MANORIAL COUNSEL LIMITED
Dormant Manorial Titles
British-History Records
WARNING!
Often British-History have researched manorial titles (Lord of the Manor) up to a given year. Normally that year being some considerable time ago.
It would be easy to assume that as no further history has been written after a given date in the past about a title - that it is no longer being used? However, one would be wrong to assume that. Just because a manorial title appears to be dormant, it does not mean that it is. All it means is that British-History have not undertaken further research or if they have, then it has not been documented in the public arena.
Most manorial and feudal titles (Lord of the Manor and Feudal Baronies) belong to someone. (For example, many titles are held by the church commission, some by charities, others are held by the families of nobility, others are held by parish and county councils, many are held by universities, many go back to the Crown – many manors were absorbed by larger manors and when that happens the smaller manor title ceases to exist).
Many platforms try to sell manorial titles that do not exist. We have found that Manorial Counsel Ltd have been selling such titles. No doubt this company and their platform mislead their clients by telling them that it once existed? The problem for his clients is that the title does not exist. You cannot take a title name from a manor which was later absorbed. A manorial or feudal title CANNOT be recreated. There is no law allowing that. Speak to the staff of Michael Baxendale – Newhall solicitors office (in the UK) if you think that we do not know what we are talking about.
We have copies of the 'legal documents' that Manorial Counsel solicitors send to purchasers. They clearly mention 'Quiet Enjoyment' throughout, which specifically relates to a possessory title of the title name only. They do not apply any new rights. No solicitor or barrister can do that. Only the Crown can issue new rights. The two rights they are talking about come under the possession laws.
Jus in re propria - the right of enjoyment and ownership.
Jura in re aliena - without encumbrances and fear of challenge.
Manorial Counsel ltd mislead viewers on their website as it is a complete lie that the late Kevin Norris had advice from a leading barrister. Total lies as Michael Baxendale will happily confirm as well as the Manorial Society of Great Britain. The MSGB undertook research by contacting every barrister in London to see if any would confirm their dealings with Kevin Norris. None would even acknowledge knowing Kevin Norris or Manorial Counsel Ltd. Recently we also undertook the same research, but of every barrister in the UK. We too were told by every barrister that they did not know Kevin Norris or Manorial Counsel Ltd.
It is not a straight forward case of being able to claim the right over a manorial or feudal title name that appears dormant to the amateur researcher. Although, having said this, there are those individuals and companies who do exactly that, claim the right to use a title name without any proper research. Manorial Counsel Ltd, Nobility and even in the past people like Paul Dunkley who has a novelty title of Viscount of Mergentheim and some years ago this blog
King of Mann - Peerage to be announced
In which he gives a very simplistic dialogue of how to obtain the rights over a dormant title. This is very simplistic and not the legal way at all. Therefore, the title he has is of novelty value and the titles that he thinks he acquired legally and probably sold to unwitting purchasers are of novelty value to.
To claim possession over the name of a manorial or feudal title (and it is just the use of the name that is being possessed (Quiet Enjoyment) and not the lordship or barony, specific legal procedures are required. One cannot have a genuine lordship or barony without a complete set of deeds of previous legal holders from the issuance of the title and up to the current holder of today’s date).
One legal process is in making every effort to trace any potential holder and to show cross-referenced records of that search. Legal notices have to be placed in newspapers covering the parish in which it was registered as well as legal notices to reach as wide an audience as possible. The Official Gazette does not reach that wider audience.
Manorial Counsel Ltd think that by advertising a title on their website that that constitutes it being a legal notice. It doesn’t, and Michael Baxendale a leading lawyer in the UK of manorial law will back us up on that. Also, such a claim on a title name does not make it a title. It isn’t. It is purely the quiet enjoyment of the use of the name. The holder of such does not have a proper title and does not own any of the historical manuscripts held in archives. It is a title that misleads others who do not know how to check a title to see if it is valid.
