Guidance

Practice guide 83: alteration

Published 10 March 2025

Applies to England and Wales

Please note that HM Land Registry’s practice guides are aimed primarily at solicitors and other conveyancers. They often deal with complex matters and use legal terms.

1. Introduction

1.1 Qualified indefeasibility of title

One of the purposes of the land register is to provide a conclusive, accurate and definitive register of legal interests affecting land in England and Wales. This aim is supported by section 58(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002, which provides that:

“If, on the entry of a person in the register as the proprietor of a legal estate, the legal estate would not otherwise be vested in him, it shall be deemed to be vested in him as a result of the registration.”

Therefore, registration of a legal title to a party will vest that title in that party, regardless of whether that party was entitled to have that title vested in them. 

The conclusiveness of the register is qualified by the potential for an alteration to be made under section 65 of and Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002. Where an alteration is made to correct a mistake, which prejudicially affects the title of a registered proprietor, statutory indemnity may be payable under Schedule 8 to the Land Registration Act 2002.

1.2 Alteration generally

Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 provides that the registrar may alter, or the court may make an order for the alteration of, the register for certain limited purposes.

Paragraph 2 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 provides that the court may make an order for the alteration of the register for the purpose of either:

• correcting a mistake

• bringing the register up to date

• giving effect to any estate, right or interest excepted from the effect of registration

If a proposed alteration does not fall under any of these purposes, there is no power for the court to alter the register.

Paragraph 5 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 provides that the registrar may alter the register for the purpose of either:

• correcting a mistake

• bringing the register up to date

• giving effect to any estate, right or interest excepted from the effect of registration

• removing a superfluous entry

If a proposed alteration does not fall under any of these purposes, there is no power for the registrar to alter the register.

1.2.1 Alteration pursuant to a court order containing an order to alter

The registrar is under a duty to give effect to an order of the court for alteration of the register when it is served on him (paragraph 2(2) of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002). Service of an order for alteration of the register must be made by way of an application to give effect to the order (rule 127(2) of the Land Registration Rules 2003).

The court order must meet the requirements set out in rule 127(1) of the Land Registration Rules 2003, therefore it “…must state the title number of the title affected and the alteration that is to be made, and must direct the registrar to make the alteration.” The alteration that is made to the register must reflect the intention of the court order, which may result in amended or additional alterations to those set out in the order itself.

1.2.2 Alteration pursuant to a court order not containing an order to alter

The registrar is not under a duty to give effect to an order of the court unless the order is for alteration of the register. An application for alteration may be made as the result of a court order that is not an order for alteration of the register as it does not comply with rule 127(1) of the Land Registration Rules 2003. In those circumstances it will not be an application made under a court order to which the registrar is obliged to give effect under paragraph 2(2) of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002. Consequently paragraphs 5 and 6 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 (and not paragraphs 2 and 3 of Schedule 4) will apply to such an application for alteration.

Where an order of the court does not meet the requirements to be an order for alteration of the register, this does not prevent the order from being lodged as evidence to justify an application for alteration for the purposes of rule 129 of the Land Registration Rules 2003.

1.2.3 Alteration not pursuant to a court order

Rule 129 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 stipulates that an application for alteration of the register (other than under a court order) must be supported by evidence to justify the alteration. The nature of this evidence will depend on the facts in each case but must show on the balance of probabilities that the alteration sought is justified.

1.2.4 Alteration by the registrar without an application

In the course of their duties an HM Land Registry caseworker may discover that a registered title contains an out of date or superfluous entry or an error. In these circumstances the caseworker will investigate the matter and, if we decide the alteration is necessary, take steps to alter the register under paragraph 5 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002.

1.2.5 Notices

Where an estate, charge or interest would be affected by a proposed alteration, otherwise than an alteration pursuant to a court order, rule 128 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 requires the registrar give notice of a proposed alteration to:

• the registered proprietor of any affected registered estate

• the registered proprietor of any affected registered charge, and

• any person entitled to any affected interest protected by a notice if that person’s name and address for service are set out in the register in which the notice is entered

unless the registrar is satisfied that such notice is unnecessary. The registrar may also “…make such enquiries as he thinks fit.” (rule 128(4) of the Land Registration Rules 2003)

It is not possible to provide an exhaustive list of situations where notice of an alteration under paragraph 5 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 may not be served.

