Land Registration (Network Access) Rules 2008

The noble Lord, Lord Henley, makes a good point about the electronic registration of existing entries on the register. I think that registration was introduced in 1925; certainly it was operative on a voluntary basis when I was engaged in conveyancing in the 1960s, and it was extended gradually over the country. I note that, even now, not all interests have to be registered. Presumably there are some areas of land that do not require registration now. Accordingly, it will be a very big job to cover the existing records. I imagine that it will happen as it did with registered land originally: registration will take place electronically only when there is some disposition of the property in question. Electronic conveyancing sounds very good, but what happens if the system crashes? I have been trying to find out where the liability lies from Schedule 2 of the agreement. The Monitor in this Room has failed at least twice today, and that is a good warning about what can go wrong. If there is no absolutely failsafe procedure as a backup to the electronic registration of land, all I can say is that future lawyers are going to make a fortune and I wish I could be there to see it. My next question to the Minister is about the voluntary nature of registration. It says in the Explanatory Notes that the intention is to have pilot schemes on a voluntary basis. Is it envisaged that at some point it will become compulsory to work through electronic conveyancing? I was at a breakfast meeting this morning at the Law Society, where the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, was promising us a technological future that will greatly increase the profits of lawyers; or was it that it would help consumers? I cannot quite remember. Something along those lines was said. The noble Lord, Lord Henley, raised the issue of whether it will be less expensive to convey property in the future. One other area of interest is the position of people who wish to do their own conveyancing. I have done so myself. I do not see any provision in the rules that deals with the position of a person who says, ““I think it is a very simple procedure now that it is being done electronically. I am a whizz with the computer. I can do it myself and avoid having to pay the expenses of a solicitor””. It is a considerable temptation to people in this day and age to do precisely that. Again, that is usually profitable to the legal profession, but still people should have the choice. Finally, it is all very well to have an electronic system, but a piece of paper in the hand is valuable and makes you think that you actually own the property. The deeds of my house in Gresford go back to 1805 and there are some wonderful parchments from that date that are prized. It makes you think that you own the place. I recall when I started in the 1950s and 1960s, the managing clerk had beautiful copperplate handwriting to engross conveyances. That gave a sense of ownership. However, there is a practical side to it. When one has a dispute with a neighbour about who must repair a fence that has blown down, it is handy to have immediate access to a piece of paper with a plan attached either to a land certificate or to a conveyance and to look at what exactly is there. Under the electronic conveyancing provisions, it looks as though one will have to go to a lawyer to get access to the system, so the lawyer can look and tell you, and he will charge you for that privilege. All sorts of practical questions arise when we come to dealing with the rules. They are only paving the way for more regulations in the future. Subject to that, we do not intend to object to the passing of the rules, but we would like clarification on my points.