If Golly has a CT as he claims, and I have no reason to doubt him on this issue, then a transaction cannot be registered on the title unless he presents his CT.
Yes with an If, and No with a But.
Yes IF nobody steals Golly's Identity or tries to fraudulently alter his title then you are absolutely correct. However this topic of discussion has long meandered away from that very simple, undeniable fact.
The but is if somebody does have Golly's certificate of title. If somebody has stolen the physical title, or stolen his identity to get a copy of that certificate of title. There is no Photo ID, Retina Scan or DNA test associated with a CT that welds it explicitly to the individual rather then individuals name.
If that happens then his CT is compromised. Identity theft is exactly that. Yes all states have moved to tighten up ID requirements on property transactions to reduce risk however that has not always been the case and equally is clearly not infallible.
The reality is that such an event is exceptionally rare, so rare I cannot believe that it continues to be debated across multiple pages and multiple threads, but somehow Drunkbat has stretches his pride and joy over 600 pages so I guess nothing should amaze me.
I would be very interested to see case studies of where following identity and subsequent property theft the property has been returned to the original owner with additional compensation for damage, inconvenience or whatever as Golly attests and the new buyer made to forfeit their acquisition. I have asked if anyone can provide such evidence on a number of occasions. To this point nobody has been able to, as I have also been unable to locate examples. Yet we do have published examples of a person who was indeed unable to recover their property following identity theft and rather forced to accept compensation for their loss which may or may not have been adequate for them.
If you are able to provide links then I would be very interested to read them, and more than happy to concede that my belief is incorrect.
My only hope for my three boys is that they turn out nothing at all like Chris.
I'm a world renkown Wet-wipes Leviathon whisperer.
Matthew
28 Jun 2017, 04:28 PM
Yes with an If, and No with a But.
Yes IF nobody steals Golly's Identity or tries to fraudulently alter his title then you are absolutely correct. However this topic of discussion has long meandered away from that very simple, undeniable fact.
The but is if somebody does have Golly's certificate of title. If somebody has stolen the physical title, or stolen his identity to get a copy of that certificate of title. There is no Photo ID, Retina Scan or DNA test associated with a CT that welds it explicitly to the individual rather then individuals name.
If that happens then his CT is compromised. Identity theft is exactly that. Yes all states have moved to tighten up ID requirements on property transactions to reduce risk however that has not always been the case and equally is clearly not infallible.
The reality is that such an event is exceptionally rare, so rare I cannot believe that it continues to be debated across multiple pages and multiple threads, but somehow Drunkbat has stretches his pride and joy over 600 pages so I guess nothing should amaze me.
I would be very interested to see case studies of where following identity and subsequent property theft the property has been returned to the original owner with additional compensation for damage, inconvenience or whatever as Golly attests and the new buyer made to forfeit their acquisition. I have asked if anyone can provide such evidence on a number of occasions. To this point nobody has been able to, as I have also been unable to locate examples. Yet we do have published examples of a person who was indeed unable to recover their property following identity theft and rather forced to accept compensation for their loss which may or may not have been adequate for them.
If you are able to provide links then I would be very interested to read them, and more than happy to concede that my belief is incorrect.
The women from the ACT lost control of her Title. Her lawyer simply handed it over to the fraudsters.
This is what ultimately allowed the scam to succeed. I doubt that the scammers would have been able to get a CT from the Registry themselves, given the difficult process required to issue a new Certificate.
I should imagine that the defrauded purchaser would be in a position to sue the negligent laywer to recover their losses.
As you note, it is extremely rare, and the system works quickly to identify and address problems.
Here is an example of previous action:
"No: 2003/05 March 2003 Circular
Counterfeit Certificates of Title
The Registrar General wishes to advise customers of LPI of further incidences of fraud involving the use of counterfeit Certificates of Title. The scheme was first uncovered in late 2002. A total of six counterfeit Certificates of Title have been detected to date by LPI. Generally, the fraud works in the following way. The fraudsters create a counterfeit Certificate of Title, assemble fraudulent personal identification documents and present these to a financial institution to secure a mortgage over the land.
