‘Tax fraud usually involves either positive deception of the tax authorities or breach of duties of disclosure imposed by the tax legislation. It will usually, therefore, involve the commission of fraud by false representation, fraud by failing to disclose information or both. Often the particular form of deception adopted will give rise to liability for false accounting, forgery or the making of false statements contrary to the Perjury Act 1911 section 5(b).’ (Arlidge And Parry on Fraud, Sixth Edition (2020), by Jonathan Fisher KC, HHJ Alexander Milne KC, Jane Bewsey KC, and Andrew Herd, Sweet & Maxwell, paragraph 14-001). See also chapter 4 – ‘False representations and deception.’ Note, that section 2(3) of the Fraud Act 2006 (‘FA 2006’) provides that, ‘Representation’ means ‘any representation’ but does not say what a representation is. Section 2 of FA 2006 provides:

‘Fraud by false representation

(1)     A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)     dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation—

• to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)     to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2)     A representation is false if—

(a)     it is untrue or misleading, and

(b)     the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3)     “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

(a)     the person making the representation, or

(b)     any other person.

(4)     A representation may be express or implied.

(5)     For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).’

Therefore, the ‘legal meaning of the word representation is wider than its ordinary meaning. … In the civil law of misrepresentation … A representation can certainly be implied rather than express. Less obviously, a representation in the legal sense need not be a statement at all. It is sufficient that D has led V to believe that something is true, without in any real sense asserting it to be true.’ (Arlidge And Parry, paragraph 4-008).

My new ‘in-depth’ article for Trusts & Trustees (Oxford University Press) –
Title: ‘Mediating probate & trust disputes – process challenges & tools’ – Part 1.
Abstract:
‘While it is not the function of a mediator to speak truth to power, a mediator can facilitate the re-framing of a dispute as an opportunity, by enabling each participant to think about what is important to them, so that the participants can jointly agree upon a ‘methodology’ i.e. a ‘road map’ for convergence and consensus. This requires a ‘paradigm shift’, i.e. acceptance by each participant that there is a better way of resolving their dispute than proceeding to trial. In Part 1 the author discusses the benefits of mediation, the process, ground-rules, and how best to prepare for the mediation day. In Part 2 (to be written in 2023), the author will discuss the challenges throughout each phase of the mediation day, and the tools available to a mediator to help engineer a sudden outbreak of common sense in a probate and trust dispute.’

The article is now in production and scheduled for publication on line in December, and in the journal worldwide, in February. Following publication I will post details for where a link to the article can be found on my website www.carlislam.co.uk. Part 2 of the article is on schedule to be written before May next year.
I am also completing the writing of an article for Taxation (Tolley) about the mediation of tax disputes. I am planning to submit this for final editorial approval and proof-reading at the end of November, for publication before Christmas. The title of the article is, ‘Follow the Yellow Brick Road – Off to Mediation with HMRC.’

1st – enquire about what each participant’s [‘P’s] conclusions are about the facts on the ground following inspection & investigation & during a pre-mediation day zoom call separately with each P, invite them to state this in their Position Paper.
2nd – Also invite each P to state in their Position Paper, what legal remedies/defences are claimed – i.e. what is each P’s Position about the applicable legal principles?
3rd – Reality-test each proposition in private sessions, in order to obtain acknowledgment by each P that there is an unquantifiable element of legal risk for both of them if they litigate.
4th – Enable the joint development by the P’s of a bespoke practical framework to be used as a road-map for the amicable and practical resolution of the dispute by asking each P:
“Are you ready & willing to collaborate as neighbours in the development of a road-map for settlement, by isolating and agreeing the key issues and principles that need to be aired, discussed, and agreed, in order to unlock the dispute and thereby establish/create building-blocks for an overall settlement that is enough for both of you and practical?”
5th – Enquire with each P about what they want? – i.e. what are each P’s primary underlying interests, concerns, needs & priorities?
6th – Invite each P to consider & propose a practical solution.
7th – Enquire with each P about what needs to be done in order to do a deal e.g. an application to HM Land Registry following settlement to regulate the situation & avoid a future dispute.

General principles

What follows is a summary of general principles in an ‘Adverse Possession’ / ‘Prescription’ claim.

Rules of prescription perform the important function of preventing ‘the disturbance of long-established de facto enjoyment.’ (R v. Oxfordshire CC Ex P. Sunningwell PC [2000] 1 A.C. 335 at 349 per Lord Hoffman).

Prescription and limitation are in many ways similar principles, but as the law has developed they have become quite distinct.

Whereas prescription is acquisitive, limitation is prescriptive, i.e. adverse possession of land for 12 years extinguishes the previous owner’s title, leaving the adverse possessor with a title based on his or her own actual possession.

Adverse possession arises from the law of limitation of actions.

Limitation is a rule of litigation that prevents the recovery of land from a trespasser after a certain period of time has elapsed.

By limitation a person [‘P’] may acquire the land of another by adverse possession for a period of 12 years.

A person who has been adverse possession of unregistered land for the limitation period does not just bar the right of action for its recovery. He or she extinguishes the landowner’s title.

Land Registry Practice Guide 4 states:

‘Adverse possession requires factual possession of the land, with the necessary intention to possess and without the owner’s consent. You must show … adverse possession for at least 10 years … ending on the date of the application (Schedule 6, paragraph 1(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002).’

The LRA 2002 came into force on 13 October 2003.

As a result of LRA 2002 Schedule 12, paragraph 18(1), the rights of a claimant who has completed 12 years of adverse possession (so that the section 75(1) trust had come into existence) on or before 12 October 2003 are preserved. The trust is removed by the repeal of section 75 of the 1925 Act, and the adverse possessor retains the right (originally conferred by section 75(2)) to be registered as proprietor. The entitlement to be registered as proprietor ‘of the estate’ confirms that a statutory transfer takes place.

In other words, where title to land is registered, and P is able to demonstrate that as at 13 October 2003, i.e. the date when the Land Registration Act 2002 came into force, he/she had been in adverse possession for 12 years or more, then P is entitled to be registered as the proprietor of the land.

This right of registration subsists indefinitely against the registered proprietor who is holding on trust.

The right of registration also operates as an overriding interest, and will bind a purchaser for value provided P was in actual occupation of the land, but not if the occupation ‘would not have been obvious on a reasonably careful inspection of the land at the time of the disposition ’and the purchaser ‘does not have actual knowledge’ of that person’s interest (LRA 2002, schedule 3, paragraph 2).

The register can be altered to correct a mistake arising from pre-registration adverse possession.

In relation to boundary disputes, LRA 20002, Schedule 6, paragraph 5(4) provides:

‘The third condition is that—

(a)       the land to which the application relates is adjacent to land belonging to the applicant,

(b)       the exact line of the boundary between the two has not been determined under rules under section 60,

(c)        for at least ten years of the period of adverse possession ending on the date of the application, the applicant (or any predecessor in title) reasonably believed that the land to which the application relates belonged to him, and

(d)       the estate to which the application relates was registered more than one year prior to the date of the application.’

Prescription acts or operates positively, so as to create a new title. This is brought about by presuming a grant, as ‘all prescription presupposes a grant.’ (Gardner v. Hodgson’s Kingston Brewery Co Ltd [1903] A.C. 229 at 239 per Lord Lindley).

The court may presume, on proof of the fact of long enjoyment, that there once was an actual grant of the right, even though it is impossible to produce any direct evidence of such a grant. It is then ‘the habit, and in my view, the duty of the court, so far as it lawfully can do, to clothe the fact with a right.’ (Moody v. Streggles [1879] 12 Ch. D 261 at 265 per Fry J). Please also note reversal of the burden of proof in a claim based upon prescription, see paragraph 4-119 of ‘Gale on Easements’, 21^st Edition, by Jonathan Gaunt QC and The Honourable Mr Justice Morgan (who is a High Court Judge) (2020), Sweet & Maxwell.