2. The purposes for alteration under Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002

2.1 Alterations to correct a mistake

‘Mistake’ in the context of land registration is defined at paragraph 11(1) of Schedule 8 to the Land Registration Act 2002:

“For the purposes of this Schedule, references to a mistake in something include anything mistakenly omitted from it as well as anything mistakenly included in it.”

In the absence of a more substantive definition of mistake elsewhere in the Land Registration Act and Rules, HM Land Registry consider this definition applies equally to the correction of a mistake under Schedule 4. As the definition refers to mistakes by inclusion or omission, a mistake in the register can arise in the following circumstances (set out in Ruoff & Roper: Registered Conveyancing at paragraph 46.009).

• Where the registrar makes an entry in the register which he would not have made (for example – the registration of a transferee as proprietor of a registered title when the transfer has not been properly executed by the transferor).

• Where the registrar makes an entry in the register which he would not have made in the form in which it was made (for example – the registration of a unilateral notice in respect of a pending land action, where it subsequently comes to light that the action is solely concerned with the percentage of the respective shares in the equitable estate owned by two or more tenants in common. Notices cannot be entered in the register in respect of interests under a trust of land (section 33(a)(i) of the Land Registration Act 2002) and so the correct entry would be an appropriate restriction).

• Where the registrar fails to make an entry in the register which he would otherwise have made (for example – no entry being made on first registration in respect of a non-void restrictive covenant contained in a conveyance).

• Where the registrar deletes an entry which he would not have deleted, had he known the true state of affairs at the time of deletion (for example – the deletion of an entry in respect of a registered charge where the discharge lodged was not authorised by the chargee).

The creation of a mistake in the register does not require the registrar to have made an error in the registration process. For example, an unregistered parcel of land may have accidentally been conveyed twice by the owner within a short period of time. An application for first registration may be lodged by a party claiming a documentary title under the later conveyance. The registrar, unaware of the earlier conveyance, registers the applicant as proprietor of the land. Through no fault of the registrar, this has potentially created a mistake in the register as the unregistered owner no longer had legal title to the land when he entered into the later conveyance. The registrar would only become aware of the mistake when a party lodges a subsequent application for first registration claiming a documentary title under the earlier conveyance.

The existence, or not, of a mistake in the register will turn on the facts of the individual case. Take the example given above: on the face of it, the registration as registered proprietor of the holder of the documentary title derived from the later unregistered conveyance created a mistake in the register. However, if this registered proprietor can demonstrate that they, and any predecessors in title, had been in adverse possession of the land for over 12 years prior to first registration, then the earlier unregistered documentary title would have been defeated (see section 1 of practice guide 4: adverse possession of registered land). Therefore, the registration of the squatter as registered proprietor of the land would not create a mistake in the register as they had extinguished the documentary title to the land at the time of first registration.

2.1.1 ‘Void’ and ‘voidable’ dispositions

While not set out in the definition of mistake given in the Land Registration Act 2002, case law has confirmed that ‘mistake’ refers only to a mistake in the register itself rather than a mistake in an application lodged for registration. This is illustrated by the distinction between dispositions that are ‘void’ or merely ‘voidable’ as referred to in the Court of Appeal judgment in the case of NRAM Ltd v Evans & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 1013.

A void disposition is one which, upon its creation, is not valid and therefore does not affect the relevant legal estate. A voidable disposition is valid upon its creation but is liable to subsequent rescission by the courts due to the circumstances in which it was created.

In NRAM, Kitchen LJ, at paragraph 53, cited with approval the following from Ruoff & Roper, Registered Conveyancing at paragraph 46.009:

“… So the entry of an estate or interest purportedly arising under a void disposition is a mistake. The entry made in the register does not reflect the true effect of the purported disposition when the entry was made. However, the entry of a person as having acquired an estate or interest under what proves to be a voidable disposition is not a mistake. Unless it had been rescinded at the date of registration, the disposition would be valid and it would not be a mistake to enter the disponee as the proprietor of the estate or interest under it….”

The NRAM case involved an application in form e-DS1 mistakenly lodged by the bank, discharging a registered charge the bank did not intend to discharge. An application for alteration by the bank ultimately resulted in the e-DS1 being rescinded by the High Court. One of the questions before the Court of Appeal was whether the subsequent alteration (to give effect to the High Court order and re-register the bank’s legal charge) was to correct a mistake in the register or to bring the register up to date. This would depend upon whether the e-DS1 was considered void or voidable.

Ultimately, it was decided that removal of NRAM’s legal charge following lodgement of their e-DS1 application did not create a mistake in the register. Kitchen LJ handing down judgment on this point at paragraph 59:

“In my judgment, the registration of a voidable disposition such as that with which we are concerned before it is rescinded is not a mistake for the purposes of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002. Such a voidable disposition is valid until it is rescinded and the entry in the register of such a disposition before it is rescinded cannot properly be characterised as a mistake. It may be the case that the disposition was made by mistake but that does not render its entry on the register a mistake, and it is entries on the register with which Schedule 4 is concerned. Nor, so it seems to me, can such an entry become a mistake if the disposition is at some later date avoided. Were it otherwise, the policy of the Land Registration Act 2002 that the register should be a complete and accurate statement of the position at any given time would be undermined.”

The registrar was ordered to restore NRAM’s legal charge to the register for the purpose of bringing the register up to date under paragraph 2(1)(b) of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002.

2.1.2 Mistake and subsequent dispositions

Case law has also confirmed that the power to alter the register to correct a mistake, whether by the courts or the registrar, can extend to subsequent changes to the register flowing from the initial mistake. This applies even where the subsequent changes are not themselves mistakes in the register.

Take the following example:

“A is the registered proprietor of a property. A’s signature is not witnessed on a form TR1, transferring the property to B. B then validly transfers the property to C, who grants a valid first legal charge to lender D.”

Assuming all dispositions are registered, the registration of the transfer from A to B creates a mistake in the register as the form TR1 has not been properly executed and therefore could not operate to transfer the legal estate in the property from A to B. However, regardless of this mistake, following registration the property vests in B by virtue of section 58(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002. Further to the vesting of the property in him, B has full owner’s powers of disposition set out in sections 23 and 24 of the Land Registration Act 2002.

Given the above, the subsequent transfer of the property from B to C, as well as the subsequent charge of the property in favour of D, do not of themselves create mistakes in the register. B and C have both exercised owner’s powers of disposition and the dispositions have been correctly registered.

The position regarding alteration of the register in respect of matters flowing from a mistake was considered by the Court of Appeal in Gold Harp Properties Ltd. v. McLeod [2014] EWCA Civ 1084. This case involved the closure of an existing leasehold title and subsequent grant of a new lease to Gold Harp by the freeholder. The High Court later decided that the existing leasehold estate had not determined and therefore that the closure of the title was a mistake.

In proceedings before the High Court, it was decided that the closed leasehold title could be restored to the register to correct the mistake. It was also decided that, in order to put the leaseholders in the position they would have been in had the mistake not been made, the priorities of the restored lease and Gold Harp’s lease would be altered so the restored lease had priority.

Gold Harp appealed the High Court decision, in part challenging the decision to alter the priorities of the leases. Dismissing the appeal, Underhill LJ (at paragraph 95) stated that:

“It is worth recalling that Schedule 4 is concerned with “correcting” mistakes in the Register, and it is established by the decisions to which I have referred that the power to do so extends to correcting the consequences of such mistakes.”

Subject to any limits on the registrar’s powers to alter (see, for example, The registered proprietor in possession regarding the registered proprietor in possession), any interest created following the mistake is susceptible to alteration in order to correct the mistake.

2.1.3 Overriding interests

An alteration that reflects an overriding interest will not usually be considered the correction of a mistake. This is because these interests, that are set out in Schedules 1 and 3 to the Land Registration Act 2002, are binding on a registered proprietor even though they are not mentioned in the register. A title will not, therefore, be adversely affected if details of an overriding interest are added to the register.

Further information regarding overriding interests can be found in practice guide 15 overriding interests and their disclosure.

2.1.4 Rectification

Rectification of the register is a specific type of alteration, defined under paragraph 1 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 as an alteration which:

a. involves the correction of a mistake, and

b. prejudicially affects the title of a registered proprietor

With regard to the alteration of the register, it is only in circumstances where an alteration amounts to rectification that persons suffering loss may be entitled to statutory indemnity under Schedule 8 to the Land Registration Act 2002.

Further information regarding rectification of the register can be found in section 4, below, and in practice guide 39: rectification and indemnity.

