Progress on UK probate delays

Emily Deane TEPUpdated 2 December 2019: STEP met HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) this week, together with The Law Society, and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.

HMTCS provided the following update on the Probate Service:

Timeframe

For personal applications HMCTS is now issuing grants in less than four weeks.

For professional applications grants are being issued within two to three weeks.

HMCTS issued 11,390 grants in the first two weeks of November.

HMCTS has identified that 16 per cent of stops are caused by a pending IHT421 and 11 per cent of stops are due to a missing death certificate.

The new online system will help to identify the reasons for other stops in due course.

Online system

HMCTS is promoting the use of its online system and is keen to see increased professional uptake. It is also looking at introducing a new paper form in the new year. Once introduced there will a transitional period to enable firms to implement.

The online service for Welsh applications will be implemented in the new year.

Customer Service

From 2 December 2019 the CTSC customer service centre will be open from 8am-8pm Monday-Friday and from 8am-2pm on Saturday.

If you continue to have issues with a probate application please contact HMCTS by email: probatefeedback@justice.gov.uk

Alternatively, contact STEP’s Policy Team and we will direct you to someone at CTSC who can assist.

STEP will continue to meet with HMCTS regularly next year to discuss future changes to the service and feedback from the industry.

Emily Deane TEP, STEP Technical Counsel

STEP attends Global Tax Advisers Platform conference in Turin

Emily Deane TEPSTEP attended the Global Tax Advisers Platform (GTAP)’s inaugural conference ‘Tax & the Future’ in Turin, Italy last week, alongside many leading European tax advisors. The event was hosted by the foundation of Confédération Fiscale Européenne (CFE) Tax Advisers Europe, which was celebrating its 60th anniversary (press release).

The GTAP was set up by the founding organisations, CFE, Asia Oceania Tax Consultants’ Association (AOTCA) and West African Union of Tax Institutes (WAUTI) in 2014 to facilitate networking links and enhanced dialogue between tax advisors throughout the world. Panel experts, including STEP’s Deputy Chair, David Russell QC TEP discussed a variety of prominent global issues including the future of global tax policy, the longevity of the global tax profession and business models and tax sustainability.

During the conference, the founding bodies of the GTAP signed the Torino-Busan Declaration, a binding document in which they define their main purposes: shaping the contemporaneous developments in the field of global taxation and ensuring the fair and efficient operations of national and international tax systems. GTAP sets out four key short-term priorities in the Declaration which include a focus on tax for growth, sustainable tax policies, tax and digitalisation and taxpayers’ rights and certainty in a fast-paced world.

The objective of the Declaration is to regroup the joint efforts of the GTAP members around these priorities, in order to draw attention on the need for recognition of the rights and interests of taxpayers, and the role of tax professionals.

STEP was a signatory to the Declaration and continues to promote the fair and efficient operation of national and international tax systems. A copy of the Declaration will be available on the CFE website in due course.

Emily Deane TEP, STEP Technical Counsel

EW probate delays: September update

Emily Deane TEPUpdate 21 November: HM Courts & Tribunal Service (HMCTS) has announced this week that all legal professionals’ probate calls have been centralised and are now dealt with by the Birmingham Courts and Tribunals Service Centre (CTSC). You will no longer be required to contact a local registry if you need an update on your client’s applications.

The CTSC will be able to confirm whether the application has been received, where the application is being processed, the current service level, when it expects the grant to be issued and whether a ‘stop’ is in place and the reason for it. HMCTS anticipates that the new process will allow the Registry staff resource to process your paper applications more efficiently.

The Probate CTSC helpline number is 0300 303 0648 and is open Monday to Friday from 9.30am to 5pm.

Update 22 October: HMCTS has confirmed legal professionals and personal applicants will be able to call the Birmingham CTCS from 4 November for an update on any application in England and Wales, provided it has been uploaded to its system.

The CTSC will be able to confirm:

  • if the application has been received;
  • where it is being dealt with;
  • the current level of service in that registry;
  • when its expects the grant to be issued;
  • whether a ‘stop’ is in place.

This information will be passed to the registry which will contact the legal professional/applicant directly.

HMCTS hopes to have the staff resource to open the Birmingham CTCS Monday to Friday from 8am to 8pm, and on Saturday mornings from 8am to 2pm.

