Why HM Land Registry Property Alert Matters
A guide to HM Land Registry's free property fraud alert service, why it matters legally and practically, and how it compares to paid alternatives.
Table of Contents
Why HM Land Registry Property Alert Matters
Most homeowners never think about their property title until something goes wrong with it. That is precisely the gap HM Land Registry’s Property Alert service is designed to close. It is a free, official monitoring service for registered land in England and Wales, and it exists because property fraud, while still rare relative to the total number of registered titles, is neither hypothetical nor small. HM Land Registry has prevented tens of millions of pounds of fraudulent property applications every year in recent years, and the owners most exposed are a specific, identifiable group: people with mortgage-free homes, rented or empty properties, owners who do not live at the property they own, and cases where HM Land Registry only holds the property address itself as the contact address.
It is worth being precise about what Property Alert actually does, because the honest answer is more modest than it might first sound. The service does not block a fraudulent application and does not stop a registration. What it does is create an independent, low-friction early-warning channel. Any user can monitor up to 10 registered properties for free, and HM Land Registry emails them whenever it receives a relevant search or application against a monitored title. That single email, arriving at the right moment, can give an owner, a relative, or a professional adviser enough time to investigate, contact the named solicitor or lender, order official copies of the documents, and object before a suspicious matter becomes far harder and more expensive to unwind.
The stakes of getting this wrong are severe. Owners have found their homes transferred without their knowledge. Buyers have paid substantial sums to impostors. Lenders have advanced money against fraudulent mortgage applications. And victims have then faced years of litigation, possession proceedings, rectification claims, and sometimes insurance and repair difficulties even after the title itself was recovered. The cases later in this article, including a clergyman whose Luton home was sold without his consent and a case built on forged probate documents, show how quickly the consequences escalate once a fraudulent transaction gets underway.
The strongest legal value of signing up is not that Property Alert proves ownership or somehow stops registration on its own. Its real value is earlier notice. Earlier notice enables quicker fact-finding and, where the facts justify it, a written objection under section 73 of the Land Registration Act 2002, lodged before HM Land Registry completes the challenged application. The alert email itself identifies the type of activity, the applicant, and the date and time it was received, and HM Land Registry’s own guidance points users toward ordering official copies of the relevant documents. Together, that can materially improve both the speed and the quality of an owner’s response.
For most owners, and for the conveyancers advising them, the practical conclusion is straightforward. Sign up to Property Alert, keep the address for service on the register up to date, and add a restriction where the title carries higher risk. Property Alert is not a substitute for those other safeguards, but at zero cost, it is one of the most valuable first lines of detection available.
Letters can miss you. Decision letters, review notices, and requests for further information are sent by post. A letter sent to your old address is a deadline you never see.
Payments can be affected. Some benefits, Universal Credit in particular, are reassessed when your circumstances change, and a move counts as a change in circumstances. An outdated address means the DWP is working from incomplete information.
You stay compliant. Reporting a change of address is a legal requirement, not a courtesy, covered in the next section.
Once your DWP records are updated, SlothMove can help with everything else your move involves. As a home address updating service, we notify HMRC, DVLA, the NHS, your council, and your utility providers in one go.
What Is HM Land Registry Property Alert?
Property Alert is HM Land Registry’s own free property-monitoring service, and it covers registered land in England and Wales only. Two features make it broader than a simple owner dashboard. First, a user does not need to own the property to set up an alert on it, which means relatives, executors, attorneys, and other interested parties can monitor a title on someone else’s behalf. Second, the same property can be monitored by more than one person at once, so an owner, their solicitor, and a family member can all watch the same title independently.
The trigger behind every alert is HM Land Registry’s own internal processing system, not a separate consumer database. Under the service’s terms, a user receives an email whenever a search or a substantive application appears on the day list for a monitored property. That is what gives the service its authority: it is drawing directly from official activity that has already entered the registration workflow, rather than from open-source monitoring of the wider internet.
