239 / 270
GAZETTE
DECEMBER 1980
Conveyancing Notes
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
UNREGISTERED TITLES
The Conveyancing Committee has been receiving an
increasing number of representations from practitioners
about the presentation of sets of title documents to
unregistered land. The Committee recommends that as a
matter of good professional practice all such sets of title
documents should:
(1) Contain an Index or List of Contents.
(2) Have all pages numbered.
(3) Have all maps properly coloured.
(4) Be clearly printed, preferably by the letterpress or
litho-method (not stencilled).
(5) Contain a full set of searches against the title.
The Committee is satisfied that a Vendors solicitor is
under an obligation to furnish proper books of title and
urges solicitors acting for Purchasers to reject any
booklets which do not reach an acceptable standard.
In an increasing number of cases no Registry of Deeds
Searches are furnished with or in a Booklet of Title. The
Builders solicitors apparently claim that they are basing
this practice on a recommendation of this committee. No
such recommendation was ever made. Any practice notes
issued by this Committee regarding searches emphasised
that the current practice that Registry of Deeds Searches
be furnished by developers solicitors should continue.
When Builders or Developments purchase property for a
housing development their solicitors pay extra attention
to the investigation of title and to searches knowing that it
will be vitally important to be able to explain all queries
which will arise in the course of the investigations by the
many Purchasers and Mortgagees solicitors. The
Committee cannot think of any reasonable circumstances
where searches are not available and think that it is un-
reasonable for Builder's solicitors not to furnish copies
with the title with suitable explanations.
Solicitors for Builders are reminded that the Land
Registry will now give priority to first registrations of
development property. There should be no difficulty in
any ordinary case in achieving registration in good time
and builders solicitors are urged to avail of this facility.
BUILDING DEVELOPMENT
A member has drawn the attention of the
Conveyancing Committee to the fact that solicitors for
some Builders selling houses on developments which
comprise unregistered land are refusing to furnish
Memorials executed by the Vendor as has always been
the practice. The Committee feels that a Purchaser is
entitled to have a Memorial executed by the Vendor and
can see no good reason for a departure from the practice
that in building estates a Memorial duly executed by the
Vendor is furnished at his expense.
Recommendations of
Law Society
/Building
Societies Joint
Committee
BUILDING SOCIETY VACATED MORTGAGES
Pending the production of the Building Society
Mortgage with receipt under seal, it is recommended that
Solicitors acting for Purchasers and Mortgagees shall not
defer completion of the sale nor registration of the
Purchase Deed nor completion of a Mortgage by the
Purchaser provided the said Solicitors are satisfied that all
monies due on foot of the Building Society Mortgage have
been discharged and that a satisfactory undertaking to
forward same with receipt has been furnished.
This is having regard to Section 84 of the Building
Societies Act 1976 which provides, inter alia, that a
receipt under seal of the Building Society for all monies
secured by the Mortgage shall:
. .
(1) In the case of unregistered land operate to vacate
the Mortgage and to vest the property comprised in the
Mortgage in the person for the time being entitled to the
equity of redemption.
(2) In the case of registered land for the purposes of
Section 65 of the Registration of Title Act 1964 be
sufficient proof of the satisfaction of the Mortgage.
FAMILY HOME PROTECTION ACT
Two questions relating to requisitions under this Act,
have been submitted fo the Committee for a
consideration. These are:
Is it reasonable or necessary to enquire into the
position in relation to the Family Home Protection Act:
(1) In respect of a sale by a Company or
(2) In respect of the occupation of a premises by non-
conveying beneficiaries on a sale by a personal
representative.
The Committee is unanimously of the opinion that in
each of the above cases such investigation is neither
reasonably nor necessary. In the first case it points out
that a Company cannot have a spouse and accordingly a
conveyance by a Company could not be void due to lack
of consent of any separate legal person such as a Director
who may have lived in the premises the subject of the sale.
In the second case the Committee feel that a pur-
chase from a personal representative
qua
personal
representative should not be concerned with the Family
Home Protection Act in relation to that particular
assurance. It would be quite different if an assent had
been executed and the sale was by a beneficiary as
beneficial owner.
233