Contact details for this service will be available shortly.

In the meantime, please email probatefeedback@justice.gov.uk for queries rather than contacting individual probate registries.

Update 10 October: STEP met HMCTS at its Birmingham office yesterday where a few key points were made:

  • HMCTS is now issuing almost 7,000 grants a week.
  • It is inputting information received within three days.
  • It has confirmed that the Birmingham CTCS office can be called for an update on any application in England and Wales. It has a proper telephony system, and an agent will always answer a call and have access to the central system.
  • If members use the new online service, they will be notified by email if there are any issues, rather than by post. This may accelerate the speed of their application moving forwards.
  • HMCTS hopes to have the staffing resources to open the Birmingham CTCS office on Saturdays from 8am-8pm shortly.

Original blog 10 September: STEP met HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) this week, together with The Law Society, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, and Solicitors for the Elderly, to obtain an update on the delays and disruption to the Probate Service in England and Wales.

HMCTS gave us the following update on work undertaken since our last meeting on 27 June.

Timescales

HMCTS is still receiving 700-800 applications a day from personal applicants and professional applicants.

It has processed 98,000 grants since April and has a backlog of applications from March.

It has increased staffing levels by 20 per cent.

It is striving to get back to its pre-March level of service, which was a 28-day turnaround for personal applicants and ten days for professional applicants.

It acknowledges that performance has not been acceptable but anticipates that delays will reduce over the coming weeks.

Stops/errors

HMCTS estimates that approximately 20 per cent of applications from professionals, and 25 per cent of personal applications need to be stopped for a variety of reasons. The most frequent problems are thought to be:

  • the IHT421 form has not yet been received;
  • not all executors have been accounted for;
  • the will has not been included;
  • names are spelt incorrectly; and
  • the forms have not been correctly signed.

The new online system (see below) will be able to more accurately identify the reasons for the stops and it is hoped this feedback will lead to fewer delays and a more streamlined process.

It is worth noting that when an application is stopped it takes some time for the registry to reconnect the paperwork. 

New system

The new online application system for professionals is due to be introduced by the end of October. Users will be able to register their organisation on the website, with no need for an invitation from the registry.

Each organisation will have a single login, to include all those using the service. Organisations will be able to suspend or terminate a person’s access if they are no longer using it.

Once registered, details of applications will be uploaded within 24 hours.

All of the main types of application will be available at launch, although some of the less frequently-used applications make take longer.

Key messages

HMCTS is encouraging registry staff to communicate via email, rather than post.

The digital pilot will be transferred in early October and launched by the end of the month.

HMCTS’ eventual aim is to digitally interact with HMRC on future applications, to reduce the delays and complications of paper trails.

The implementation of the new probate fee regime is not high on the political agenda, due to continued disruption and the prorogation of parliament.

HMCTS continues to apologise for poor service.

Emily Deane TEP, STEP Technical Counsel

EW probate delays and disruption: an update

Emily Deane TEPSTEP met HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) this week, together with The Law Society and Solicitors for the Elderly, to obtain an update on the delays and disruption to the Probate Service in England and Wales.

HMCTS gave us the following update on work undertaken since our last meeting on 14 May:

  • It has taken on 30 new staff since the transfer to the new system.
  • It currently has 180 employees working across the Probate Service.
  • It has recruited additional legal advisors with probate experience.
  • The registry with the most significant backlog is Winchester, which is sharing its work with other registries.
  • HMCTS is issuing approximately 20,000 grants a month, of which 12-13,000 are from practitioners
  • It is dealing with grants in date order, oldest first.
  • It does not prioritise grants according to urgency, and will not deal with applications more quickly by request.
  • It is entering caveats into the system on the day of receipt.
  • It will not refund probate fees due to delay.
  • It will issue grants of probate in approximately six to eight weeks.

STEP’s request for waived interest, or longer timeframe

STEP is aware that the delays are making it difficult for members to pay IHT on estates, since they cannot gain access to funds until the grants have been issued.

STEP has asked HMCTS to consult with HMRC on this issue, to see if it will waive the interest accrued on outstanding IHT, or permit a longer timeframe for paying by instalments. We stressed that this would help ease some of the time pressure and negligence concerns of our members, and generate some much-needed goodwill.

