6 ms·

You are confusing who actually owned it, or who morally owned it, with who legally owned it. The claim is not that, once the legal issues and the fraud get unt

You are confusing who actually owned it, or who morally owned it, with who legally owned it. The claim is not that, once the legal issues and the fraud get untangled, the buyer will be held to be the rightful owner. The claim is that AT THE MOMENT, while the 'new owner' is listed in the Land Registry as owning it, and the 'old owner' isn't, the 'new owner' temporarily legally owns it. They have written this article as though to suggest that this is final and the original owner has no recourse. That isn't the case. What is the case is that the police don't have a remit to investigate the fraudulent sale. If person A is listed in the registry (they 'legally own' the property) and person B isn't, the police will follow person A's instructions to remove person B from the property, but not vice versa.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> AT THE MOMENT, while the 'new owner' is listed in the Land Registry as owning it, and the 'old owner' isn't, the 'new owner' temporarily legally owns it Not an expert on British law, but I don't think this is the case. The new owner owns it. Not temporarily. Fully, permanently and properly. The previous owner was fraudulently deprived of it, and can likely get damages from the parties who signed off on the conveyance. But I don't think they have the right to reverse the transaction against the new owner's will.
- so_throwaway 5y ago
  If you're not an expert on British law what makes you feel able to make such a confident and surprising claim?
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > If you're not an expert on British law what makes you feel able to make such a confident and surprising claim? The hubris of an internet commenter? Also, it's not surprising. It's unusual for a common law country. But in most jurisdictions, particularly those on statutory law, if the buyer is unrelated to the fraudster and is in possession, the register cannot be altered [1]. This comes, in most places, out of the land registry being a reaction to protracted property disputes. (Often violent.) [1] https://www.bdbpitmans.com/insights/how-to-deal-with-property-fraud/ https://www.bdbpitmans.com/insights/how-to-deal-with-propert...
  - mdoms 5y ago
    This is Hacker News. Confidently espousing on subjects we know little about is what we do.
    - Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
      Pretty sure it's not specific to HN. Any social media has this behavior.
the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
> temporarily I don't understand by what logic this sale is temporary? What mechanism can undo the sale?

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

> AT THE MOMENT, while the 'new owner' is listed in the Land Registry as owning it, and the 'old owner' isn't, the 'new owner' temporarily legally owns it Not an expert on British law, but I don't think this is the case. The new owner owns it. Not temporarily. Fully, permanently and properly. The previous owner was fraudulently deprived of it, and can likely get damages from the parties who signed off on the conveyance. But I don't think they have the right to reverse the transaction against the new owner's will.

so_throwaway 5y ago
If you're not an expert on British law what makes you feel able to make such a confident and surprising claim?
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > If you're not an expert on British law what makes you feel able to make such a confident and surprising claim? The hubris of an internet commenter? Also, it's not surprising. It's unusual for a common law country. But in most jurisdictions, particularly those on statutory law, if the buyer is unrelated to the fraudster and is in possession, the register cannot be altered [1]. This comes, in most places, out of the land registry being a reaction to protracted property disputes. (Often violent.) [1] https://www.bdbpitmans.com/insights/how-to-deal-with-property-fraud/ https://www.bdbpitmans.com/insights/how-to-deal-with-propert...
- mdoms 5y ago
  This is Hacker News. Confidently espousing on subjects we know little about is what we do.
  - Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
    Pretty sure it's not specific to HN. Any social media has this behavior.

the_mitsuhiko 5y ago

> temporarily I don't understand by what logic this sale is temporary? What mechanism can undo the sale?