We have been researching, in-depth, manorial and feudal titles for many years and over that time we have built a huge data base of manuscripts and archives showing who hold titles, legally. Plus, we have links to universities archives, national archives and county archives and parish archives in the UK. There are not that many titles which are actually available. Manorial Counsel Ltd have far too many titles for sale. There are not that many – so be warned. All Manorial Counsel ltd sell are novelty titles with fraudulently submitted notices on the Official Gazette which undermine those titles which hold full sets of deeds. Possessory titles are not in the same bracket.
A Lord of the Manor title with a complete set of deeds of previous holders up to the current date sell for £8,000 +
An English Feudal Barony with a complete set of deeds of previous holders up to the current date (which are very rare) sell for £100,000+
A Scottish barony with a complete set of deeds of holders sells for £95,000 +
A few years ago, a Feudal Earldom with a complete set of deeds of previous holders sold for £2 million.
So, you can see that these platforms that try to sell titles for £2,000 plus are out to rip you off. They are not genuine titles at that price. They are novelty titles which should not be any more than a few hundred pounds. Manorial Counsel ltd further misleads clients into thinking that they hold a genuine title by registering their title on the Official Gazette. These notices have been submitted fraudulently. The Official Gazette has also been misled by Hatton's solicitors.
Three platforms everyone should steer clear of are:
Manorial Counsel Ltd
Nobility
Noble Titles
Manorial Counsel Ltd in having their complicit solicitors submit notices of their client’s novelty titles to the Official Gazette fraudulently undermine those titles which hold a complete set of deeds of holders. It is for this reason that every title Manorial Counsel Ltd sells will be subject to negative publicity.
Anyone considering purchasing a title from them must bear this in mind.
Manorial Counsel ltd solicitors, Hattons, are acting in the same way as the solicitors detailed below who were reprimanded. We have more recent cases of solicitors being reprimanded for the same misleading sales and registration of possessory titles.
In re Roger Pitts-Tucker
Sean J Murphy
16 years ago
An article in the 'Law Society
Gazette' relating to a decision of the
Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), online at
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/in-practice/sdt-decisions/roger-pitts-tucker
'Roger Pitts-Tucker
'Thursday 08 October 2009
* Application 9722-2007
* Admitted 1973
* Hearing 18 December–13 November 2008
* Reasons 11 August 2009
'The SDT ordered that the respondent, of Pitts-Tucker & Co, 2 Priory
Court, Pilgrim Street, London EC4V 6DE, should be suspended from
practice for six months to commence on 1 March 2009. The respondent had
been guilty of conduct unbefitting a solicitor and in breach of his
professional obligation in rule 1 of the Solicitors Practice Rules 1990
not to do anything in the course of practising as a solicitor which
compromised or impaired, or was likely to compromise or impair, the
solicitor’s independence and integrity, the good repute of the solicitor
and the profession, and the solicitor’s proper standard of work in that,
in the course of practising as a solicitor for BFI Ltd and/or Mr B he
had acted in about 13 transactions in the period 1999 to 2003, the
details and circumstances of which were summarised below, whereby his
client had purported to sell and convey feudal titles to third parties,
notwithstanding that the transactions were dubious in that they bore
indicators of possible fraud as more particularly detailed below; the
respondent had known that to be the case; the respondent had known that
the purpose for which his client had involved him as a solicitor during
the above period was to lend credibility to the client and the
transactions, and he should have known that he was assisting the client
in taking unfair advantage of the other party to the transaction; he had
known that the other party to the transaction had no separate legal
representation, and had had no or no adequate opportunity to satisfy
themselves as to his client’s right to convey the feudal title or as to
the effectiveness of the conveyance before parting with their money; he
had known that his firm’s role in the transactions was being
misrepresented to the purchasers but had failed to take any steps to
correct that and had failed to advise them to instruct their own
solicitor; the circumstances were such that the respondent should have
suspected that his client was not intending to convey, and could not
convey, good title or, indeed, any rights to the feudal titles that were