HMCTS anticipates that once its new digital system is up and running, there will be less scope for administrative and human error. Users will be able to track applications and make corrections online.

It will continue to accept paper applications for those less able to deal with applying online.

  • HMCTS is holding a webinar to demonstrate the new online system for professional users on 4 July.

STEP will be meeting HMCTS again in August for a further briefing.

Emily Deane TEP, STEP Technical Counsel

STEP meets HMCTS to discuss EW probate delays

Emily Deane TEPSTEP met HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) this week to discuss the backlog of applications and continued disruption to the Probate Service.

HMCTS representatives explained its old database needed to be upgraded, which had prompted the decision to move to digital software. The new system was scheduled to go live in January but was delayed until 25 March following technical glitches. HMCTS explained that it had not anticipated this level of issues with the technology, in conjunction with such a high spike in probate applications.

The following points were raised:

  • HMCTS has brought in 15-20 more people for the national office; a 10-15 per cent increase in those working on the backlogged applications.
  • The remaining probate registries will be closed over the next 12 months. Staff will be given six months’ notice and HMCTS expects to help them all find other roles in the civil service.
  • The new digital system is being delivered from the Courts and Tribunals Service centre based in Birmingham. HMCTS is keen to get more solicitors using the digital pilot, and will be looking for volunteers shortly. This pilot will enable solicitors to issue up to 250 applications per week.
  • Cases are taking up to 30 working days to be processed at the moment.
  • The Probate Registry will publish regular bulletins to improve communication with the public.
  • HMCTS assures users its existing Registry staff are working hard to get through the applications, and issued 960 grants on a single day this week.
  • HMCTS requests users not to chase applications, as they are being dealt with by date order.
  • HMCTS is currently up to date with caveats.

STEP expressed its disappointment that the court service was not better equipped to deal with the spike in applications. The Ministry of Justice had issued reassurances earlier this year that the court service was prepared for an increase due to the proposed increase in probate fees. STEP noted HMCTS was ill prepared to merge the new online system, change the format of the certificate, close registries and cut staff all at once. 

STEP repeated its suggestion that HMCTS should change the fee implementation date to the date of death for applications, to relieve the pressure and generate some goodwill amongst the industry and the public. The idea should be seriously considered, given pressure on practitioners and members of the public is considerable, and is causing a great deal of anxiety. 

STEP has also provided feedback to HMCTS on errors in the new-style grants that members have received, together with feedback on how they could be improved. We have explained why the will should continue to be annexed to the grant of probate, and the difficulties caused if it is not.

The Statutory Instrument to increase probate fees is still waiting to be scheduled for approval in parliament, and we will continue to monitor and report any developments (latest update).

Emily Deane TEP, STEP Technical Counsel

5AMLD consultation: STEP’s view

Emily Deane TEP

The UK Treasury has published a consultation paper on the transposition of the EU’s Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (5AMLD), which expands upon the scope of registration for trusts and widens the accessibility provisions to the beneficial ownership records. The 5AMLD Directive provides for public access, but it is up to each Member State to decide whether or not they will restrict this.

Express trusts

5AMLD will require that all UK express trusts register with HMRC, not just those with UK tax consequences (as was the case with 4AMLD). It will also bring into scope non-EU resident trusts that own UK land or property. STEP is concerned that under 5AMLD, a much wider range of trusts will need to be registered. Express trusts may include co-ownership of land, insurance trusts and other dormant trusts, which will significantly enhance the number of trusts that need to be reported. The consultation seeks to clarify the definition of express trusts, which we hope will provide some clarity and narrow the scope.

Access to the register

There will be expanded accessibility provisions. In the UK, the records will be accessible by law enforcement agencies, any UK obliged entity that enters into a business relationship with a trust, and anyone who can show that they have a ‘legitimate interest’ in the data. An exception is that if a trust has a ‘controlling interest’ in a non-EU company, then anyone will be able to access the information by making a written request and no legitimate interest is required. A trust will be deemed to hold a controlling interest in any corporate or other legal entity when the trust has 25 per cent or more of either the voting shares or other means of control over that entity as defined in the Persons with Significant Control (PSC) guidance. It is currently unclear how legitimate interest applications will be dealt with by the government since ‘legitimate interest’ is not defined within 5AMLD.