- Free to sign up and free to maintain, with no subscription or renewal fee
- Covers up to 10 properties per account
- Registered land in England and Wales only. It does not cover unregistered land, and it is not the Scottish or Northern Irish system
- A monitoring tool, not an ownership check. Anyone can add a title to their account, not only the legal owner
How it works: the alert types
HM Land Registry’s guidance breaks alerts down into five categories. Two of them, the search alert and the application alert, are the ones that actually carry fraud-prevention value. The others are more administrative but still worth understanding.
Alert type | What it means | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
Search alert | Someone is preparing to transfer or sell the property, create a mortgage, or grant or extend a lease. | Usually the earliest visible signal that a transaction is being assembled, often before anything is formally lodged. |
Application alert | HM Land Registry has received an application involving a name change, address change, transfer, mortgage application or closure, lease update, restriction, or correction of the register. | Shows that the matter has progressed from preparation into a formally lodged application. |
Closure alert | Lease terms changed, a new lease title replaced an old one, or a lease expired. | Relevant mainly to leasehold monitoring and general title housekeeping rather than fraud. |
Six-month summary | A summary of all recorded activity on monitored properties, sent automatically every six months. | Useful for periodic audit and account review, but it is not a substitute for reading and acting on immediate alerts. |
Added / deleted / password reset alerts | Account-management alerts confirming a change to the user’s own alert setup or password. | A useful account-security signal in its own right, particularly if a password reset was not initiated by the user. |
Every alert email tells the recipient the type of activity, who applied, and the exact date and time it was received. HM Land Registry is explicit on one point that matters for setting expectations correctly: not every alert indicates fraud, and signing up does not automatically stop fraud from happening. The service only works if the person receiving the email actually reads it and, where necessary, acts on it quickly.
The timing advantage is worth dwelling on, because it is arguably the single most useful feature of the service. HM Land Registry’s own official-search guidance recommends lodging a search at least five business days before completion to secure priority. Because search alerts are tied to that preparatory activity, a search alert can sometimes surface suspicious activity before completion money has moved and before the change has reached a final registration stage. That pre-completion window is one of the service’s biggest practical strengths.
Signing up
The official sign-up flow is deliberately simple:
- Create a Property Alert account
- Verify the account through the activation email
- Sign in and add the property or properties to be monitored, using either the address or the title number
A few operational details sit behind that simple flow. The account holder needs an email address and a password, and is responsible for keeping the account secure. HM Land Registry reviews accounts every six months and sends a six-monthly statement of activity as a matter of course. The service is intended for one account per user, and HM Land Registry reserves the right to close an account it believes is being misused.
Technical requirements and accessibility
The practical requirements are minimal: an internet-connected device, a working browser, a valid email address, and support for cookies, since essential cookies keep the session secure and functioning. Optional analytics cookies help HM Land Registry improve the service but are not required to use it. One point worth flagging for anyone advising elderly, disabled, or less digitally confident clients: HM Land Registry’s own accessibility statement confirms the website is not fully compliant with WCAG 2.2 AA standards. That does not make the service unusable, but it is a relevant consideration for conveyancers rolling the service out as part of client care.
Costs, scope and limitations
The service is free, full stop. It covers up to 10 properties per account, and it applies only to registered land in England and Wales. Beyond that, the limitations are worth stating plainly rather than glossing over, since an honest account of what the service cannot do is what makes the case for what it can do credible:
- It does not automatically block fraud or stop a registration from proceeding
- Not every alert email means something is wrong. Most reflect entirely routine activity
- It only works if the recipient notices the email and acts on it promptly
- It covers registered titles in England and Wales only, not unregistered land, Scotland, or Northern Ireland
- Service interruptions, internet transmission issues, or third-party service problems can delay delivery of an alert
- If a title already contains a long-standing historic irregularity, an alert service on its own cannot repair the underlying defect
Why Signing Up Matters in Law and in Practice
Property Alert is best understood as a notice-and-response tool. In property fraud, timing often decides whether a case remains a manageable suspicious application or becomes a contested registration and, eventually, a multi-year rectification and damage-limitation exercise. HM Land Registry’s own published example of a bungalow fraud attempt illustrates the point well: because the owners had signed up, they were notified, visited the property, found the locks had been changed and a For Sale sign had gone up, and HM Land Registry cancelled the transfer application at their request. That is the service working exactly as designed.
