Why does electronic conveyancing work in NZ and not Australia?

The kiwis show the aussies how its done

This comparative table explains a lot of things

In summary, New Zealand's electronic land registry system works.

Australia has the problem that it has 8 separate land title systems, rules and governing legislation. The banks work cross all borders. They cannot afford to buy into 8 electronic systems and also cope with 8 legacy manual systems.

For any government system of electronic conveyancing to work in Australia, the barriers to electronic conveyancing must be removed,

Elimination of the paper Title

The first barrier is the paper duplicate certificate of title. In NZ this was abolished in 2002, 4 years prior to introducing the e-Dealing system in 2006. It is an imperative the Australian jurisdictions introduce uniform legislation for the total elimination of the duplicate paper certificate of title. Wasn't this the system that Torrens had in mind in the first place in 1858? Yet what we have seen so far from NSW and Victoria is suggested hybrid systems of titles (a mix of paper and electronic). From the government's perspective, if the strategic goal is to automate the update of the Land Registry, first, the paper title must go.

Rationalisation of multiple jurisdictions

A single Land Register? Now this will never happen and e-conveyancing from a government point of view will always be hampered by

* multiple jurisdictions, rules and legislation
* multiple land registries
* politics of change

Creating a single land register makes sense, but it can be assumed "it wont happen in our lifetime". The Law Council of Australia is promoting the harmonisation of land laws in Australia, but State politics being what it is, again it looks like it wouldn't happen without a national referendum giving the Commonwealth power to be responsible for land management. The State's power to manage land is tied in with its powers to tax land and collect duties for land transfers.

The approach of a single State going it alone has proved one thing, this didn't work. Victoria tried this and was brought to its knees when the major banks withdrew their support.

However, where there is precedence there is hope. There used to be six separate State based stock exchanges, whereas they were all replaced by the one Australian Stock Exchange and the States acceded control of companies legislation to the Commonwealth Corporations Law. We can only live in hope.

Settlement

Its a straight forward observation but Government is responsible for running Land Registries and land registers. Governements have never been involved in settlements. Why the change?

In NZ, settlements are still organised between conveyancers and lenders. New Zealands e-Dealing system still respects the boundary between industry and government functions.

Yet in Australia there still persists this strategic goal to combine the settlements with registration. Yet this approach is flawed on several levels. Logically this approach cannot work unless every lender and every conveyancer was using the system. A 10% uptake is not enough. Government would need to mandate the system. So why the change? The lesson is government needs to remain focused on registration, not settlements.

Lessons from New Zealand

We can therefore see why New Zealand's phased approach has worked.

* Single register
* No duplicate title
* E-dealing. (settlements not part of the system)
* Mandate

More importantly, NZ had the foresight to deal with the elimination of the paper title as the first priority issue, which they successfully did in 2002, 4 years prior to introducing the e-Dealing system in 2006.

Elimination of the duplicate certificate of title is the greatest barrier to electronic registration systems. It is pointless for government to build an electronic registration system unless the duplicate is abolished. In Victoria, we have had a preview of the pCT and eCT, which is a hybrid system of paper and electronic titles. It just does not seem to make sense, just like the concept of being half pregnant.

Australia needs to focus on the following priorities

* Elimination of the duplicate certificate of title
* Introduce the standard xml title search
* Government restricts its side to registration matters
* Industry to develop its own collaborative systems between lenders and conveyancers

The vision is industry has its own framework of collaborative systems (shared workspaces, visibility of loan statuses and settlement booking systems). In addition, industry's strategic goal ought to be Unattended Settlements. An industry system of Unattended Settlements would therefore seamlessly dovetail with government e-registration systems.

So you have to give credit to the kiwis. They have shown the aussies a thing or two about making electronic conveyancing seem easy. As it should be.

Links to Articles

NECS - ECV

Safe Settlement Disbursements - NECS

Talks begin on national e-conveyancing system

Banks

Call-Centre Workers Suffer High Stress

Plan to reduce mortgage expenses

Jobs go at Westpac due to St George merger

Lawyers

Conservative lawyers struggle with Web 2.0

Estate Agents

Environment

The Cloud and the Paperless Office: It Just took 33 Years

Signatures on Electronic Documents

Paper conveyancing desperately needs to be overhauled.

Copyright ©2009 247 Legal. All rights reserved.

This email was sent to [email]. You can instantly unsubscribe from these emails by clicking here .