Post by Ian Gillespie on Aug 29, 2018 20:28:14 GMT
All of us will have come across errors on titles at some time and had them corrected through the Landonline titles correction request process. (and subsequently been rewarded with the detailed explanation – “your request has been completed”.
Having just requested another correction I began to wonder just how widespread this is.
In the last few years I have asked for the name of the registered proprietor to be changed, the title diagram to be amended to include all the land, missing land to be added in, and missing easements to be added. Some of these were brought up by the property owners. I don’t keep a record of all the details – these are just from memory.
I’m not blaming anyone, it’s a complicated business and I certainly understand about making mistakes. But it seems to me that I didn’t come across these problems in the past and I was just wondering if they were becoming more widespread.
When titles were captured into Landonline, all live memorials had to be keyed. This required decisions about what was still "live", and indeed what memorials to capture. You will find errors on titles captured into Landonline because of this. I have found errors which are for (many) ha, shown as square metres. But the most problematic is where "Limited as to Parcels" is not captured. Other than checking on the historic title each time (which is the only way to check, and which I would do if I was in an area where I suspected there may be Limited Titles), theres not much you can do, unless you stumble accross something.
As Pat says it is pretty widespread, and it is always a good idea to have a squint at the historical image. If the missing memorial is 'Limited as to Parcels', LINZ won't just bowl in and correct it either, there seems to be some consultation with the owner - we are going through one of these at the moment. I came across one a few years ago where the 'Limited' memorial hadn't come down when a new title to the same land was issued (all pre-digital era). A bonus for the owner, and problematic for me at the time.