Legitimate interest

The government will need to decide whether or not requests for trust data meet the definition of legitimate interest. The current train of thought is that those with legitimate interest should be limited to people with active involvement in anti-money laundering or counter-terrorist financing activity, or those who have reason to believe or evidence that a particular trust or person is involved with money laundering or terrorist financing.

We hope that the government will require strong evidence of illegality and/or wrongdoing that clearly implicates the trust concerned before agreeing to consider a legitimate interest application. There are many people who seek to obtain confidential information about individuals and families with wealth for purposes other than the exposure of illegality or wrongdoing. People are often keen to obtain information about the affairs of the wealthy and those in the public domain, for example, and we are concerned that vague assertions of impropriety could be used to obtain confidential information about family trusts.

The consultation does, however, acknowledge that many trusts are used for children and vulnerable adults, and requests for personal information on either of these will be given ‘special consideration’ and will possibly even be withheld, which we fully endorse.

Registration deadlines

For trusts already in existence on 10 March 2020, the government proposes a deadline of 31 March 2021 for them to register. This gives a long lead-in time, given the greater number of trusts that will need to be registered.

For trusts created on or after 1 April 2020, the government proposes that the trust should be registered within 30 days of its creation. The government envisages that this approach will be the most straightforward, as registration can occur as part of the set-up process, when the required details should be readily available to trustees/agents. The proposal for registration within 30 days for new trusts means there is no single deadline each year and it seems sensible for the trust to be registered at the same time it is created.

It is also intended that this 30-day deadline will be used for any amendments that need to be made to the trust register data, for example, to update an address or change a trustee.

Penalties

Due to the fact that 5AMLD extends registration to non-taxpaying trusts, the government considers that the self-assessment penalty regime is not a suitable basis for the 5AMLD penalty framework. The new regime is also being consulted on within the paper.

STEP will be submitting a response to the consultation, which closes on 10 June 2019. The transposition deadline is December 2019, with an implementation deadline of January 2020. There is an extended trust register deadline for the UK of March 2020.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

HMRC’s five traps to avoid with CRS/FATCA reporting

Emily Deane TEPHMRC has identified the most common errors made by financial institutions (FIs) when filing their Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) returns, which include Common Reporting Standard (CRS) and Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) reportable information.

1. The FI misunderstands what constitutes an undocumented account

FIs are wrongly reporting accounts as ‘undocumented’ on the basis that a self-certification requested from an account holder has not been completed.

Accounts should only be reported as undocumented where they meet specific criteria, which include that the account has either a hold-mail instruction or a ‘care-of’ address. The full criteria can be found in CRS, Section III: Due Diligence for Preexisting Individual Accounts, subparagraphs B(5) and C(5). HMRC guidance is available at IEIM402850 and IEIM403040.

Any accounts that are correctly reported as ‘undocumented’ must show Great Britain as the residential country code.

2. The FI misunderstands what information is required to be reported 

Some FIs only complete the mandatory fields in the schema or portal, even though they hold additional information which is legally required to be reported. In addition, some FIs fill in mandatory fields with ‘n/a’ or similar.

CRS and the UK-US FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) state which information is required to be reported. Where a schema or portal field is not mandatory, there can still be a legal requirement to provide this information. For example, where a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) or date of birth is held or obtained by the FI, it is required to be reported even though it is not down as a mandatory field within the portal or schema. Where an address is held, the full address must be provided, even though the only mandatory field is for ‘city’ in the schema or portal.

3. The FI reports accounts held by persons who are not reportable persons

FIs are reporting publicly traded corporations, as well as related entities, governmental entities, international organisations, central banks, and financial institutions. In most cases, such accounts are not reportable. HMRC guidance at IEIM402010 outlines which accounts are not reportable.

4. The FI misreports joint accounts and/or partnership account

Some FIs confuse the treatment of joint individual accounts and partnership accounts.

Joint individual accounts must be reported as individual accounts with the entire balance or value of the account, as well as the entire amounts paid or credited, attributed to each holder of the account.

A partnership is defined as an entity for reporting purposes, and accounts held by partnerships should be reported as entity accounts, with the respective due diligence and reporting requirements applied.