In all but one case, loans have been arranged through mortgage brokers. The Law Society of NSW has advised that in each instance, the fraudsters have presented themselves to a solicitor with whom they have had no previous association and requested the solicitor to act on their behalf in relation to an approved mortgage loan. All instances to date have involved unencumbered land, and the fraudsters have instructed solicitors to pay the proceeds of the mortgage to persons other than the registered proprietor.
The NSW Police Fraud Squad is currently investigating these matters. LPI is acting to strengthen security controls, including taking steps to make Certificates of Title more difficult to replicate.
However, most activity relating to this fraud occurs well before documents are presented for registration at LPI. Therefore I urge all members of the NSW conveyancing community to exercise vigilance particularly when confronted with circumstances that appear to fit the modus operandi of the fraudsters as outlined above. Apart from the need to ensure thorough identity checks have been undertaken, if you have any doubts as to the authenticity of a Certificate of Title please feel free to contact LPI for advice before taking further action.
The type and quality of the counterfeit Certificates of Title varies. Distinguishing features of the counterfeits identified so far include: • Lack of clarity of the State crest; • Signature of the Registrar General may not be consistent with the holder of that office at the time of title issue; and • Variations in the colour of margin notes on the face of the Certificate of Title and in the words ‘Certificate of Title’ on the reverse side.
Inquiries may be directed to Ron Sale, Customer Services Manager by telephone on 02 9228 6996 or by email to ron.sale@ditm.nsw.gov.au. Des Mooney General Manager"
"Where the Register is a perfect mirror of the state of the title".
The register serves the title, not the other way around.
Next sock please Shadow.
The title they refer to isn't the CT which is just a print of the record of the register at a point in time.
The title IS the register.
That judgment is slightly loose in it's language but the concept is that the register reflects who owns the property. The use of the word title doesn't mean the certificate of title but actual ownership.
Again. Please answer this time and don't run away:
You are looking to buy a holiday house up the coast and come across an ad. You go and check it out and like it and the price. You meet the owner. You have the cash available and she has no mortgage and therefore has the certificate of title at the house. She has ample proof of ID that matches the name on the title.
Assuming you don't care or are otherwise satisfied with planning status, flood areas etc, do you:
A. Go get a bank cheque and hand it over for title and a transfer document signed by the lady?
B. Get your lawyer to run a title search to see if the name on the piece of paper she holds matches the official record at the land titles office and then have the lawyers proceed to settle the transaction and arrange for the transaction to be recorded at the land titles office?
The title they refer to isn't the CT which is just a print of the record of the register at a point in time.
The title IS the register.
That judgment is slightly loose in it's language but the concept is that the register reflects who owns the property. The use of the word title doesn't mean the certificate of title but actual ownership.
Again. Please answer this time and don't run away:
You are looking to buy a holiday house up the coast and come across an ad. You go and check it out and like it and the price. You meet the owner. You have the cash available and she has no mortgage and therefore has the certificate of title at the house. She has ample proof of ID that matches the name on the title.
Assuming you don't care or are otherwise satisfied with planning status, flood areas etc, do you:
A. Go get a bank cheque and hand it over for title and a transfer document signed by the lady?
B. Get your lawyer to run a title search to see if the name on the piece of paper she holds matches the official record at the land titles office and then have the lawyers proceed to settle the transaction and arrange for the transaction to be recorded at the land titles office?
C. There is no C.
I'd do C.
C. go to the Office of the Registrar to confirm whether the Certificate of Title is the present edition.
Then I'd confirm if the vendor has a right to deal.
Then we would knock up a wee little contract of exchange.
A receipt would be issued, which I'd also retain, 'et voilà!
You can do this yourself, get a lawyer, or conveyancer to assist.
Given I'm not a cheap skate, I would use a lawyer.
WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE! Share a cot with Milton?
The women from the ACT lost control of her Title. Her lawyer simply handed it over to the fraudsters.
This is what ultimately allowed the scam to succeed. I doubt that the scammers would have been able to get a CT from the Registry themselves, given the difficult process required to issue a new Certificate.
I should imagine that the defrauded purchaser would be in a position to sue the negligent laywer to recover their losses.
As you note, it is extremely rare, and the system works quickly to identify and address problems.
