Post by Brent George on May 30, 2018 20:24:03 GMT
The following story is an example of (perhaps) some sloppy e-dealing "quality control". Stuff - 30 may 2018
It was/is obviously an error - but when you look at the details, some aspects could almost excuse the error, such as:
- appellation = the same = Part Lot 24 DP 109
- area = the same = 1668m²
- road name = the same = River Road
- land value = the same = $39k
- capital value = nearly the same = $114k vs $109k
- previous owner = the same
Whilst others are harder to explain away:
- title reference = significantly different = 40A/379 vs 508/278
- physical address = different = #48 vs #50
- valuation reference = somewhat different = 18060-31300 vs 18060-31400
This event has caused the affected parties some stress - but surely there would have been other opportunities to identify the error - and remedy it in a shorter space of time? ie:
1. When the (incorrect) re-transfer was being actioned - surely if there was a suspicion of an error then a 'double-check' was warranted - both at the legal end and at the LINZ property rights check stage;
2. During subsequent transfer and dealings - did no-one else pick up some inconsistencies with parts of the references?
3. And after the error was identified in Dec-2017, why is it still not sorted?