5. The FI reports entities as controlling persons 

Some FIs report entities as the controlling persons of entity accounts, resulting in trusts and companies being reported as controlling persons. However, entities cannot be controlling persons; under CRS and FATCA, ‘controlling persons’ means‘natural persons who exercise control over an entity. In the case of a trust, such term means the settlor, the trustees, the protector (if any), the beneficiaries or class of beneficiaries, and any other natural person exercising ultimate effective control over the trust, and in the case of a legal arrangement other than a trust, such term means persons in equivalent or similar positions. The term ‘Controlling Persons’ shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the Recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force.’

Full HMRC guidance on AEOI reporting can be found at: International Exchange of Information Manual.

Please email Emily.Deane@step.org with any further queries.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

GDPR Roundtable

Emily Deane TEPSTEP’s GDPR working group recently hosted a roundtable event that enabled representatives from professional bodies, including the Law Society, ICAEW and CIOT, to update each other on their progress in relation to GDPR implementation. It is widely felt by the private client industry that when the legislation was drafted it was not designed with trust and estate practitioners in mind and there are some significant grey areas in practice.

Key issues that continue to be an industry concern discussed were:

  • How the GDPR applies to lay trustees and personal representatives.
  • How non-legal advisors process special category data.
  • How the GDPR impacts upon international transfers.
  • Queries in relation to joint data controllers and confidentiality.
  • GDPR and its impact upon engagement letters.
  • GDPR and its impact upon attorneys and deputies.
  • Erasure of files and filing system requirements.

STEP’s working group is in the process of preparing a joint paper that it will submit to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) identifying the practical issues that have arisen for trust and estate practitioners. We hope that the ICO will be able to address some of the gaps in the guidance and legislation.

STEP has scheduled another roundtable in February 2019 to further discuss these issues and aims, to provide STEP members with a best practice position and guidance in due course. In the meantime, STEP has published an update to its briefing note on the GDPR, listed below.

Please note that STEP will be publishing a webinar in January 2019, recorded by the chair of STEP’s GDPR working group, Edward Hayes TEP of Burges Salmon, that will offer some interim guidance on the application of the GDPR to trust and estate practitioners.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

Cross-border protection of vulnerable adults in Europe under discussion

Emily Deane TEPSTEP took part in the EC-HCCH Joint Conference on the Cross-Border Protection of Vulnerable Adults last week in Brussels, to discuss the ratification of the Hague Convention of 13 January 2000 on the International Protection of Adults (the Hague Convention) at EU and global level and the possible future EU legislative initiatives in this field.

The event, organised jointly by the European Commission and The Hague Conference on Private International Law, brought together legal practitioners, judges, academics and government officials who deal practically with the challenges associated with the cross-border protection of vulnerable adults in Europe and beyond.

STEP’s EU cross-border expert Richard Frimston TEP joined panellists to discuss the need for an international and regional legal framework for the cross-border protection of vulnerable adults from the perspective of organisations providing services and/or protection. Richard was accompanied by representatives from Dementia Alliance and Alzheimer’s Disease International, AGE Platform Europe, CEOs in global banking and the President of the International Union of Notaries (UINL).

Richard is the coordinator of the Protection of Adults in International Situations Project Team and spoke on behalf of STEP as a member of the Board and Co-Chair of the Public Policy Committee. He delivered some pertinent points on the need for a protective framework for our increasingly aged society and those living with disabilities, and their supportive loved ones, including family members and guardians, in accordance with their human rights.

He expressed concern with powers of representation which are generally not measures of protection, unless confirmed with sufficient legal process, and the manner of exercise of such powers of representation being governed by the law of the state in which they are exercised. He argued for more balance between the protection and autonomy of individuals, and called for improved methods of powers of representation to be accepted cross-border.

The conference emphasised that this work is invaluable since the Hague Convention determines which courts have the jurisdiction to take protection measures, and which law is to be applied in circumstances when a vulnerable person requires it.

Importantly it establishes a system of central authorities to cooperate with one another and locate vulnerable adults, as well as providing information on the status of vulnerable persons to other authorities. Although much work has been carried out already, more could be done to improve the quality of European law, increase practical guidance in the European legal field and enhance European legal integration.

STEP is asking members for any practical examples of when they have encountered difficulties in practice in relation to England and Wales not having ratified the Hague Convention. Please email STEP’s policy team if you have any feedback on this issue, at step@policy.org.