the subject of the transactions; the circumstances were such that the
respondent should have suspected that the transactions were not
effective to convey the feudal titles; the respondent had failed to make
such enquiries as he should have made, as more particularly detailed
below, so as to satisfy himself as to the bona fides of his client and
of the transactions; the respondent had continued to act for the client
in circumstances where he should have declined to do so no later than
the autumn of 2002; he had made deceitful representations to third
parties and/or prospective purchasers calculated to lend credibility to
the transactions and/or to his client and/or to encourage the
prospective purchaser to enter into the transactions, not having known
that the transactions were dubious at the outset, but having come to be
apprised of their true nature; the respondent had made a deceitful
representation to Mr G as to the Law Society’s position regarding KGF’s
complaint; he had purportedly taken statutory declarations when the
maker of the statutory declaration had not been present and in matters
where he was acting for one of the parties in the transaction or his
firm was otherwise interested; he had purportedly witnessed the
transferor’s signature to deeds of transfer when the transferor had not
signed the deed in his presence; and further in conducting himself in
the manner set out above the respondent had acted with conscious
impropriety and therefore dishonestly (in that the respondent’s conduct
was dishonest by the ordinary standards of honest behaviour and he knew
that he was transgressing those standards). The SDT had concluded that
the feudal title transactions were dubious and that the respondent had
on a number of occasions been put on notice of that. Whilst there was a
market for such titles, it was a controversial, even eccentric, market
and it was the manner in which the respondent had allowed those
transactions to be conducted by ‘rubber stamping’ his client’s paperwork
that had compelled the SDT to conclude that the respondent’s conduct was
dishonest by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people. The
SDT was satisfied so that it was sure that the respondent had turned a
blind eye to the nature of the transactions, the nature of his
involvement in them and the questionable bona fides of Mr B and his
business. The respondent knew that what he was doing was dishonest by
those same standards. The SDT accepted that there was a time when the
respondent had not known that there was anything dubious about the
transactions, but that position had changed as the respondent had been
repeatedly put on notice of concerns about his client’s activities. The
SDT had carefully weighed the need to protect the public against the
respondent’s particular circumstances. It had taken into account the
fact that the profession’s regulator, while being fully aware of the
nature of the respondent’s conduct, had granted him unconditional
practising certificates and had permitted him to continue in practice
over a substantial period time. The SDT had found delay on the part of
the SRA in prosecuting the case and that was a matter to be taken into
account when deciding on the proportionate sanction to be imposed. The
SDT had also taken into account the respondent’s good character
exemplified by his references and that the conduct complained of was out
of character. The respondent was ordered to pay costs of £80,000.'
(End quote)
An earlier newspaper report indicated that Pitts-Tucker had been acting
for Anthony Boada of British Feudal Investments and that the 13 titles
'related to areas named as Bywell in England; Mount Nagle, Carrowreagh
and Clonakilty in Ireland; Clissa and Nona in Croatia; De Laci in
France; Halberstadt in Germany; and Bovanti in Albania'
(http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article5187689.ece)
In my article on Irish 'Feudal Titles' at
http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/feudaltitles.htm I had
concluded in 2003 that 'the statement that there existed a Lordship of
the Manor of Mount Nagle' was 'based on brazen fabrication'.
Sean Murphy
Solicitor accused of aiding ‘bogus’ trade in feudal titles – The Times
Posted November 19th, 2008 in disciplinary procedures, news, peerages & dignities, professional conduct, solicitors by sally
“A solicitor was accused yesterday of being at the centre of a dishonest trade in bogus feudal titles sold to Americans and other foreigners.”
The Times, 19th November 2008
Purchasers should always seek the advice of an independent solicitor/attorney before parting with their money.
THE MANORIAL SOCIETY OF GREAT BRITAIN
The Manorial Society of Great Britain is the Uk leading authority on manorial and feudal titles. They too give very interesting advice on buying a title.