Written evidence from Richard and Janet Woodward (MAR 08)
Manorial Rights
1. We wish to add our voices to the national campaign seeking abolition of the recently announced Manorial Rights registered by Lords of the Manor or owners of manorial properties, which has impacted on areas nationwide and has drawn negative responses from around 25 Members of Parliament, including Grant Shapps who wrote to Sir Alan Beith. Manorial Rights have, of course, already been abolished by the Scottish Parliament. This document is in accordance with the paper dated 20 June 2014 from the Justice Committee seeking submissions on the subject.
2. As owners of freehold property in the Handside area of Welwyn Garden City, we received notification from the Land Registry in October 2013 that the Marquess of Salisbury has registered manorial rights over this area, allowing him to hunt, shoot, fish and mine for minerals, including over our property. These liabilities were never raised when we bought this freehold property in 2003, nor were they identified at any time during the conveyancing process when we made the purchase. Accordingly, we completed form UN4 supplied by the Land Registry, seeking cancellation of the notice. The Land Registry responded in December 2013 inviting us to pursue negotiations, but warned about the potential cost of this process. We were told at the time that we should respond by 3 January 2014 when our objection would lapse, although this would not stop us from renewing the objection at a later stage.
3. The question was also raised about how much was known about this liability by the New Towns Commission and the local Council when Welwyn Garden City was established. The Land Registry believes these bodies were 'probably not aware'. Our local Council is the freeholder of all the leasehold properties in their area, and are therefore subject to this liability. This must be unacceptable.
4. When we became aware of this Manorial Rights issue, we wrote to the Marquess of Salisbury, setting out the basis for our objections, in particular the nonsense of historic feudal rights being exercised in this 21st century democracy. Our letter also highlighted the creation of our local Action Group pursuing our objections, also reflecting opposition in many other areas nationwide. The reply from the Marquess dated 22 January 2014 noted that he believes 'a campaign to introduce legislation to remove remaining manorial rights is entirely legitimate and such a campaign's initial task would be to persuade Parliament and Government to act accordingly'. This is what we are attempting to do with this submission.
5. Unfortunately this appears inconsistent with the Marquess stating elsewhere that, whilst he has no intention in the short term to exercise his rights, a time may come in future generations when circumstances may change, for example a new type of mineral may be identified which will be worth mining. This concept retains the liability over properties which will undoubtedly impact on values in the future.
6. We are aware that you must be familiar with the range of other documents and initiatives associated with this campaign against Manorial Rights, including the creation of an e-petition. Rather than reiterate them in detail which will add to your paperwork, we list them below. We subscribe to all these objections.
7. Key documents to be taken into account in the Justice Committee's considerations:
August 2014