Live data from Hacker News

Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

bbc.co.uk

321–330 of 360 posts

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#321
I remember reading about something similar a few years ago. A lady had paid off her mortgage turned out that made her property vulnerable because without the mortgage company being involved there were less checks. Someone stole her post, impersonated her and sold her property without her knowledge obtaining the deed as well I think. Its always stuck in my brain!

I wonder if thats what happened here too?

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#322

For what it's worth. If you own Real Property in England, even if only a Leasehold (Long Lease e.g. 99 years) you can get the Land Registry to email you about activity or, once per year, the lack of activity for your property records. https://propertyalert.landregistry.gov.uk/ Land Registry records have a sort of poor man's locking. The buyers (or in practice their solicitor) need to first perform a "Search" which wo…

That's messed up — it pushes the blame onto the victims for not monitoring.

Security and freedom are both active pursuits. Anything unattended will be repurposed and recycled by law of nature, in one way or another.

We humans can and do try to fight against nature. But that's exactly what it is, a fight! And I doubt the Art of War said "Pay no attention to your enemies. They will leave you be."

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#324

> Once the house was sold to the new owner for £131,000 by the person impersonating Mr Hall, they legally owned it. That's nuts. Why isn't it the case that the person who failed to properly vet the seller is out of £131,000 and the house? So I can "buy" a local mansion and then say "oops, I didn't know this random guy didn't own it. Oh well."

Also, how does the seller disappear with that much money without being able to be IDed? That seems like a severe failure of the state. It almost makes me wonder if this is a semi common scam wealthy folks use to take poor people's desirable homes.

I'm guessing he had a fraudulent bank account opened in the owners name with the address as the house and then stole the bank mail as the bank mail would have apparently worked as verification as the original person for the sale according to this [0]. This story is scant though and needs more details.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29074464

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#325
post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what happens when the owner wants to sell it, but forgets the PIN?

He recovers the wallet from a seed stored in safe place.

And how does he prove he's the owner to get into that safe space?

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 85% of land in the UK is registered - including the vast majority of domestic dwellings.

My apologies - bad memory https://whoownsengland.org/2019/01/11/the-holes-in-the-map-e...

You can get INSPIRE polygons from https://use-land-property-data.service.gov.uk/datasets/inspi...

Either download the GML or view it on the map. This gives you a number which you can pump into https://eservices.landregistry.gov.uk/eservices/FindAPropert...

And the spend £3 buying the deeds for the property. One look at the coverage in your local area shows the type of properties available, for example Parliament Square (North and South), or tiny bits of rock off the edge of the Isles of Scilly, as well as more pedestrian locations like "Flat 1-14, Grosvenor Court, 55 Upper Grosvenor Road, Tunbridge Wells, TN1 2DY"

A lot of unregistered land, certainly in towns, are roads and railways that have been there for over 100 years

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you consider each country's history with respect to property and power, it makes sense. Could you elaborate on that, please? I don't know which historical aspects you're referring to.

My interpretation - the UK was about having a few gentry owning all the land and a lot of peasants that just work on the land. The US was about giving each settler a Homestead of previously unowned land (Natives not being considered capable of owning land, because racism ). So, a registry would be easy to operate in the UK, but the US was too big and poorly connected and had too many land owners to make that viable.…

Torrens title was invented in South Australia in the mid 19th century. It is named for the Australian politician Sir Robert Torrens, who was briefly Premier of the Colony of South Australia around the same time. It has since spread around the world, including a few American states, but has not seen anywhere near as much adoption in the US as in many other parts of the English-speaking world.

Now, the contemporary English system isn’t strictly speaking Torrens, it actually is somewhat of a hybrid between a pure Torrens system (as used in Australia and many other places), and the original English system (which slowly evolved out of mediaeval English law) and which is still mostly retained in the US. But still, to the extent that the records of the Land Registry take priority over the actual title documents, it is closer to the Torrens system than most US systems.

I think the main reasons for the lesser adoption of Torrens in the US have little to do with the reasons you suggest. Trying to link the US non-adoption of it to the dispossession of indigenous people is dubious given that Australia, where it was invented, has a similar history. It is basically due to the greater number and greater conservatism of US state jurisdictions (here I mean “conservatism” primarily in the “slow-to-embrace-change” sense, rather than conservatism as a political ideology, this is the kind of technocratic legal issue about which neither progressives nor conservatives, in the ideological sense, care much), and also due to the lobbying power of the US title services/insurance industry, which sees the greater simplicity of the Torrens system (most of the time, ignoring occasional problems and frauds like this, which can and have happened under pre-Torrens systems too) as a threat to their established business models

Torrens essentially tries to optimise for the most common case, in which title is clear and no fraud is going on, and make that common case as simple and cheap as possible, even if by doing so the outcome in those rare cases of disputes and frauds may not always be completely optimal

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#328

Lol how does this sort of shit even happen in 2021. It's meant to be "the future".

Ironically it being "the future" is at least part of the reason why it happened. In the UK, all the land records are digitized nowadays, so the scammer didn't need to steal the physical deed to the property to pull off the scam. All they me had to dk was present their fraudulent identification to the office holding those digitized records and it was over without the owner even having to know.

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#329
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like a sophisticated fraud. They probably target clergy or others who have well known public schedules. I assume there is an equivalent of title insurance in the UK that will pay out though.

The original owner is not going to be the one with title insurance though, that's usually bought by the buyer, not the seller, especially not a seller who isn't even aware that there is a transaction.

"Title insurance" isn't much of a thing in the UK. I think this is because the Land Registry gives you something similar as part of the service. Random quote from the web, from the Law Society Gazette, no less: "We already have a land registry which provides a comprehensive guarantee of title backed by the state."

As for whether fraudulent sales should be reverted or not, I've been pondering the question since I read the story yesterday and come to the conclusion that it would be good to apply some common sense:

* Someone buys a house without looking at it, before or after the sale, as an investment because the price seems really attractive. It is then discovered that the owner, who is living in the house, was not involved in the "sale". Obviously they should revert the transfer of ownership and compensate the purchaser.

* Someone buys a field, gets planning permission, builds a house on it, and moves in. Ten years later it is discovered that the real owner of the field, a company in Dubai, was not involved in the "sale". Obviously the transfer should not be reverted and the involuntary seller should be compensated.

Re: Man left shocked as his house is 'stolen'

#330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Land Registry says you own the property, you can rest assured you own it. Sounds to me like you can only rest assured at the moment the Land Registry tells you. After that, it’s only a matter of time before some scammer sells your house out from under you. Not a great system.

Seems like you should be able to lock your title just like domain names.

Could you use a very small mortgage as a proxy for that function? In my country a mortgage will prevent any transaction if the bank don't agree. This will add a non trivial step for the scammer.
Post reply on HN