By prescription one person may acquire rights such as easements over the land of another.

‘Prescription is another way in which an easement … can come into existence even though there has been no express grant. If the landowner makes use of a neighbour’s land for a long period without permission, openly and peaceably, in a way that could amount to an easement, the law of prescription may create an easement, appurtenant to the user’s freehold estate in land. … The fiction of grant determines the quality of use required in order to found a claim to a prescriptive easement. The claimant’s use of the neighbouring land must have been  “as of right” or, more helpfully, “as if of right”, in other words, the claimant must have used the land as if he or she was entitled to do so by virtue of an easement already granted to him or her. [“That is to say, openly and in the manner that a person rightfully entitled would have used it.” (R (Lewis) v. Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council (No.2) [2010] UKSC 11, [2010] 2 AC 70 at [67] by Lord Hope]. The English courts have taken the definition of use as of right from Roman law and so have taken it to mean that the use must not be by force, nor by stealth, nor by permission.’ (The Law Commission Report – Making Land Work: Easements, Covenants And Profits A Prendre’, 07 June 2011 (Law Com No.327), paragraphs 3.71 and 3.89).

Paragraph 1-01 of ‘Gale on Easements’ states, ‘An easement is a right over the land of another. … it is a proprietary, not a personal, right and will therefore bind successors to the servient land [i.e. the land which is subject to the easement] and enure for the benefit of successors to the dominant land.’

While the right must be within the general nature of rights capable of being created as an easement, there is no precise definition, and the list is not closed.

Paragraph 4-01 of ‘Gale on Easements’, states:

‘Prescription may be defined as: a title acquired by use or enjoyment had during the time and in the manner fixed by law.’  Land Registry Practice Guide 52 states:

‘There is no requirement for register entries to be made in respect of prescriptive easements. The benefit of all interests subsisting for the benefit of an estate vests in the registered proprietor on first registration (sections 11(3) and 12(3) of the Land Registration Act 2002) and will then pass on a transfer of the registered estate. Easements arising by common law prescription or the doctrine of lost modern grant will be legal interests. The purchaser of unregistered burdened land is bound by legal interests. Following first registration of the burdened land most legal easements are overriding interests (section 29 and Schedule 3 of the Land Registration Act 2002) and so capable of binding successive registered proprietors of the burdened land. The use must be without force, without secrecy and without permission (nec vi, nec clam, nec precario). Use while the same person is in possession of the benefitting and the burdened land cannot be use as of right. A registered proprietor may apply to be registered as proprietor of a legal easement appurtenant to their registered estate. In other words, they may apply to register the benefit of the easement. If the application is in order and, from the evidence we have seen, we consider it to be more likely than not that the claimant is entitled to apply to be so registered, we serve notice of the application on the registered proprietor of the burdened land and on other persons, such as registered charges, who appear from the register to be interested in the land. Provided we receive no objection to the notice or notices, we make an entry in the property register for the benefitting land to the effect that this land has the benefit of the easement. If the benefitting land is only part of the land in the title, the entry specifies the part of the registered title that has the benefit of the easement. Such an entry guarantees the existence of the right for the purpose of the indemnity provisions of the Land Registration Act 2002. At the same time, we enter a notice in the charges register for the burdened land. If the burdened land is only part of the land in the title, the entry specifies the part of the registered title that is subject to the easement.’

Interference with an easement, gives rise to an action in the tort of nuisance.

A land obligation is an interest in land. Therefore, the primary remedy for breach is an injunction, as confirmed by the Court of Appeal in Watson v. Croft Promo-Sport Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 15, where Sir Andrew Morritt VC reiterated that an injunction should be refused only in exceptional cases.

