Have a client turned down for HB. He bought into a property for 28k but HB saying they wont entertain the claim because his interest doesnt appear on the Land Register. There are other capital issues but is it a legal requirement that you register. The clt says they paid a solicitor to assist in the buy and would have expected the solicitor to register the property if it was necessary.

See the Land Registration Act 2002, sections 4,6 and 7 but if he is an owner why is he claiming HB?

Sorry- should have put a bit more detail down. He's bought into property but paying rent while he lives there so being classed as shared ownership. It niggles me that HB is being refused on ground that his interest in the property isnt on Land registry. He's paid a lumper to the solicitor. If registration is compulsory why didn't the brief do it. If not compulsory how does that reflect on the HB decision to deny benefit.

Will look at the Act. Thanks.

What about asking the solicitor for an explanation? And when did all this happen? It can take a few weeks for HMLR to register a transfer after completion. Have you seen a copy of the title? I wouldn't put it past a local authority DM not to recognise rights on a title anyway - who do they say owns the property?

It may be that the solicitor has failed to register the property. I can speak from first hand experience as the first home I bought turned out not to have ever been registered by the vendor's solicitor.

I am struggling to work out why the LA feel it is relevant to the question of liability to pay rent.

Client says everything conducted through solicitor which is why I find it surprising nothing with land registry - especially as client paid a few grand for the privelege. He's bringing all his papers back to me this week before we make the appeal as theres a capital issue as well.

I take Neils point that where theres a definite agreeement and sale between the parties there lies the liability and I cant see its got sod all to do with whether you've ticked the right box for the registry. But these days who knows !.

Could'nt get back earlier as i was stuck in advice surgeries.

It may depend on the exact nature of the interest he acquired. It may or may not be immediately obvious (except to a land lawyer) from the face of the register. Have you seen the relevant entry and when was the title inspecteed - how soon after the transaction?

Sorry that this is very vague but it may be worth pursuing. I took a case to tribunal where a solicitor had failed to register with land registry on behalf of their client even though the client had completed the forms, had copies and had paid the solitor the fee. I can't remember the exact circumstances of my case but that is an irrelevance.

The full time chair in this case produced a book that I think was called something like the "solicitors remembrance" (but i might have that wrong) and pointed to something that said that in law that a solicitor is deemed to have done something in its entirety even if they haven't where it is shown that they ought to have done it.

It ought to be possible to get the defect corrected by a different solicitor and potentially for it to be executed from the date it ought to have done.

Having said all that I'm struggling with the "exclusion" simply on the grounds that his interest is not registered. If the definition of Shared Ownership Tenancy is satisfied in reg 2 then the exception in reg 12(2)(a) applies to the long tenancy and on the face of it HB is payable.

Golly! I'd forgotten the Solicitors' Remembrancer, which can be briefly described as a useful memory jogger of lots of bits of law you need to know from time to time but would never find in a huge great law library.

I think this is the presumption of regularity - that things are presumed to have been done right; but I think that is a rebuttable presumption if evidence turns up that they haven't.

My point continues to be that without seeing the title, I couldn't be sure whether everything has been done properly or not, becsue there could be rasons why ti is not visible on the title (though at the minute I can't think of them). Do any of the practising solicitors have colleagues who are land lawyers and might actually know what this transaction ought to look like on the register?

Thanks for replies. Whatever the remembrancer is I want one for fathers day. Appeals officer has responded and confirmed that disallowed on Capital grounds but also because DWP advised not to pay because not registered with Land registry. Lots to think on and again thanks for the help.
Tony

i take it you have advised your client to consult a different solicitor who can/will sort out the registration and advise on claim against previous sol (and complaint to complaints authority re. the same....).