Fraud prevention and early detection
HM Land Registry has repeatedly described Property Alert as one of its most effective fraud-prevention measures, and its own guidance continues to link rising public take-up directly to fraud prevention and awareness. The practical prevention value comes from timing: because official searches are ordinarily lodged at least five business days before completion, a monitored title can, in some cases, generate a warning before completion actually happens. In fraud terms, that is a meaningful window. It can be the difference between stopping an attempted fraud outright and trying to recover a property after the money has already moved.
This is particularly valuable for a specific set of owners: those who are absent from the property, landlords, executors, attorneys, relatives of vulnerable owners, and owners living overseas. HM Land Registry’s own fraud-guidance material identifies exactly these profiles as higher risk, and its fraud-prevention guidance specifically recommends updating addresses for service and using restrictions where relevant. Property Alert complements those other safeguards by removing sole dependence on post sent to the property itself, which is precisely the channel a fraudster is trying to control.
Legal benefit in a dispute
The strongest legal advantage of Property Alert is that it improves the chance of a timely objection. HM Land Registry’s own objection guidance confirms that section 73(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002 gives anyone the right to object in writing to an application. Provided the objection is not groundless, HM Land Registry must notify the applicant, and the application cannot be completed until the objection is resolved, either by agreement between the parties or by referral to the tribunal.
Property Alert supports that process by giving the recipient the activity type, the applicant, and a precise timestamp. HM Land Registry’s own user guidance confirms the recipient can then contact the named solicitor, lender, or applicant, and can order official copies of the search or application documents using form OC2. Put together, that can produce a useful evidential trail very quickly: the alert email itself, any official copy ordered, the objection letter, and the subsequent communication history with HM Land Registry or the named applicant.
That evidential value should not be overstated. An alert email is not conclusive proof that fraud has occurred. But it is genuinely useful procedural evidence of three things: when the owner first became aware of the activity, what activity HM Land Registry had actually recorded, and how quickly the owner reacted once notified. In contested cases, those timing facts can carry real weight.
Compensation, indemnity and insurance relevance
Property Alert is not insurance, and it is not an indemnity policy. HM Land Registry states plainly that it will not automatically stop a change from proceeding, and commercial anti-fraud products in this space, such as Cifas Protective Registration, are equally clear that they are not insurance against loss.
Property fraud consequences, however, often do spill into compensation and insurance questions. Schedule 8 of the Land Registration Act 2002 provides for compensation on an indemnity basis where a person suffers loss because of a mistake in the register, including where a fraudulent transaction has been registered. The practical insurance implication of signing up early is therefore less about any premium discount and more about loss severity. Late detection can leave an owner facing a far messier claim landscape: possession proceedings, building damage, missing contents, litigation costs, and insurability problems. Earlier detection cannot guarantee a clean outcome, but it can materially reduce the time a fraudster, or an innocent third party caught up in the fraud, remains in occupation.
Real Cases: How Property Alert Could Have Helped
The following four cases are drawn from official HM Land Registry material and public reporting. Each summary is followed by an honest assessment of what Property Alert might have offered, framed as it should be: a reasonable inference from the official alert categories and timing guidance, not a guaranteed outcome.
Reverend Mike Hall and the Luton house sale fraud
Mike Hall, a clergyman, had owned his Luton home for around 30 years. In 2021, while he was away working, his identity was stolen and used to sell the house for £131,000 without his knowledge or consent. Land Registry records showed the new buyer registered as owner by 4 August 2021, and Hall only learned what had happened when neighbours alerted him on 20 August 2021, weeks after the sale had already gone through. A later investigation found his identity had been used to open a bank account and complete the sale, and police confirmed an arrest on suspicion of fraud by false representation, with broader investigations into similar fraudulent sales in the same area that summer. Hall eventually had his title restored, but he was still litigating for possession against occupants who had moved in under a bogus rental arrangement, finally winning outright possession in a county court in March 2025. He reportedly continued to face insurance and repair difficulties even after that.