Evidence

‘Although the register is conclusive as to title, it is not normally conclusive as to boundaries, because, except in the rare cases where the boundary has been determined, the register does not determine the exact line of the boundary. In relation to boundaries, therefore, acquisition of title by adverse possession can be justified for much the same reasons as it can in relation to unregistered land, and, in particular, it quiets title. The Land Registration Act 2002 permits a person to acquire title solely on the ground of adverse possession where [P] can establish the following:

(i) The land to which the application relates is adjacent to land belonging to the applicant. This requirement restricts the condition to boundary disputes. [LRA 2002, Schedule 6, paragraph 5(4)(a)].

(ii) The exact line of the boundary between the two properties has not been determined under the procedure provided for In the Act And the Rules. [LRA 2002, Schedule 6, paragraph 5(4)(b)]. In other words, the condition applies only to a general boundary. Once a boundary has been determined in accordance with the statutory procedure [under LRA 2002 s.60(3), (4) LRR 2003 rr. 118-122], The register is conclusive and the justification for the third condition no longer exists.

(iii) That [P] or a predecessor in title has not only been in adverse possession for at least 10 years ending on the date of the application, but for at least 10 years of that period, [P] or her predecessor in title reasonably believed that the land to which the application related belonged to her. This mental element is the most important requirement of this condition and it means that the period of adverse possession necessary to support the condition will in fact have to be longer than 10 years. The period of reasonable belief as to ownership must last for 10 years. That period of reasonable belief will come to an end once [P] becomes aware that she does not own the land. Only then will [P] realise that an application for registration must be made, and she must remain in adverse possession until she makes an application, unless she is evicted by the registered proprietor otherwise than pursuant to a judgement for possession, and on the day before the eviction [P] satisfied this mental element.

(iv) The estate to which the application relates must have been registered more than one year prior to the date of the application. This requirement is intended to meet the situation which would arise where title to unregistered land was first registered at a time when [P] had been in adverse possession of that land for more than 10 years but less than 12 years. But for this provision, [P] could apply to be registered as proprietor as soon as the title was registered even though she had not extinguished the unregistered title by adverse possession prior to 1st registration. In that situation, by reason of this requirement, the registered proprietor has a period of one year after first registration to terminate [P‘s] adverse possession, whether by seeking possession or by granting [P] a lease or licence. … The third condition will commonly apply in cases where the legal and physical boundaries of land do not coincide. Sometimes this happens because, e.g. on the construction of new housing, the fences or walls between the different lots are constructed in the wrong place. It can also happen, where the legal boundary does not follow the natural features of the land.’ (‘Megarry & Wade – The Law of Property’, 9th edition, by Stuart Bridge, Elizabeth Cooke and Martin Dixon, Sweet & Maxwell (2019), paragrpah 7-097).

Practical principles to be agreed in relattion to the land in dispute

The following are examples:

• In a dispute about adverse possession and prescription, that the age of a line of trees located along/within the line of the disputed boundary, is evidence of the the length of time that they have been planted in the ground, and possibly of maintenance, as logically, they would be higher unless they had been maintained.
• In a dispute about the ownership and preservation of a tree, because of the need for there to be a minimum distance between the tree and the erection of a boundary fence in order to protect the roots, and prevent the tree from becoming unstable, that a sufficient space needs to be left and agreed e.g. of 1-10 feet.

‘The General Boundary Rule.’

Even where land is shown on the file plan, this is subject to the General Boundaries Rule in s.60 of the 2002 Act.

S.60 provides as follows:

“(1) the boundary of a registered estate as shown for the purposes of the register is a general boundary, unless shown as determined under this section. (2) a general boundary does not determine the exact line of the boundary”.

‘Boundary agreements’

‘Registration with general boundaries is sufficient for the majority of titles. However, there are occasions where an owner might require something more precise. There are 2 main ways to achieve this: entering into a boundary agreement or having a determined boundary.

Two or more sets of owners may come to an agreement about the boundary between their properties. The agreement can deal with the position of the legal boundary, or the maintenance of a boundary feature (such as a hedge), or both. This supplement is concerned only with boundary agreements in so far as they deal with the position of the legal boundary.

