The purchase had completed, but Land Registry had not been updated after 3 months.  Mr XY then decided to apply pressure to the vendor solicitor as it had transpired they had not completed their processes correctly.

Mr XY’s solicitor had filed the application to change Land Registry ownership but there was a problem with the TR1 form submitted by the vendor solicitor.  The TR1 contained errors and thus Land Registry had responded back to the vendor solicitor to make the required changes. These changes, it is understood, required the vendor to sign documents, so further delay ensued.

Mr XY then filed a complaint with the SRA stating the delays with the vendor solicitor were preventing the update to Land Registry.  As a result the SRA commenced investigations, albeit at a very slow pace.

Eventually the vendor solicitor resubmitted the amended TR1 forms to Land Registry and thus enabling the register to be updated with Mr XY showing as the new owner.  The result was it took over 4 months for Land Registry to show Mr XY as the rightful owner.

But next things were to take a turn for the worse, a few weeks later Mr XY received a letter stating a notice had been placed on the register by a person claiming to be the owner and that they “did not sell their property to Mr XY”.

So who was this claimant?  Where they a fraudster? If not then who really was the original owner of the property? More importantly how will this issue be resolved?  In our next post we will describe the process of Mr XY defending his innocence and rights of ownership with Land Registry.

When we have completed this series of posts on property fraud we will summarise some key learning points for the benefit of both buyers and sellers in protecting themselves from a property fraud.

After the offer was accepted the seller expressed the need to transact quickly and insisted the purchase had to be with cash to facilitate this.  Mr XY did not have an issue with this as a fair discount was negotiated and he would be using a qualified solicitor to conduct the conveyancing on his behalf.

The vendor appointed his solicitor and notified details to Mr XY who then passed this onto the solicitor he had appointed at act on his behalf.  Once solicitors were instructed everything got moving.  Searches were initiated, identity checks carried out by Mr XY’s solicitor, property questions clarified by the vendor solicitor, and eventual completion within 2 weeks.  The vendor then met Mr XY on site and handed over the keys. It all seemed to be going well.

Subsequently Mr XY sought to raise some bridge finance to help with the property purchase, in effect releasing some of his cash enabling him to invest elsewhere, and this is where the first alarm bells started to ring.  Despite the purchase completing through the solicitors Land Registry had not been updated showing Mr XY as the new owner.  The upshot was bridge funds could not be obtained until Land Registry identified Mr XY as the title holder.

This last step was fundamental, Land Registry is now the prime holder of property registrations, effectively replacing the old system which involved property deeds (actual documents) identifying title to a property.  This issue was soon to become fundamental in the events that followed.

The next post will follow up on what happened with Land Registry, a very key factor to events that followed.