How Property Alert might have helped: this is one of the strongest cases for the service. A search alert would likely have been the earliest useful warning, triggered once the buyer’s conveyancer or lender lodged an official search ahead of completion. An application alert would likely have followed once the transfer itself was lodged. Either alert would have given Hall an independent channel of warning that did not depend on a neighbour happening to notice unusual activity weeks after the fact.
Stanislaw Sokolowski and the inheritance-fraud title case
In a case widely reported in 2026, a fraudster exploited a forged or back-dated will and fraudulent probate, based on the death of a different man entirely, to have title assented and registered away from the real, living owner. Stanislaw Sokolowski returned home in January 2023 to find removal men emptying his house. The property had been sold for £550,000, and Sokolowski went on to incur around £150,000 in legal costs before a judge ruled in his favour in November 2025, in a case that resulted in rectification of the land register.
How Property Alert might have helped: had the title been monitored, an application alert should have been capable of flagging the transfer or mortgage activity once the fraudulent application reached HM Land Registry, and a search alert could have given even earlier warning if a purchaser’s or lender’s conveyancer had searched the title first. The case also illustrates the service’s genuine limit. If monitoring had been absent, or if the underlying fraud involved compromised probate and identity records that went unchallenged at the time, rectification could still require lengthy tribunal or court proceedings regardless of any alert.
Diane Moorcroft, Laylah De Cruz and the Kensington bridging-loan fraud
This is one of HM Land Registry’s own clearest published examples of how property fraud actually works. Diane Moorcroft impersonated the registered proprietor of a high-value Kensington property to enable a fraudulent application for a £1.2 million bridging loan. The property was an attractive target precisely because it was rented out, mortgage-free, high in value, and because the property address was the only contact address HM Land Registry held for the owner. HM Land Registry’s own counter-fraud team identified the application as fraudulent and cancelled it before the owner lost the property, although the lender had already advanced the funds. Moorcroft and her daughter, Laylah De Cruz, were found guilty on 16 January 2017 and jailed the following March.
How Property Alert might have helped: this case is a textbook illustration of why an owner should never rely solely on post sent to the property itself. Because the owner did not live there and had, apparently, only the property address on record, an email-based search alert or application alert would have created an entirely independent route to warning of the mortgage activity. HM Land Registry’s own fraud team caught this particular attempt regardless, but Property Alert would still have reduced the owner’s dependency on being reachable at the very address the fraud was targeting.
Tali Shani and the problem of deep historic identity irregularity
In Tali Shani v Chief Mike Agbedor Abu Ozekhome, HM Land Registry referred the matter to the tribunal on 27 February 2023, after receiving an objection to a transfer dated 17 August 2021 over a house in Neasden. The objection itself had been lodged in September 2022. Later commentary on the case revealed something more troubling than a simple impersonation of a known current owner: the tribunal found that the supposed prior owner, Tali Shani, had never existed at all, exposing a much older false-identity problem buried in the title’s history.
How Property Alert might have helped: only partially, and this case is as much a limitation case as a success case. If the person genuinely entitled to protect the title had already been monitoring it, an application alert could have flagged the new transfer application when it was lodged. But Property Alert is a tool for monitoring the present title going forward. It cannot, on its own, correct a title whose historical ownership identity is itself corrupted or fictitious. Fixing that still requires objection, tribunal or court adjudication, and careful documentary reconstruction.