2.2 Alterations to bring the register up to date

The register may also be altered for the purpose of bringing the register up to date. This will generally be to reflect a change in the true situation regarding a registered title. A common example is where a registered proprietor has changed their name and applies to bring the register up to date to reflect this change in the proprietorship register.

Taking the decision in NRAM v Evans, referred to above, the Court of Appeal ordered alteration of the register following rescission of the bank’s e-DS1 application. The entry in respect of the legal charge had been correctly removed by the registrar when the e-DS1 was lodged, however the register now needed to be brought up to date to reflect the fact that the e-DS1 had been rescinded and effectively treated as if it had never been lodged for registration.

An alteration to reflect in the register a right to which the registered title is already subject as an overriding interest, such as an easement acquired by prescription, will also be an alteration to bring the register up to date.

A registered title may be altered as a result of a deed of rectification, which corrects an error in an earlier deed. For example, the parties to an earlier transfer may agree that their transfer did not include all the intended conditions (such as covenants, easements, etc.). The effect of such a deed is that the rectified (corrected) deed has to be read as if it had been drawn up originally in its rectified form (but only from the date of the deed of rectification). Such an alteration would be to bring the register up to date to reflect the terms of the deed of rectification.

However, where the parties to an earlier transfer agree that their transfer plan did not reflect the extent the parties intended to transfer, it will usually be necessary for them to execute a further transfer to correct this error using a form TR1 or TP1 as prescribed under rule 58 of the Land Registration Rules 2003. Further information on this point can be found in practice guide 68: amending deeds that effect dispositions of registered land.

2.3 Alterations to give effect to any estate, right or interest excepted from the effect of registration

Alterations to the register for this purpose are to reflect any estate, right or interest excepted as a result of the title being registered with a possessory, qualified or good leasehold title. An alteration to reflect such an estate, right or interest would not correct a mistake since the class of title means that the registered title has always been subject to such estate, right or interest.

An example of this would be where a squatter has successfully applied for first registration of land on the basis they have acquired title by adverse possession under the Limitation Act 1980. They are registered as proprietor of the land with a possessory freehold title. Subsequently the documentary title holder to the land applies for alteration of the register to close the squatter’s possessory title on the basis that they had not acquired title under the Limitation Act. If the documentary title holder is successful, alteration will take place to give effect to an estate, right or interest excepted from the effect of registration. This is due to the definition of a possessory title under section 11(7) of the Land Registration Act 2002:

“Registration with possessory title has the same effect as registration with absolute title, except that it does not affect the enforcement of any estate, right or interest adverse to, or in derogation of, the proprietor’s title subsisting at the time of registration or then capable of arising.”

meaning that the unregistered documentary title was excepted from the effect of the registration of the squatter’s possessory title, and that the alteration would be to give effect to that estate.

2.4 Alterations to remove a superfluous entry

Of the four purposes for altering the register, removing a superfluous entry is the only purpose available to the registrar but not the courts. No application is required for the registrar to exercise his power to alter the register by removing a superfluous entry, however it may be that an application draws to our attention the fact that an entry is superfluous.

An entry will be superfluous where the matter to which it relates is no longer current, for example where the entries relating to a second charge are removed from the register on registration of a person taking a transfer from the first chargee under their power of sale.

3. Making an application for alteration

The following section provides information regarding applications for alteration of the register or a title plan. Further information is provided in practice guide 77: altering the register by removing land from a title plan.

3.1 The application

An application for alteration should clearly set out the alteration(s) sought and be accompanied by evidence to justify the alteration(s) (rule 129 of the Land Registration Rules 2003). If the alteration is pursuant to a court order for alteration, the order must comply with rule 127 of the Land Registration Rules 2003. The only exception to this is where the application is to bring the register up to date by removing the name of a deceased joint proprietor (rule 13(2)(a) of the Land Registration Rules 2003).

Under the current Land Registration Fee Order, a fixed fee is payable for any application to alter the register. In some cases (in particular, if the error has been caused by HM Land Registry) the fee may be refunded (see HM Land Registry: Registration Services fees).

3.2 Standing

In the High Court case of Mann v Dingley [2011] EWLandRA 2010_582, on appeal from the Adjudicator to HM Land Registry (the predecessor to the Land Registration division of the Property Chamber (First-tier Tribunal)) HHJ McCahill QC confirmed that:

“As a matter of law, there is no requirement for an applicant for rectification to have private law standing. The procedural rules and powers of the court are more than adequate to prevent vexatious or abusive applications.”