Here is an example of previous action:
"No: 2003/05 March 2003 Circular
Counterfeit Certificates of Title
The Registrar General wishes to advise customers of LPI of further incidences of fraud involving the use of counterfeit Certificates of Title. The scheme was first uncovered in late 2002. A total of six counterfeit Certificates of Title have been detected to date by LPI. Generally, the fraud works in the following way. The fraudsters create a counterfeit Certificate of Title, assemble fraudulent personal identification documents and present these to a financial institution to secure a mortgage over the land.
In all but one case, loans have been arranged through mortgage brokers. The Law Society of NSW has advised that in each instance, the fraudsters have presented themselves to a solicitor with whom they have had no previous association and requested the solicitor to act on their behalf in relation to an approved mortgage loan. All instances to date have involved unencumbered land, and the fraudsters have instructed solicitors to pay the proceeds of the mortgage to persons other than the registered proprietor.
The NSW Police Fraud Squad is currently investigating these matters. LPI is acting to strengthen security controls, including taking steps to make Certificates of Title more difficult to replicate.
However, most activity relating to this fraud occurs well before documents are presented for registration at LPI. Therefore I urge all members of the NSW conveyancing community to exercise vigilance particularly when confronted with circumstances that appear to fit the modus operandi of the fraudsters as outlined above. Apart from the need to ensure thorough identity checks have been undertaken, if you have any doubts as to the authenticity of a Certificate of Title please feel free to contact LPI for advice before taking further action.
The type and quality of the counterfeit Certificates of Title varies. Distinguishing features of the counterfeits identified so far include: • Lack of clarity of the State crest; • Signature of the Registrar General may not be consistent with the holder of that office at the time of title issue; and • Variations in the colour of margin notes on the face of the Certificate of Title and in the words ‘Certificate of Title’ on the reverse side.
Inquiries may be directed to Ron Sale, Customer Services Manager by telephone on 02 9228 6996 or by email to ron.sale@ditm.nsw.gov.au. Des Mooney General Manager"
So you are still unable to provide an example where a person, the subject of identity fraud, has been able to reclaim their property as a result of identity theft.
Got it.
My only hope for my three boys is that they turn out nothing at all like Chris.
It's both the Register and the Certificate. WTF don't you understand about that?
Anyone claiming a right to deal (unless a bank under PEXA) MUST produce the current edition of the Certificate of Title.
This is not rocket science.
The Certificate is the fail safe mechanism; like two keys for a nuclear launch, or two keys for a safe deposit box; two key for land title.
Yes Golly, it is clearly established that the most current certificate of title is needed and that copies can be made by satisfying identity requirements which is the cornerstone of identity fraud.
However my question to you is that in the event of identity fraud are you able to provide examples where on producing proof of said fraud the property is taken from the current owner (per title and register) and returned to the person defrauded of said property?
Can you answer that question, or will you continue to ignore it?
My only hope for my three boys is that they turn out nothing at all like Chris.
So you are still unable to provide an example where a person, the subject of identity fraud, has been able to reclaim their property as a result of identity theft.
Got it.
Please Shadow, it's a nice trick but proves nothing.
I can see a Pope demanding such things of Copernicus.
I've given you all the evidence you need about the Land Titles system. You don't want to believe it, that's fine.
You want to believe once again that government systems reward and protect criminals.
All your behaviour does is prove you don't actually own land, nor have a mortgage.
Herbie is a bullish Land owner, perhaps he might PM you about how all this actually works?
It's both the Register and the Certificate. WTF don't you understand about that?
Anyone claiming a right to deal (unless a bank under PEXA) MUST produce the current edition of the Certificate of Title.
This is not rocket science.
The Certificate is the fail safe mechanism; like two keys for a nuclear launch, or two keys for a safe deposit box; two key for land title.
It's quite easy to get a replacement certificate of title (a few steps but not too onerous) but there is no getting a replacement register. Therefore the register is the primary source. It's convenient to a transaction to have the ct but not essential, ie, by getting a replacement. Accordingly, one could have a ct, swear a stat dec it was lost, have a replacement issued, sell the property using the replacement ct and still retain the first ct (which would be proof of nothing). Accordingly it is next to useless to 100% prove ownership title to a property. To do that you need to look at the register.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy