NSW Help to resolve title issue-1888 owner still current

[Robbo]

Suburban property title dated 1888. The Owner died without a will in 1912 (his wife died 1897). There was no administration of the estate.
One of the 4 children (then 26 years old) assumes ownership of the property for the remainder of her life and dies in 1962, (having raised 8 children in the process). She possessed the title deed.
Her 7th child (aged 39) then assumes ownership from 1962 (at the direction made in her mother’s will) and continues to live for her full life (also) in the family home, until passing away in 2008.
Her only child (a great grand-daughter of the original owner) has been continuing to pay all running costs, etc. for the property since 2008, although unable to live at the home. She possesses the title deed, still unaltered since 1888.
We believe the suggestion of a possessory title claim is not achieveable due to the possession not being adverse. However, please do offer any alternative thought to this, which may lead to a claim for title.
Financial circumstances dictate that a final resolution to this matter has now become urgent.
Thankyou sincerely for your consideration in this affair - any guidance would be greatly appreciated.
Robbo.

 

[Tim W]

Suburban property title dated 1888. The Owner died without a will in 1912 (his wife died 1897). There was no administration of the estate.

Let's assume that you are referring to an intestacy that may not have been properly dealt with back in the day.
Let's also assume that you're not getting yourself into a tangle of terminology
that you've picked up from Google, and don't actually understand.

Consider that the current ("Torrens Title" system) started in NSW in 1863.
In those early days, conversion (a primary application) typically occurred as part of a transfer.
Such conversions continue to this day, albeit with fewer and fewer transactions each year.
So, a transaction that occurred in 1888 may not have been an Old System Transaction.

Even if the 1888 transaction was the first time that the land had been dealt in,
it is possible (even likely) that conversion occurred at the time of transfer.
So, even if there's a pretty document on parchment with ye olde lettering and language,
it could possibly be either a Torrens CT, or, if an Old System deed, one that has been
overtaken by history and is in in itself, inoperative.

Thing is, Old System deeds are a bundle of documents, in a date order, that give one a record
right the way back to the original grant.
One single document in that chain proves little, if anything.
A single document is more likely to be a CT... even if the family tradition has been to call it a Title Deed.

Transactions involving those very few suburban lots that truly remain on Old System title
(that is, that have not been converted to Torrens at some point)
are truly a job for a specialist.
This is especially so since there is clearly a complex history linked to the land and its occupants,
not least of which is a complex question of what might be several intestate successions.

You need a specialist property lawyer to sort this out.
Let me be clear - this is not a job for a mere layman conveyancer.
Yes, this will cost money.

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

I agree with Tim. Many years ago I did a couple of old system title transactions (albeit in Queensland). They can be complex - especially as time is generally not kind to the documents. Each link must be verified, and if it can’t it needs to be investigated to ensure proper continuity of ownership. The difficulties in compounding documents in chain of title was done away with by the Torrens titling system.

Interestingly, the compounding factor is the same as one of the potential difficulties in blockchain. The more transactions that are done, the longer and more difficult to verify the chain becomes.

 

[Robbo]

Thankyou Tim for your quick (and enlightening) response to our dilemma.
Yes, the mistake is mine in referring to the Title Deed, where in fact it is clearly the Cert. of Title complete with a Torrens registry vol. no. This is the first and only dealing after the initial grant.
Regarding your intestacy comment....in fact there is only one in that basket. Both the daughter and grand-daughter possessed wills, and I believe both were administered. The daughter did attempt to instruct affairs re-the property in her will, however I guess those wishes could not be enacted due to her not having title (although she clearly believed she “owned” the property, for whatever reasons).
I understand your direction to a specialist property lawyer, and also at some expense. Many thanks for your valued comments.

 

[Robbo]

Does anyone have another opinion regarding an alternate way to claim title to this property (other than possessory title)?
We need to act urgently to find a favourable solution if there is one.

 

[Deleted member 17143]

contact the relevant council to clarify title? Then once clarified contact a solicitor.

 

[Tim W]

contact the relevant council to clarify title? Then once clarified contact a solicitor.

Council is not the keeper of land titles.