Therefore, an application for alteration may be lodged by anyone provided it is pursuant to a court order that complies with rule 127 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 or is accompanied by sufficient evidence to satisfy the registrar, on the balance of probabilities, that the alteration sought is justified (rule 129 of the Land Registration Rules 2003).

3.3 Supporting evidence

3.3.1 Alteration pursuant to a court order

An application for alteration made pursuant to a court order must be accompanied by the original order, a sealed office copy of the order or a certified copy of the order. The order must comply with rule 127(1) of the Land Registration Rules 2003.

The English and Welsh courts will not recognise a foreign judgement relating to land in England and Wales, therefore HM Land Registry will not accept a court order made outside of England and Wales as compliant with rule 127 of the Land Registration Rules 2003.

3.3.2 Alteration not pursuant to a court order

There are simply too many situations which may give rise to possible alterations to the register for HM Land Registry to provide a definitive list of evidence that should be lodged in each situation. Provided the evidence lodged justifies the alteration sought, on the balance of probabilities, HM Land Registry may then decide to alter the register (rule 129 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 and paragraph 5 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002). Where the alteration amounts to rectification, the registrar must approve the alteration if he has the power to make it, unless there are exceptional circumstances which justify not making the alteration (paragraph 6(2) of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002).

Depending upon the facts of the particular case, one or more of the following may constitute evidence justifying a particular alteration sought.

• Declaratory evidence (either a statement of truth or statutory declaration) given by a person with knowledge of the relevant facts.

• Expert evidence, such as a surveyor’s or handwriting expert report.

• A court order that does not comply with 127 of the Land Registration Rules 2003.

• Certified copies of documents relevant to a specific disposition, such as a contract for sale, which explain the context in which the disposition was made.

This is not an exhaustive list.

3.4 Our response to an application for alteration

HM Land Registry’s primary function is to maintain the accuracy and integrity of the land register. Therefore, where it is brought to our attention that an alteration to the register or a title plan may be required, we will investigate the relevant issue to establish whether, on the balance of probabilities, we consider any alteration is required. Unless the alteration amounts to rectification, HM Land Registry has discretion as to whether to make the proposed alteration or not.

In order to establish whether an alteration is required, HM Land Registry caseworkers may investigate both the current and historic versions of the register and title plans, as well as any documentation retained by HM Land Registry. We may also investigate historic versions of the Ordnance Survey map, as well as instructing an Ordnance Survey surveyor to inspect (with consent from the relevant owner) and prepare a report regarding any land subject to an application for alteration. Depending on the circumstances the caseworker may also need to raise requisition points, both on consideration of the initial application and following our additional investigations.

Once our investigations are complete, including consideration of any additional evidence lodged in response to our requisitions, the caseworker will notify the party that lodged the application as to whether we consider, on the balance of probabilities, that alteration(s) should be made to the register.

3.4.1 Notices

Once a decision has been taken to proceed with the proposed alteration, the caseworker will then consider whether to serve notice of the application.

Where an estate, charge or interest would be affected by a proposed alteration, otherwise than an alteration pursuant to a court order, rule 128 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 requires the registrar give notice of a proposed alteration to:

• the registered proprietor of any affected registered estate

• the registered proprietor of any affected registered charge, and

• any person entitled to any affected interest protected by a notice if that person’s name and address for service are set out in the register in which the notice is entered

unless the registrar is satisfied that such notice is unnecessary. The registrar may also “…make such enquiries as he thinks fit.” (rule 128(4) of the Land Registration Rules 2003).

If HM Land Registry does not receive a grounded objection to the application, the alteration will be made to the register or title plan.

If HM Land Registry does receive a grounded objection to the application we must notify the applicant, and we cannot complete the application until the objection is disposed of (section 73 of the Land Registration Act 2002). Further information regarding HM Land Registry’s dispute process can be found in practice guide 37:objections and disputes: HM Land Registry practice and procedures.

4. Specific considerations when applying to rectify the register

Rectification of the register is a specific type of alteration, defined under paragraph 1 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 as an alteration which:

a. involves the correction of a mistake, and

b. prejudicially affects the title of a registered proprietor.

Paragraphs 3 and 6 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 contain specific provisions regarding the powers of both the courts and the registrar, respectively, when an alteration would amount to rectification.

4.1 The registered proprietor in possession

There are limits on the power to rectify the register where there is a registered proprietor in possession. Rectification is not possible (whether the matter is before the court or the registrar) against a registered proprietor in possession unless that registered proprietor either:

• consents to the rectification

• has by fraud or lack of proper care caused or substantially contributed to the mistake

• it would for any other reason be unjust for the alteration not to be made

If, following consideration of the above, it is decided that the court or the registrar does have power to rectify the register, then the rectification must be completed unless there are exceptional circumstances which justify not making the alteration.

Section 131(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002 confirms that “land is in the possession of the proprietor of a registered estate in land if it is physically in his possession, or in that of a person who is entitled to be registered as the proprietor of the registered estate.” The question as to whether land is physically in the possession of a party in a particular case will depend on the nature of the land and the use made of the land by, or on behalf of, that party.

Section 131(2) of the Land Registration Act 2002 sets out specific situations where possession by another party can be attributed to the registered proprietor. These are:

• possession by a tenant can be attributed to their landlord

• possession by a mortgagee can be attributed to their mortgagor

• possession by a licensee can be attributed to their licensor

• possession by a beneficiary can be attributed to their trustee

4.2 Statutory indemnity

The statutory indemnity scheme covers anyone who suffers loss because of:

• the rectification of the register

• a mistake in the register that could have been rectified but was not

• a mistake in the register before it was rectified

If a party comes within any of the above categories, they are entitled (subject to certain exceptions) to be indemnified by the registrar for any losses incurred. The following section provides some additional information regarding indemnity claims relating to legal costs and expenses. Further information regarding indemnity claims generally, including how claims are assessed and any exceptions to the entitlement to indemnity, is set out in practice guide 39: rectification and indemnity.

5. Costs in alteration cases

Costs and expenses may be claimed by a party suffering loss due to an alteration of the register. Depending on the nature of the alteration, payment may be at the registrar’s discretion (non-rectification cases) or due to the party’s entitlement to statutory indemnity (rectification cases).

In both cases payment will only be paid in respect of costs or expenses reasonably incurred by the claimant.

A claim can be made by letter and should include (insofar as they have not already been supplied in connection with an application for consent):

• details of the alteration made to the register

• details of the costs and expenses claimed and the basis of calculation, with supporting invoices or receipts where appropriate, and

• (if made in relation to a non-rectification alteration) an explanation as to why the registrar should pay them under paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002

5.1 Rectification cases

Paragraph 1(1) of Schedule 8 to the Land Registration Act 2002 confirms that “[a] person is entitled to be indemnified by the registrar if he suffers loss by reason of…” rectification of the register or a mistake whose correction would involve rectification of the register. In addition to payment for substantive losses, a person may also claim indemnity in respect of costs and expenses incurred as a result of the rectification.

The prior consent of the registrar is normally required before such costs or expenses are incurred, except where it appears to the registrar that the costs or expenses had to be incurred urgently and it was not reasonably practicable to apply for the party to obtain the registrar’s consent. In such circumstances, we would still expect the claimant to contact us as soon as reasonably practicable (even if this is after incurring the relevant costs).

Further information regarding indemnity claims arising due to rectification can be found in practice guide 39: rectification and indemnity.

5.2 Non-rectification cases

If the register is altered in a case not involving rectification, the registrar has the power to make a discretionary payment in respect of any costs or expenses reasonably incurred in connection with the alteration.

As in rectification cases, the prior consent of the registrar is normally required before such costs or expenses are incurred except where it appears to the registrar that the costs or expenses had to be incurred urgently and it was not reasonably practicable to apply for the party to obtain the registrar’s consent (paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002).

6. Alteration and fraud

Alteration of the register may be applied for as a result of a mistake in the register due to registered title fraud. While instances of registered title fraud are rare, they can have a major impact on those affected.

Property owners can take steps to reduce the risk of falling victim to a fraudster, such as signing up to HM Land Registry’s Property Alert service.

Contact our property fraud team if you think you’re the victim of property fraud.

HM Land Registry property fraud team

reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk

Telephone: 0300 006 7030

Monday to Thursday, 8am to 5pm

Find out about call charges

You can also:

• get advice from Citizens Advice or an independent legal adviser

• report it to Action Fraud

7. Things to remember

We only provide factual information and impartial advice about our procedures. Read more about the advice we give.