Top-500 conveyancers should be braced to be 'named and shamed' by HM Land Registry, which will begin publishing error rates for applications such as register updates, first registrations and new leases this month.
Land Registry says it sends more than 3,000 information requests daily when customers omit or supply inaccurate information. Starting this month, it will publish data showing the number of enquiries raised for its top 500 customers, by volume of lodged applications.
Data for April 2018 to December 2018 will contain names arranged alphabetically, the number of applications completed by Land Registry, broken down by application type, and the number of requests for information raised for each application type.
Data for the first three months of this year will be published in April, followed by quarterly reports.
Land Registry announced its intention to publish error rates in December 2017. It said today that requisitions 'delay the conveyancing process and cost us all time and money'.
Releasing the data, it added, 'supports our ambition to become the world's leading land registry for speed, simplicity and an open approach to data, and fulfills our business strategy target. It also supports the government's industrial strategy, enabling closer alignment with the Competition and Markets Authority's recommendation for greater transparency in the legal sector'.
Last year Land Registry published a customer charter, which included service delivery times and accuracy standards. For instance, it aims to complete applications involving creating a new register (such as new leases and first registrations) within 25 days. Between 1 April 2018 and 1 January 2019, around 2,056 new title applications were handled every working day; 62% were completed within the target.
Rob Hailstone, chief executive of Bold Legal Group, a conveyancing group, told the Gazette: 'Anything that can help reduce the number of requisitions has to be a good thing. However, whether this exercise is fair on their top 500 customers remains to be seen.'
30 Readers' comments