'When we heard of ChancelCheck we thought we had hit on the answer to the problem of chancel searches. However:
1. A large proportion of search results are coming back positive (ie stating "the above building is located within the historical boundary of a parish which continues to have a potential chancel repair liability"). In some cases this result is issued even where, to our knowledge, there is no actual chancel repair liability.
2. A full chancel repair search is in most cases likely to prove negative. However, we cannot risk a positive result, as such would make the risk uninsurable.
3. We therefore are forced to fall back on taking out the insurance which is on offer from ChancelCheck — even though the chances of a liability are remote — simply because the “screening” search has “hinted” at a possible liability.
'1. ChancelCheck® reports on whether or not a property is within the
boundary of an historical (relevant) parish that continues to have the right
to charge chancel repair liability.
In our experience, the correct relevant historical parish boundary within
which a property is situated (rather than the more modern 19th century
boundaries) is rarely known, and adjacent properties can fall within
different boundaries. 5 Wordsworth Drive Eastbourne East Sussex BN23
7QP is a good example as, although its address refers to Eastbourne, it is
in fact within a different historical parish boundary - that of Westham.
Using local knowledge of parish boundaries (which have been altered
significantly since medieval times) can potentially place conveyancers
at further risk of a negligence claim. In fact, without reference to our
GIS mapping system (which is unique), it is not possible to determine which
historical parish boundary a property resides within without a visit to
the National Archives and a study of ancient maps.
I would point out that if a local solicitor only conveys property within
a particular area and that area is within the historical parish boundary
of a parish that continues to have the right to charge the results will be a
risk!
In addition, 35% of parishes are risk parishes so logically 35% (a
significant proportion) would come back as a risk parish. We have spent
considerable time and money researching this data and have in fact
reduced the risk profile as we have determined whether the Church
Commissioners, educational establishments or a third party are wholly responsible for
the chancel repair liability within the parish and removed these parishes as
risk parishes.
The statement by conveyancers that our reports are wrong is quite common
although it is the "knowledge" of the correspondent that is usually at
fault rather than our data and we respond to such criticisms daily and
in detail. We do not produce incorrect reports, and if we ever did the
company's Lloyds underwritten Professional Indemnity cover is £5m with
£250,000.00 per claim). We would be happy to double check but expect to find
(as we often do) that the local knowledge is less than complete and that the
incorrect parish or church has been researched.
2. We can arrange bespoke insurance quotes for instances where full
Chancel repair searches have been carried out. Our standard ChancelSure
Insurance pricing does not apply.
The somewhat more important points to consider when instructing a full
chancel repair search are as follows:
a) it costs more than insuring the risk.
b) if a positive result is returned under the Land Registration Act 2002, the conveyancer given notice of an actual overriding interest has an obligation to register it against the title. Going from a parish level screened risk to an entry on the title is highly likely to impact value, marketability and any current proposed sale.
c) insurance against a risk where there is an entry on the title is 6-10
times more expensive than with only a parish level screened risk.
3. I am unsure of how the correspondent can suggest that the chances of
registration by the church and subsequent claims to repair the chancel
are likely to be remote unless they consider that "hundred of thousands of
liable properties" are "irrelevant". The church act as trustees and so
have no choice but to register their interest against the title of liable
land.
At least 5 dioceses have already (7 years prior to the 2013 cut
off date) commenced active registration to date.'
