Unclear or inaccurate title information can stall sales, delay development, and undermine valuation across residential property and commercial property. Resolving discrepancies requires a blend of land surveying, property law and practical project management. This guide follows a structured pathway that works for homeowners and professional teams, aligning with UK practice across England and Wales (HM Land Registry), Scotland (Registers of Scotland) and Northern Ireland (Land & Property Services).
Identifying Common Land Registry Issues
Missing or Incorrect Entries
Mistakes and omissions occur more often than many expect. Typical examples include mis‑spelled proprietor names, charges not shown as discharged, easements and restrictive covenants not carried through from historic conveyances, or rentcharges and minerals reservations omitted from the register. In leasehold titles, the demise may be misdescribed (for example, a basement store room not included) or a plan may lack the floor level and orientation required by the registrar. These gaps create legal and financial uncertainty for real estate transactions and asset management.
Overlapping Boundaries and Conflicts
In England and Wales most title plans are prepared under the general boundaries rule, so the red edging is indicative rather than survey‑grade. Overlaps can arise where neighbouring titles were drawn against different base maps or where adopted highway limits were misunderstood. On complex plots, triangles of verge or small strips can be left unregistered or double‑registered, creating boundary disputes and complicating planning and development. Vertical extents can also be unclear, particularly with airspace, subsoil or multi‑storey mixed‑use schemes.
Historical Record Inconsistencies
Historic deed plans can be undated, not to scale, or tied to features that no longer exist. Ordnance Survey epochs, river migration, coastal change or highway realignments can all shift visual references over time. Older transfers of part may use coloured edging without dimensions; when geospatial analysis reconciles these against modern mapping, mis‑fits appear. In Scotland and Northern Ireland, mapping conventions and cadastral practice differ, so cross‑border portfolios need country‑specific checks.
Steps for Resolving Discrepancies
Document Verification Process
Start by assembling a complete documentary picture: official copies of the register and title plan, historic conveyances, transfers, deeds of grant, lease plans, adoption plans for highways, public rights of way mapping, sewer adoption agreements, and any previous measured surveys. Create a schedule of documents with dates, scales and known limitations.
Next, commission a measured topographical survey tied to national control (OS Net) and capture fences, walls, kerbs, building faces and services evidence. A land surveying team should record methodology, coordinate system and stated tolerances. Overlay deed plans and title plans onto the measured base within a GIS to produce a variance report that highlights where paper and ground diverge. For leaseholds, test that the plan meets the registrar’s compliant‑plan requirements (clear scale, north point, edging/tints that do not obscure base detail, floor identification and dimensions to fixed features).
Finally, compile an evidence pack: photographs with locations, annotated drawings, the variance schedule and a concise narrative explaining the origin of each discrepancy. This pack underpins later applications, negotiation and, if necessary, expert evidence.
Working with Land Registry Authorities
When you have clear evidence, choose the correct application route. Common options in England and Wales include an application to alter or rectify the register, an application for a determined boundary where precision is essential, or applications to enter agreed notices or restrictions. Covering letters should explain the survey methodology, control, accuracy and how lines were derived from documentary sources. Respond promptly to requisitions and, where necessary, offer a joint site meeting. In Scotland or Northern Ireland, follow the equivalent procedures with the relevant registrar and plan ahead for mapping audits.
Good practice is to include a plan that is simple, scaled and legible. While coordinate schedules can support accuracy, the registrar still requires a map‑based depiction that ties to recognisable features. If a transfer of part is pending, prepare the plan to compliant standards now so you do not inherit avoidable problems later.
Legal Remedies and Adjustments
Many issues can be resolved by agreement rather than litigation. Boundary agreements, deeds of rectification or variation, and properly drafted easements can align occupation with title and bind successors. Where there is a genuine mapping or registration error, rectification procedures may be available. If HM Land Registry or a neighbour objects, the matter can be referred to the appropriate tribunal or court; at that point, expert determination or mediation often narrows the issues and controls cost and programme.
Be cautious with indemnity insurance: it can be a pragmatic tool for sales, but it does not fix the underlying error and may restrict future action. A balanced approach weighs time, cost, the prospects of success and the impact on investment appraisal.
Preventing Future Land Registry Discrepancies
Regular Property Record Updates
Build title housekeeping into asset management. After extensions, land swaps, rights grants or highway adoptions, update the register promptly so it reflects reality on the ground. For developments, submit transfers of part and easement deeds in step with phasing so utilities, access and maintenance obligations are recorded before occupation. Maintain a central data room that estate management and facility management teams can access.
Best Practices for Accurate Registration
Use registrar‑compliant plans: appropriate scale (for example 1:200, 1:500 or 1:1250), north point, clear edging and tints, dimensions to fixed features, and no shading that obscures base detail. Identify floor levels for multi‑storey units and depict common parts distinctly. Base plans on recent measured information rather than redrawing from memory. Where precision matters—ransom strips, retained access rights, or complex mixed‑use—support the plan with a topographical survey and a short methodology note.
Ensuring Clear Titles and Ownership Records
Before marketing or refinancing, perform a title health‑check: confirm charges are discharged, company names match current corporate records, restrictions and notices reflect reality, and any options, overage or wayleaves are documented properly. Align report outputs with contract administration so warranties, licences and obligations flow cleanly into sale packs. Clear titles reduce time to exchange, minimise requisitions and support reliable real estate appraisal across portfolios.
Practical checklist (surveyor‑grade, homeowner‑friendly)
- Define the discrepancy and why it matters (sale, boundary setting‑out, funding, planning).
- Gather every relevant document and map the evidence chronologically.
- Commission a measured survey and produce a variance overlay with photographs.
- Choose the right registrar application and submit a clear, legible plan with a concise methodology.
- Seek neighbour agreement first; escalate to legal remedies only if needed.
- Update the asset record and register after any change so the title stays aligned with the ground.
Handled this way, title discrepancies become solvable technical problems rather than project‑stoppers. Combining geomatics, topographical surveys and sensible property law steps keeps transactions moving, protects programme and supports confident decision making for both homeowners and professional real estate teams.
