Age of house

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

Must have been the reclaimed victorian bricks that done it.

-- Sir Benjamin Middlethwaite

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

I think it only does houses of a distinct period? ;-)

63 was not a good year for houses.

-- Sir Benjamin Middlethwaite

[Brian Sharrock]

I was asking a genuine question and not attempting to be dismissive; however, if it was built by 'the Council' it will have been on land purchesed by the Council - perhaps it was previously a farm- and that conveyance should be on a title deed.

The property will have been built using public monies and there _must_ be a minutes of the Council Meeting allocating the monies(budget) and awarding the contract to build.

Somehow the Council must have generated 'parcels' of land to convey the property [BTW, one doesn't legally buy 'the house' but merely the land and 'the heridament' (sp?) which happens to be thereupon]. The title will normally display the 'big picture' of the estate and the actual land conveyed 'marked in red on the attached' with a textual description.

I suspect that your question could be answered by badgering your Council officers - the minutes of meetings are in the public domain (it's your money they're spending) - go and ask to see them. [The planning department may have records of council houses being built]. BTW, my own house was built in a 'village' - then (politically) it was absorbed into a 'town' which itself was absorbed into a 'district's. Each successive level of administration somehow 'lost' the previous organisation's records. The builder has long since deceased and his office records/plans has disappeared. So I can understand if you feel the above is a 'counsel of perfection'.

[Mike Clarke]

The title deeds don't always provide the information you need since they're mainly concerned with the land the house stands on.

The deeds for our house show a plot of land changing hands in 1931. The owner subsequently built a house on it (in 1938 according to an elderly neighbour) and then sold part of the land with the house on it in 1946. The action of building the house didn't involve any requirement for any deeds.

[Mike Clarke]

If you're buying a house now you shouldn't need to pay for a copy, if the deeds exist you should be entitled to keep them. Digital copies of all relevant documents are (supposed to be) recorded by the Land Registry for all land sales since October 2003 and the original deeds are theoretically no longer needed after registration. When we bought our house our solicitor gave us all of them (the "pre-registration" documents) with the remark that they were now potentially obsolete but could be invaluable in the event of any future dispute. She didn't have a very high opinion of thoroughness of the Land Registries records.

[Roger]

The message from chris [e-mail] contains these words:

Thanks for the links. My house is in an awkward place close (300 yards) to the corner of a map so I need to look at 4 sheets to view my particular locality. Anyway it was there in 1852.

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

I think that was when the map was drawn up? ;-)

-- Sir Benjamin Middlethwaite

[Owain]

That's what copy typists were for :-)

Owain

[Andrew Gabriel]

I thought registration was mandatory since 1970-something. It certainly was by 1986.

Some mortgage companies have been posting deeds back over the last year, as they are no longer of any legal interest to the building societies in the case of registered properties, and safe storage in fireproof facilities costs them a lot. I asked for mine back, and the Woolwich were only too happy to oblige -- no fee.

The Land Registry records are always correct, in that what they say cannot be questioned/corrected. If they make a mistake, you can sue them for your loss, but you can't have the records "corrected". This happened to a friend of mine who bought a new house on a housing estate. When they got their copy of the land registry entry, it showed their garden as belonging to next door. This was a mistake, but it could not be "corrected". Fortunately, their neighbour was willing to sell them the garden for a token £1. They then sued the Land Registry for the legal fees for the transfer. Had the neighbour not cooperated, they would have had to sue the Land Registry for the loss in value of the property.

There was also a case where someone house sitting sold the house before the owners returned. The Land Registry had made insufficient checks to establish the sitter was the owner. However, the sale could not be "corrected" -- the original owners had to sue the Land Registry for the value of their house, and the new owners could not be forced to give it up.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I'd say you both entered data incorrectly.

[Roger]

The message from [e-mail] (Andrew Gabriel) contains these words:

It depends where you are. According to the Land Registry registration on purchase has only been compulsory in NE Essex since 1990.

[Roly]

This was the first course of action and was also what led to the question being asked.

There are two near-neighbours who each claim to have been the first to move into that steet. Obviously they're getting a bit old and maybe their memories aren't all they might be, but the problem is that theu each

[Roly]

I don't know what happened there, my message got truncated and garbled.

As I was saying ... This was the first course of action and was also what led to the question being asked.

There are two near-neighbours who each claim to have been the first to move into that street. Obviously they're getting a bit old and maybe their memories aren't all they might be, but the problem is that they each tell different versions of when that was.

[John Cartmell]

So check each against the local newspaper which should be archived at your local library. Look for the weekly paper rather than daily!

[John Rumm]

That is something I did not realise... Scary!

It does seem to fly in the face of the usual laws concerning the sale of stolen property though (i.e. it is the buyer who gets stitched up and not the original owner).

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

It might be I'm up late, but check what in the papers?

-- Sir Benjamin Middlethwaite

[John Cartmell]

Get the story from each neighbour. Look for news items that confirm their stories. At best of course it could be news of the first people moving into - or houses being pulled down if one moved from somewhere that was then demolished. At worst it might be first mentions of the addresses in BMD mentions. Details vary far too much according to circumstances but it should be possible to confirm one account rather than another in this way.

[Rob Morley]

So fill it in properly for me and see what the result is.

[Rob Morley]

You might narrow it down if you can tie them down to traceable events like rationing, who won the FA Cup etc. which they might recall more easily than the date :-)

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

I believe this is a good site?

Sir Benjamin Middlethwaite