How Property Alert might have helped: this case is a textbook illustration of why an owner should never rely solely on post sent to the property itself. Because the owner did not live there and had, apparently, only the property address on record, an email-based search alert or application alert would have created an entirely independent route to warning of the mortgage activity. HM Land Registry’s own fraud team caught this particular attempt regardless, but Property Alert would still have reduced the owner’s dependency on being reachable at the very address the fraud was targeting.
Case-to-alert mapping
Case | Most useful alert type | When it would most likely have helped | Strength of mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
Mike Hall, Luton | Search alert first; application alert second | Search stage before completion, then transfer-application stage | High |
Sokolowski | Application alert for transfer/mortgage; search alert if a buyer/lender search was lodged | At first lodged transfer or mortgage activity, possibly earlier at search stage | High, if monitored early |
Moorcroft / De Cruz | Search or application alert around mortgage activity | Before or at mortgage-application stage, especially where the owner is not contactable at the property | Medium to high |
Tali Shani | Application alert, only if the right person was already monitoring the title | On the new transfer application | Limited. Monitoring cannot cure historic title corruption |
The Numbers: Fraud Prevention Statistics
HM Land Registry’s own published figures show that property fraud, while still rare against the total number of registered titles, is a persistent and economically material problem rather than a hypothetical one. In 2022 to 2023, HM Land Registry reported preventing 41 fraudulent applications affecting properties worth about £18 million. In 2023 to 2024, it reported stopping 97 registered title fraud attempts on properties valued at £58 million. In 2024 to 2025, it reported preventing more than £59 million of fraudulent property applications. Looking across a longer five-year window, HM Land Registry said that between 2020 and 2025 it prevented fraudulent applications against more than 300 properties worth over £194 million in total.
A longer-run view points the same way. HM Land Registry stated in late 2024 that it had prevented more than £340 million worth of property fraud between 2009 and 2023, with more than £123 million of that figure prevented in the five years immediately preceding. These figures are not directly comparable to one another, since the publications use different time windows and slightly different framing, and that inconsistency should be acknowledged rather than smoothed over. Taken together, though, they point firmly in one direction: this is a persistent threat operating at real scale.
Take-up of the service has grown substantially over the same period, though the reported figures mix two different measures, accounts and active alerts, so they should be read as directional rather than as a single continuous series. HM Land Registry reported 160,000 accounts since launch by 2018. By 2023 it reported more than 1.25 million active alerts protecting properties across England and Wales. By 2024 to 2025, the number of accounts had risen by more than 100,000 during the year alone, to more than 798,000 accounts in total. The clear trend, on either measure, is upward.
The wider point these numbers support is simple: HM Land Registry’s prevention effort is not merely educational. It is actively intercepting fraudulent activity worth tens of millions of pounds every year. Because Property Alert is free and plugged directly into that same official process, the cost-benefit case for signing up is unusually favourable.
Best Practice for Homeowners and Conveyancers
For individuals
The best-practice combination for individual owners is straightforward and works as a layered set of safeguards rather than any single measure.
- Verify that the property is registered, and that HM Land Registry holds current addresses for service, including an email address. Owners can hold up to three addresses for service, including an overseas address, and fraud risk rises sharply when the only contact point on record is the property itself
- Sign up to Property Alert and actively monitor the linked email account. Because the service does not stop registration on its own, it only works if someone actually reads the alert and acts on it. A dedicated email folder, a safe-sender rule, and shared monitoring by a trusted relative or co-owner are all sensible steps, and HM Land Registry explicitly allows more than one person to monitor the same property
- Use a restriction on higher-risk titles. Owners who do not live at the property can apply for a restriction without a fee, and owners who do live there can also apply, usually for a £40 fee. A restriction goes further than an alert, since it can require a conveyancer or solicitor to certify that an application was genuinely made by the proprietor. For absent, tenanted, probate, vacant, or mortgage-free property, Property Alert combined with a restriction is markedly stronger than either measure alone
- React to a suspicious alert in a disciplined way. Contact the named solicitor, lender, or applicant, order official copies of the relevant documents, and contact HM Land Registry if the details are unrecognised. Where the risk looks real, object in writing promptly and take legal advice
For conveyancers
For conveyancers, Property Alert should sit alongside, not replace, professional identity and transaction-risk controls. HM Land Registry’s own evidence-of-identity guidance relies on conveyancers verifying clients’ identities to reduce the risk of registration fraud, and its digital identity practice guide confirms that conveyancers meeting HM Land Registry’s digital identity standard can achieve an enhanced status often described as safe harbour, provided they remain alert to suspicious transaction characteristics and make further enquiries where doubts arise.
