header-logo header-logo

24 May 2007
Issue: 7274 / Categories: Features , Local government , Property
printer mail-detail

Information meltdown

HIPs will be hindered by the failure to reform the local authority search market, says Mark Riddick

Local government holds the information required by conveyancers to undertake their due diligence requirements on the purchase of a property by their clients. It competes with private companies in the compilation of searches for conveyancers from that information. It is claimed that certain local authorities compete unfairly by restricting the private search companies’ access to the information.

LOCAL AUTHORITY SEARCH FEES

Local authorities can justifiably claim that they do not have the resources (funding or personnel) to cope with providing the necessary facilities to private search companies. This is because central government has set a fee for access to this information at a level that is not currently calculated to recover all of the cost of maintaining and providing the information.
The fact that the fee charged to private search companies for access is £11, and the cost of a search compiled by a local authority (the so-called “official search”) can be as much as £300, suggests that either the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll