owner is shown to have committed fraud. The Solicitors are required to be insured. And of course the Government owns the Land Registry and so is quite capable of standing any of its potential liabilities, though it seems most likely the Solicitors screwed up here in accepting bogus "proof" of identity.
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  > The Land Registry is the final arbitor of who owns what in England and Wales. I don't think that's true because for instance there are still properties unregistered (as mandatory registration was phased in until 1990). Certainly it seems possible to rectify the Register, not least in case of fraud [1] Also, in English law, a valid sale of land must meet strict criteria, including being made by Deed. I am not a lawyer but I don't see how the Deed can valid in this case since it did not involve the legal owner at all! Since solicitors must check identities (how could they have failed that?) and executing a Deed includes signing it in the presence of a witness I suspect a number of people have at the minimum massively screwed up, and the witness is likely an accomplice. [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and-indemnity/practice-guide-39-rectification-and-indemnity https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and...
  - ineedasername 5y ago
    It seems to be true: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and-indemnity/practice-guide-39-rectification-and-indemnity#rectification-and-fraud https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and...
  - tialaramex 5y ago

tonyedgecombe 5y ago

The article says "The Land Registry paid out a total of £3.5m in compensation for fraud last year." which tends to imply they have some liability.

pdmccormick 5y ago
I wonder if that means they don't pay all that much compensation on a case by case basis, or if there isn't that much fraud occurring to begin with.
- pmyteh 5y ago
  I suspect they'd rather you claimed against the fraudster or a solicitor, with the compensation fund as a backstop. If that is the case, it could be neither: just that most people get recompensed elsewhere.

pmyteh 5y ago

That's right, I think. The property can be recovered from the fraudster, but not from an innocent subsequent purchaser. There is at least some form of compensation scheme by the Land Registry. And 'selling on behalf of someone who isn't the actual owner' certainly can found a liability claim on the solicitor.

Causality1 5y ago
That's wild. Is there any other case where someone gets to keep stolen property as long as they didn't know it was stolen? I have to say if I was in the victim's position, my reaction would probably land me in prison for longer than the fraudster.
- White_Wolf 5y ago
  I second that. If I'd end up losing my house to something like this... Let's just say nobody would get it by the end of it.
  - pydry 5y ago
    If you're implying what I think you're implying it would probably end with you in prison.
    - reificator 5y ago
      Losing the singular most expensive item you own, that typically contains the rest of your property, with no warning… that tends to end with you on the street which some may feel worse than prison. I’m not condoning that choice but recognize the consequences are particularly low when you’re already at the bottom.
    - White_Wolf 5y ago
      mate.. it's a matter of perspective. for people that have nothing left... prison doesn't sound that bad. If I have to choose between ending up on the streets again or prison... I'm pretty sure I'd chose prison this time around. I was young and lucky the first time. Now...
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      Part of his point is that's not really much of a deterrent if you've already lost everything.
- lazide 5y ago
  I think it’s more ‘if someone goes through an expensive and extensive legal process to purchase at great expense, some real property, starts taking it as their own in good faith, then later what may be the prior legal owner, but who was not who did all the legal paperwork comes back to me and claims fraud - do I have to move?’ The issue is there are scenarios where the person writing the article may not actually be the legit owner - maybe they are delusional, or were squatting, or whatever. Maybe they are in league with the person who took off with the money, etc. And the person who bought it is out real money on the meantime and is trying to make a home in good faith - it’s a pretty bad situation all around.

tialaramex 5y ago

The Land Registry is the final arbitor of who owns what in England and Wales. So yes, right now the Registry says this New Owner owns this property, there is no way to contest this in a court of law, the official Land Registry paperwork is de jure supreme, it has the same legal effect as if an Officer from the Registry was in Court to say yup, that's who owns this property says the Crown. But, of course what we've got here is apparently Fraud. Presumably the likely legal outcome is that the actual sale price or, if higher, fair market value, must go to the previous legitimate owner. Unless the new owner is shown to have committed fraud. The Solicitors are required to be insured. And of course the Government owns the Land Registry and so is quite capable of standing any of its potential liabilities, though it seems most likely the Solicitors screwed up here in accepting bogus "proof" of identity.

mytailorisrich 5y ago
> The Land Registry is the final arbitor of who owns what in England and Wales. I don't think that's true because for instance there are still properties unregistered (as mandatory registration was phased in until 1990). Certainly it seems possible to rectify the Register, not least in case of fraud [1] Also, in English law, a valid sale of land must meet strict criteria, including being made by Deed. I am not a lawyer but I don't see how the Deed can valid in this case since it did not involve the legal owner at all! Since solicitors must check identities (how could they have failed that?) and executing a Deed includes signing it in the presence of a witness I suspect a number of people have at the minimum massively screwed up, and the witness is likely an accomplice. [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and-indemnity/practice-guide-39-rectification-and-indemnity https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and...
- ineedasername 5y ago
  It seems to be true: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and-indemnity/practice-guide-39-rectification-and-indemnity#rectification-and-fraud https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rectification-and...
- tialaramex 5y ago