- Advise every private client owner, landlord, executor, attorney, and overseas owner to set up Property Alert as standard practice
- Confirm that addresses for service are current, both before and after completion
- Consider restrictions where the client is not in occupation, or where other risk factors are present
- Use robust identity checks and, wherever possible, workflows aligned to HM Land Registry’s digital identity standard
- Treat a client’s suspicious Property Alert email as a matter for immediate triage, not ordinary correspondence
False positives and false negatives
It is worth being direct about the service’s main false-positive risk, because it is built into the design rather than being a flaw: not every alert means fraudulent activity has occurred. Routine remortgages, legitimate address changes, lease updates, restrictions, register corrections, and other ordinary title-management events all trigger the same alert types as genuine fraud. A false positive is simply the natural by-product of a system designed to warn early rather than to wait for certainty.
False negatives are the more concerning limitation. Property Alert only watches registered titles, and it only fires on activity that reaches HM Land Registry’s own searches and applications pipeline. On its own, it will not warn about a fraudulent listing on a property portal, suspicious activity at Companies House, or identity misuse elsewhere in the fraud chain, unless and until that conduct eventually translates into activity HM Land Registry actually processes. There is also a behavioural false negative worth planning around: an owner may receive a perfectly good alert but fail to spot it, understand it, or act in time. HM Land Registry itself notes that delivery can be delayed by internet transmission or third-party service issues, and the site is not fully WCAG 2.2 AA compliant. Both are practical reasons to build redundancy into monitoring arrangements for higher-risk properties, rather than relying on a single person checking a single inbox.
Privacy and data protection
HM Land Registry’s terms confirm that Property Alert holds the user’s email address, password, postal address, and, if provided, a telephone number, and that this information is used to create and manage the account, provide alerts, contact the user, and help prevent and detect crime. The service relies on essential cookies for security and functionality, with optional analytics cookies used only for service improvement.
Two privacy points are worth flagging clearly, because they will genuinely surprise some users. First, HM Land Registry may retain and share information with other government departments, law-enforcement and regulatory bodies, including specified anti-fraud organisations, for the purpose of preventing and detecting crime. Second, and more strikingly, HM Land Registry’s terms state that it may provide personal information details if a third party asks who has set up a Property Alert against a specific title number. That is worth understanding before signing up, particularly in family or protective monitoring arrangements where the relationships involved are sensitive.
How Property Alert Compares to Paid Alternatives
The following is a compact implementation list for an individual owner, or for a conveyancer advising a client.
Action | Why it matters |
|---|---|
Check that the property is registered | Property Alert only works on registered titles |
Update all addresses for service with HM Land Registry | Fraud risk worsens when HM Land Registry can only write to the property itself |
Create a Property Alert account, verify the email, and add the title | This activates the monitoring |
Use an email account you actually monitor, with a safe-sender rule for HM Land Registry alerts | The service only helps if the alert is seen and acted on |
For higher-risk titles, add a restriction as well | Restrictions add a stronger control than alerting alone |
If an alert is suspicious, contact the named applicant, solicitor or lender, order document copies, and contact HM Land Registry promptly | Speed matters |
If needed, make a written objection before completion of the challenged application | A non-groundless objection prevents completion until the matter is resolved |
For conveyancers, use robust identity workflows and, where possible, HM Land Registry’s digital identity standard | Reduces fraud exposure and improves the defensibility of the transaction process |
Quick-Reference Checklist
The following is a compact implementation list for an individual owner, or for a conveyancer advising a client.