STEP will keep you updated on the outcome of these discussions.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

Government changes E&W probate procedure without consultation

Emily Deane TEP

This Blog was updated on 26/11/2018 – for latest developments, please see the update at the end of the article below.

The government has announced amendments to the procedure for applying for probate in England and Wales, with less than a month’s notice. The Statutory Instrument (The Non-Contentious Probate (Amendment) Rules 2018) will come into force on 27 November 2018.

The Rules were laid as a negative instrument, meaning they don’t need the approval of Parliament and have already been signed into law by the relevant Minister. The instrument can be annulled by Parliament before implementation, but this is rare.

In brief the amended rules:

  1. allow personal online applications for probate to be made by an unrepresented applicant;
  1. enable all applications for probate to be verified by a statement of truth (instead of an oath) and without the will having to be marked (by the applicant, solicitor or probate practitioner);
  1. extend time limits in the caveat process, which give the person registering the caveat notice of any application for probate;
  1. allow caveat applications and standing searches (which give notice of grants being issued) to be made electronically;
  1. extend the powers of district probate registrars equivalent to those of district judges; and
  1. make further provision for the issue of directions (instructions to the parties) in relation to hearings.

The Probate Service has accepted online applications from personal applicants (individuals not represented by probate specialists) since earlier this year, with a view to making the system simpler and ‘easier to understand’.

There are concerns that the introduction of the online service may discourage individuals from using a probate specialist where it may be advisable to do so, for example where the estate is taxable, has foreign or complex components, or may be disputed.

The announcement comes at the same time as the Ministry of Justice’s proposal to increase the probate application fee with a banded fee structure depending on the value of the estate.

STEP strongly opposed this new system when it was proposed in 2016, on the basis that it is disproportionate to the service provided by the probate court. It is effectively a new tax on bereaved families. The government intends to introduce this measure without any proper debate via Statutory Instrument (see STEP blog: The death tax returns).

STEP will continue to follow developments in this area.

UPDATE 26/11/2018

HMCTS has advised that they will shortly provide further information with regard to the template of the statement of truth, but at present it is their intention only to make small changes to the current oath format to ensure that it fits with the new procedure and to make sure that practitioners do not need to change the format completely. They will soon provide template wording that must replace the jurat at the foot of the oath, as well as wording to account for the removal of the need to sign the will.

HMTCS have also provided guidance on the changes to the way caveat applications can be submitted. This is as follows.

Please note the following changes to Rule 44 regarding caveats:

  • Rules 44(2) (b) and 44 (3) (a) and (b): Caveats can now be entered and extended via email as well as post. If the caveat is to be entered electronically, the caveat form should be emailed to the DPR solicitors enquiries address. The email attaching the caveat form should ask for the fee to be taken from your PBA account. The fee must be paid before the caveat is entered/extended and currently there is no provision to pay a fee electronically other than by use of a PBA account. The caveat should be in the prescribed form i.e. form 3 (precedent form number 41 in Tristram & Cootes Probate Practice, 31st Edition). Caveats received after 4pm will be entered the following day.
  • Rules 44(6),(10) and (12): The period for entering an appearance/summons for directions following a warning to a caveat is now 14 days (calendar days including weekends and Bank Holidays).
  • Rule 44(13): District Probate Registrars can now deal with all summons to discontinue caveats following an appearance – whether by consent or not. The summons should be sent to the registry where the grant application is pending and if there is no application pending to the registry where the caveat was entered.
  • Rule 44(14): District Probate Registrars can now deal with applications to enter a further caveat entered by or on behalf of any caveator whose caveat is either in force or has ceased to have effect under R44(7) or (12) and under R45(4) and R46(3). These applications should be sent to the registry where the caveat was entered.
  • R45(3) and R46(3): Registrars can now deal with applications under these rules.
  • R43: Standing Searches can now be entered and extended via email as well as post. If the Standing Search is to be entered electronically, form PA1s should be emailed to the DPR with confirmation that the fee is to be taken by PBA. The fee must be paid before the Standing Search is entered/extended and currently there is no provision to pay a fee electronically other than by use of a PBA account.

In addition, please note that caveats received after 4pm will be deemed as having been received on the following day.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel