Stage one complaint decision

either spoken or written that requires a response” under HMLR’s 
Complaints 
Procedure. 
As 
your 
correspondence 
expresses
dissatisfaction about a legal decision, I am treating it as a complaint. 
I hope that my response below will address your concerns and 
explain the situation to you.  
Your complaint 
My understanding is that your complaint is about the following points 
- 
That the first registration of the land was procured by identity 
misconduct by BP Properties Limited and that HMLR should have 
investigated whether there was any dispute regarding 
possession 
- 
HMLR was negligent / maladministrative in dealing with the 
application for first registration of the Property  
- 
You have made a request for indemnity under the HM Land 
Registration indemnity scheme  
Summary of decision 
District Land Registry For Wales 
DX 82800 
SWANSEA 2 
 
Email sent to: 
 
 
__ 
__ 
__ 
 
__ 
 
[redacted]

 
 
 
2 of/o 5 
 
I have concluded my investigation of your complaint under stage 
one of HMLR’s Complaints Procedure, and my decision is to not
uphold (this means that I have decided that HMLR has acted 
correctly in accordance with the law and our policy and procedures) 
your complaint. I have set out my full response to your complaint 
below.  
HMLR operates a two stage internal complaints procedure, and this 
letter represents our first stage response.  
Further information about our complaints procedure can be found 
here: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-
registry/about/complaints-procedure 
  
HMLR’s role 
It may help you to understand our role and what we are able to do to 
help our customers with the applications they make.  
HMLR is a government department responsible for registering the 
ownership of land and property in England and Wales. Our legal
duties and powers are set out in the Land Registration Act 2002 
(“the Act”) and the Land Registration Rules 2003 (as amended) 
(“the Rules”). Previous relevant acts included the Land Registration
Act 1925.  
Our basic role is to keep a register of interests in property, so that 
the public have easy access to reliable information about land 
ownership and interests in land.  
Because HMLR is an administrative agency rather than a court or 
tribunal, we do not have the legal power to make or enforce a 
decision in the same way as a court or tribunal can nor do we have
any investigative powers.  
Background / History 
In unregistered conveyancing, title is ultimately based on the estate 
owner’s right to be in possession of the land or to receive the rents 
and profits of it. Showing a full documentary title commencing with a 
good root of title that is at least 15 years old should normally 
establish this right and is sufficient for land registration purposes.  
The registration history of the Property has been set out by my 
colleague Ms Smith in her letter of 23 March 2026. To expand on 
that, the application for first registration for the land comprised in 
title WA231076 was made on 30 November 1982. The list of deeds 
and documents of title lodged in support of the application are listed 
in the form ‘DL (‘document list’). Our files show an abstract of title 
listed dated 1971 was lodged with the application for first 
registration. This is effectively a summary of deeds, documents and 
events which show a person’s title to unregistered land. It may be 
written in legal shorthand 

 
 
 
3 of/o 5 
 
The deed which conveyed the Property to the applicant for first 
registration was a conveyance dated 19 November 1982 made 
between (1) The British Petroleum Pension Trust (2) BP Trustees 
Limited and (3) BP Properties Limited. The recitals clause 
(preamble) to that Conveyance states ‘The Vendors are seised in 
fee simple in the premises described in the First Schedule hereto 
(hereinafter called “the premises”) upon the Trusts referred to in a 
Conveyance dated 31 December 1969 and made between Western 
Ground Rents Limited of the one part and the Vendors of the other 
part..’  It is clear therefore that the applicant (BP Properties Limited) 
could show a good root of title and that The British Petroleum 
Pension Trust acquired the land in 1969.  
As to the land comprised in WA240304, the application for first 
registration was made on 23 February 1983 and the applicant was 
again BP Properties Limited. A request was made to amalgamate 
the two titles together. The deed which conveyed the Property to the 
applicant was a conveyance dated 23 May 1975 made between (1) 
The British Petroleum Pension Trust Limited (2) BP Trustees 
Limited and (3) BP Properties Limited. The recitals clause to that 
Conveyance states ‘The Vendors are seised in fee simple upon the 
trusts referred to in a conveyance dated the thirty first day of 
December One thousand One hundred and sixty nine and made 
between Western Ground Rents Limited of the one part and the 
vendors of the other part.’ Again, our files indicate that we had sight 
of a copy of a 1971 abstract of title. 
Consideration and analysis 
Historic dispute / identity misconduct 
HM Land Registry is required to check each application includes the 
information required under the relevant law applicable at the time an 
application is lodged, and that there are no obvious gaps or 
inconsistencies in an application. We are not, however, required to 
make enquiries to ensure that each title includes a comprehensive 
list of all interests and rights affecting a particular piece of land.  Our 
role is to respond to the applications we receive, rather than to be 
pro-active in establishing what rights and interest may exist.   
HM Land Registry application form FR1 contains certain certificates 
by the solicitors acting for the applicants. These include:  
“We are not aware of any question or doubt affecting the title to the 
land or any part thereof, or of any matter or thing whereby the title is 
or may be impeached, affected or called into question in any matter 
whatsoever’. HM Land Registry is entitled to rely on those 
certificates when examining deeds lodged and granting title to land. 
You have provided a detailed timeline regarding the possession of 
the property by your relatives. It appears the basis of your claim is 
that there had been a long running dispute and historic adverse 
possession of the Property which had the result of extinguishing the 
documentary title such that the registration of the title created a 

 
 
 
4 of/o 5 
 
mistake in the register. 
 
As you reference in the timeline, the Court of Appeal heard the 
dispute relating to the claim of adverse possession in the case of BP 
Properties Limited v Buckler [1987] EWCA Civ 2] which found that 
an offer to remain on the land made by the landowner constituted 
permission and that from that point it was occupied under a licence 
such that possession was no longer adverse. It did not matter that 
the offer was never accepted.  
As explained above, HM Land Registry has an administrative 
function and it is not for the Registrar to look behind or challenge 
decisions of the Court. Your asserts relating to ‘identify misconduct’ relating 
to how your grandmother was addressed by the documentary title 
holder are not relevant to the issue of title to the land. They relate to 
the dispute which was heard by the Court. 
 
It is clear that you disagree with the findings of the Court but the 
appropriate forum for any challenge is the judicial system and not 
HM Land Registry. 
 
Negligence / Maladministration of HM Land Registry 
Having reviewed our records held in relation to the applications 
made for first registration of the Property, I am satisfied that the 
registered proprietor evidenced a good documentary title to the 
land. Our practice and procedures were correctly followed and there 
is no evidence of negligence or maladministration on the part of HM 
Land Registry.  
Indemnity 
The registrar has the power to make alterations for the purpose of: 
(a) 
correcting a mistake; 
(b) 
bringing the register up to date;  
(c) 
giving effect to any estate, right or interest excepted from the 
effect of registration; or 
(d) 
removing a superfluous entry. 
None of the above would apply in this case. There is no evidence of 
a mistake in the register.  
HMLR can make payments in accordance with the statutory 
indemnity scheme, as detailed under Schedule 8 of the Act, to 
anyone who suffers loss because of: 
• 
A mistake (error) in the register that could have been 
rectified (corrected) but was not; or 
• 
A mistake in the register before it was rectified. 
As there is no evidence of a mistake in the register, there is no right 
to make a claim under the indemnity scheme.  

 
 
 
5 of/o 5 
 
My decision 
For the reasons set out above, my decision is to not uphold your
complaint. If you wish to obtain official copies of any documentation
you will need to apply for these. Please see HM Land Registry
Practice Guide 11 for further information. You may also find the
provisions of HM Land Registry Practice Guide 39 of assistance.  
If you are not satisfied 
I hope that my response has clarified HM Land Registry’s position in 
relation to your complaint. If you remain dissatisfied, you may wish 
to progress your complaint to the next stage of our Complaints 
Procedure. 
If you want to begin stage two of our Complaints Procedure, please 
reply to this letter telling  us why you are unhappy with my response 
and provide the following information: 
• 
Identify the particular decision(s) you consider to be 
incorrect.  
 
• 
Explain why you think that my decision was incorrect. For 
example, if it is because of my account of the facts, please 
say which facts; if it is because of my understanding of the 
law, please say what part of the law. 
• 
Set out what you think would be the correct decision. 
Your complaint will then be reviewed by a Land Registrar (Senior 
Officer), and you will be contacted within 20 working days. 
If you require this correspondence in an alternative format please 
contact us, quoting our reference.  
Yours faithfully, 
Charlotte Takeuchi 
Assistant Land Registrar / HM Land Registry