Action | Why it matters |
|---|---|
Check that the property is registered | Property Alert only works on registered titles |
Update all addresses for service with HM Land Registry | Fraud risk worsens when HM Land Registry can only write to the property itself |
Create a Property Alert account, verify the email, and add the title | This activates the monitoring |
Use an email account you actually monitor, with a safe-sender rule for HM Land Registry alerts | The service only helps if the alert is seen and acted on |
For higher-risk titles, add a restriction as well | Restrictions add a stronger control than alerting alone |
If an alert is suspicious, contact the named applicant, solicitor or lender, order document copies, and contact HM Land Registry promptly | Speed matters |
If needed, make a written objection before completion of the challenged application | A non-groundless objection prevents completion until the matter is resolved |
For conveyancers, use robust identity workflows and, where possible, HM Land Registry’s digital identity standard | Reduces fraud exposure and improves the defensibility of the transaction process |
Service | Coverage | Price | Key strengths |
|---|---|---|---|
HM Land Registry Property Alert | Registered land, England and Wales; up to 10 properties; user need not own the title | Free | Official, free, and tied directly to HM Land Registry’s own registration workflow |
Title Guardian | Homeowners, landlords and portfolios; monitors HM Land Registry, Companies House, and online sales and lettings portals | £49.99 per year for a single property, with lower per-property rates for portfolios | A wider monitoring footprint than HM Land Registry alone, plus multi-channel email, SMS and app-push notifications |
Cifas Protective Registration | Individuals at heightened identity-fraud risk; not title-specific | £30 for two years | Useful where identity documents have already been compromised, as a complement to title monitoring |
Experian Identity Plus | Consumer identity protection; not title-specific | £10.99 per month after a 30-day trial | A good fit where the underlying concern is wider identity theft rather than title events specifically |
What our customers say
FAQs
Is HM Land Registry Property Alert really free?
Yes. There is no charge to create an account, verify it, or monitor up to 10 registered properties in England and Wales.
Does Property Alert stop someone from selling or mortgaging my property fraudulently?
No. It does not block or automatically stop an application. It sends an email when relevant activity appears on HM Land Registry’s day list, so the value depends entirely on the recipient noticing the alert and acting quickly.
Do I need to own the property to set up an alert on it?
No. Anyone can set up monitoring on a title, which is why relatives, executors and attorneys often register alerts on behalf of an owner who is elderly, vulnerable, or living overseas.
What should I do if I receive a Property Alert email I do not recognise?
Contact the named solicitor, lender or applicant shown on the alert, order official copies of the relevant search or application using form OC2, and contact HM Land Registry directly. If the activity looks genuinely suspicious, take legal advice promptly on lodging a written objection before the application completes.
Can I object to a Land Registry application once I receive an alert?
Yes. Section 73(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002 gives anyone the right to object in writing. If the objection is not groundless, HM Land Registry must notify the applicant and cannot complete the application until the objection is resolved, either by agreement or referral to the tribunal.
Does Property Alert cover unregistered land, or property in Scotland or Northern Ireland?
No. It only covers registered titles in England and Wales.
Is Property Alert a substitute for title insurance or an indemnity policy?
No. Property Alert is a monitoring and notification service, not insurance. Compensation for loss caused by a mistake in the register, including a registered fraudulent transaction, falls under Schedule 8 of the Land Registration Act 2002, which is a separate legal route.
Who is most at risk of property fraud, and should they do anything beyond signing up?
HM Land Registry’s own guidance flags mortgage-free homes, rented or empty properties, owners who do not live at the property, and titles where the property address is the only contact address as higher risk. For these titles, adding a restriction alongside Property Alert gives a materially stronger layer of protection than either measure alone.
About SlothMove
SlothMove has helped over 75,000 UK residents update their address across government and private organisations since 2019. We are an ICO-registered data controller, GDPR compliant, and backed by Taylor Rose MW, one of the UK’s
leading conveyancing firms.