For example, neighbours may agree that the legal boundary between their properties is the middle of a hedge (and that each will keep their side of the hedge below a certain height). Or there may be a post and rail fence and a brick wall running close together between 2 properties and the owners agree which of the 2 possible boundary features marks the legal boundary.

It is for legal advisers to advise their clients, in the particular circumstances, as to (i) whether or not a boundary agreement is appropriate for them, (ii) the form the agreement should take and (iii) whether or not to apply to have it recorded in the register. However, you may find the following comments helpful.

There is a rebuttable presumption that a boundary agreement does not involve the transfer of any land, and that the agreed position coincides with the true position of the legal boundary. The presumption will not be rebutted merely because of “circumstances of doubt or uncertainty” as to whether or not the transfer of any land is actually involved. See Neilson v Poole (1969) 20 P&CR 909 at 918 and 919. However, it must be the case that where the agreed position differs from what is shown in a title plan, the agreement can only have identified the current position of the legal boundary if the agreed position is within the scope of the general boundaries rule: see practice guide 77: altering the register by removing land from a title plan.

Where, on the other hand, it is established that there is in fact a transfer of land involved then, subject to the possible requirement to be in writing (see A simple boundary agreement), the boundary agreement gives rise to an obligation on a party to transfer any of their land falling on the other party’s side of the agreed boundary, if called upon to do so: Neilson v Poole (1969) 20 P&CR 909 at 918 and 919.

In circumstances where there is clearly a transfer of land involved, the neighbours may wish instead (or following the boundary agreement) to ‘formally’ transfer or convey the land. Only then, on registration, will the transfer be effective at law – and this is so even if only a small or trivial amount of land is involved. This approach may be most appropriate where there has been a dispute between the neighbours and there is a desire to resolve the matter once and for all. It is almost certainly appropriate, whatever the relationship, where the agreed boundary involves the transfer of a substantial amount of land.

It seems settled that an “agreement to demarcate an unclear boundary is binding on the parties and binds successors”: Haycock v Neville [2007] EWCA Civ 78 at [25] and Neilson v Poole (1969) 20 P&CR 909. But whether a boundary agreement will bind successors in title in all circumstances (in particular, in the absence of their knowledge of the agreement) does not appear to have yet been established.

A boundary agreement which does not involve the conscious transfer of land, or in other words does not have a “disposing purpose”, falls outside the scope of section 2(1) of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 – which is concerned with “a contract for the sale or other disposition of an interest in land”. As a result, such a boundary agreement does not need to be in writing in order to be enforceable: Haycock v Neville [2007] EWCA Civ 78 at [25]; Yeates v Line [2012] EWHC 3085 (Ch) at [29]. This is also the case where only “trivial transfers of land [are] consciously involved” and the de minimis principle applies: Joyce v Rigolli [2004] EWCA Civ 79 at [32]; [45]; Yeates v Line [2012] EWHC 3085 (Ch) at [30]. But it is obviously sensible to put the agreement into writing and for the parties to sign the document. The registrar is unlikely to proceed with an application to alter the register by recording a boundary agreement (see Recording a boundary agreement in the register) unless the applicant produces a copy of a signed agreement.

Where neighbours agree on the position of the legal boundary, there is no particular reason to doubt that this was the position of the legal boundary, and they want to try to stop any going-back on the agreement, particularly when one of the properties is sold, then it might be appropriate to have the agreement put into writing and recorded in the individual registers.

There is no prescribed form for a written boundary agreement, even where the land concerned is registered. The following shows the form that a simple boundary agreement might take where the properties concerned are both registered.

It would be sensible for both parties, and any witnesses, to sign and date the plan attached to the agreement. Generally speaking, the better the quality of the plan – and, in particular, the more precisely it shows the position of the legal boundary – the more helpful the agreement is likely to be to the parties and their successors in title. You may, therefore, wish to ensure that the plan complies with the guidelines in practice guide 40 supplement 2: guidance for preparing plans for HM Land Registry applications. But there will be cases where the particular circumstances mean that a more basic plan is sufficient.

This is not to suggest that a plan of some sort will always be necessary. In some cases it may be thought enough to identify the boundary in words alone. For example, the agreement might include a clause along the following lines:

“The parties agree that the legal boundary between the land within their respective registered titles is the centre line of the wall running between their properties.”

It would seem that a mortgagee will not generally need to be a party to a boundary agreement. Assuming that the presumption mentioned earlier in this section is not rebutted, then the agreed boundary will be taken to be the legal boundary of the mortgagor’s estate from the start – and so at the time the estate was charged. But the mortgagee’s involvement is a matter that you would need to advise your clients on, bearing in mind the clients’ particular circumstances.

Where neighbours agree on the position of the legal boundary, they want to try to stop any going back on the agreement (particularly when one of the properties is sold) and there is no particular reason to doubt that the agreed position is the position of the legal boundary, then it might be appropriate to have the agreement put into writing and recorded in the individual registers.

Where the position is the same but there is thought to be a transfer of a small piece of land involved, then the neighbours may again simply want to apply for the boundary agreement to be recorded in the register. They would be relying on their ability to enforce, if necessary, the obligation to transfer created by the boundary agreement.

The registrar has power to alter the register of title for a number of purposes, one of which is ‘bringing the register up to date’: paragraph 5 of Schedule 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002. So, unless all the property concerned is unregistered, a boundary agreement can be noted in the register. An application must be made in form AP1 for the register(s) of the relevant title(s) to be altered. Applicants should lodge a copy of the boundary agreement. The prescribed fee for applying to alter the register must be paid.

If the application is in order, an entry along the following lines will be made in the property registers of the registered titles involved:

“An agreement dated

[date]

made between [the parties to the agreement] relates to [the boundary concerned – eg the south western boundary] of the land in this title.

NOTE: Copy filed.”

If a registered chargee is not a party to a boundary agreement and its consent to the alteration is not lodged, we shall serve on the chargee notice that the entry has been made.

Unless determined under section 60 of the Land Registration Act 2002, the boundary of a registered estate as shown for the purposes of the register is a general boundary. Note that this is so even if there is a boundary agreement and it has been recorded in the register. The registrar is not in any way guaranteeing that the legal boundary is where the parties have identified it as being in the boundary agreement. If the parties want to ensure that the exact line of the legal boundary is shown for the purposes of the register, they should apply for a determined boundary.’

(HM Land Registry Practice Guide 40 – HM Land Registry Plans, Supplement 4 boundary agreements and determined boundaries). Practice guide 40: HM Land Registry plans, supplement 4, boundary agreements and determined boundaries – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Determined boundaries

‘The boundary of a registered estate as shown for the purposes of the register is a general boundary, unless shown as determined under section 60 of the Land Registration Act 2002. Unlike a general boundary, a determined boundary shows “the exact line of the boundary of a registered estate”. The Act does not define “exact”.

HM Land Registry does not determine a boundary in the sense of resolving a disagreement as to where the exact line of the boundary is located. Instead, with the exact line having been identified, HM Land Registry will then make it apparent from the register that the boundary has been determined. Reference to the boundary concerned being a determined boundary is made in the property register of each affected title. The general position of the boundary will be marked on the title plan of each affected registered title, often with lettered points showing the extent of the boundary which is determined. A filed copy of the determined boundary plan (see below) is retained and can be referred to in order to identify the exact line.

It is not always possible for the owner to apply for a boundary to be shown in the register as determined. In particular, the applicant may be unable to produce the necessary evidence to establish the exact line of the boundary.

The application must be made on form DB. Only one application form is required, irrespective of the number of adjoining boundaries. A fixed fee is payable. Please see HM Land Registry: Registration Services fees.

On receipt of the application or after further enquiries under rule 17 of the Land Registration Rules 2003, the registrar must decide whether they are satisfied that: (i) the plan identifies, or the plan and verbal description identify, the exact line of the boundary claimed, (ii) the applicant has shown an arguable case that the exact line of the boundary is in the position shown, and (iii) they (the registrar) can identify all the owners of the land adjoining the boundary and has an address at which each owner may be given notice. If so satisfied, the registrar must give the adjoining owner(s) notice of the application, unless the evidence relied on and lodged with the application includes an agreement in writing with the adjoining owner as to the line of the boundary or a court order determining the line of the boundary. Panel 9 of form DB should be completed where there is agreement by the adjoining owner. The registrar must cancel the application if not satisfied as to (i), (ii) and (iii).

The evidence lodged to satisfy the registrar that the exact line of the boundary is in the position shown might include plans or provisions within pre-registration deeds, statutory declarations, statements of truth or other signed statements. Where an applicant is relying on an expert’s report, a copy of that report should be lodged. It should be noted that an expert’s finding as to the position of the legal boundary is not conclusive on the point, even though it may bind the parties instructing the expert. The registrar still needs to be satisfied that an arguable case has been shown for the exact line of the boundary being where the expert has assessed it to be, hence the need for a copy of the expert’s report to be lodged. If there is particular reason to think that the registrar might not be satisfied about an arguable case being shown, it may be better to consider taking the transfer approach explained in Transfers and determined boundaries without an application.

If there is an objection to the application and the objection is not found to be groundless, the matter will have to be referred to the Land Registration division of the Property Chamber, First-tier Tribunal, unless the parties can reach agreement.

It will be seen below that a chartered land surveyor or other suitably qualified professional will normally have to endorse a determined boundary plan with a certificate. But even where this is not necessary, it is recommended that such a professional should prepare the plan.

A surveyor will normally survey the boundary to be determined in one of 2 ways.

• By the use of measurements from permanent features.
• By the use of Ordnance Survey National Grid co-ordinates.

Using National Grid co-ordinates would only be appropriate in areas where there is little in the way of suitable permanent features or where taped measurements would be excessively long. Using co-ordinates requires specialist surveying equipment and is likely to be the more expensive option when determining the boundary or attempting to reconstitute it.

The position of the boundary to be determined may be marked on the ground by a feature such as a fence or wall. However, this is not a requirement and may not always be possible. For example, some housing developments with open garden frontages contain covenants preventing the erection of fences. An alternative way of marking a boundary can be the use of “permanent ground markers”: see Use of permanent ground markers. Their position will need to be marked on any determined boundary plan lodged with the application.’

(HM Land Registry Practice Guide 40 – HM Land Registry Plans, Supplement 4 boundary agreements and determined boundaries). Practice guide 40: HM Land Registry plans, supplement 4, boundary agreements and determined boundaries – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Application to alter or rectify the register

P may apply under Schedule 4 of the Land Registration Act 2002. The strict criteria for alteration include:

• the correction of a mistake;
• the bringing of the register up to date; or
• to give effect to any estate, legal right or interest that is not affected by registration (because the land has been registered with good leasehold, possessory or qualified title).

Rectification is defined by paragraph 1 of Scheduel 4 as being an alteration which involves the correction of a mistake, and prejudicially affects the title of a registered proprietor. Not every alteration will constitute a rectification. The fact that the rectification of the register may cause a person prejudice, e.g. because he has purchased land from someone who lacked good title or that is subject to an interest that he was unaware of, means a registered proprietor is generally entitled to an indemnity where he suffers loss as a result of the ‘rectification’.

‘A Tory MP and arch critic of Boris Johnson has sparked a backlash from Brexiters after suggesting Britain re-join the EU’s single market to help ease the cost of living crisis.’ (02.06.2022 – the ‘Guardian’).
‘Rishi Sunak’s first job is to admit to Brexit ‘lies’ and strike a new deal with EU, says ex-Tory donor Guy Hands … The boss of private equity firm Terra Firma said he will not donate to the Conservative Party until it moves on from ‘internal destructive battles.’ (the ‘I’ 24.10.2022).
Assume that:
·        Labour, under the leadership of Sir Keir Starmer take seats from the SNP in the next general election.
·        This weakens the political resolve of the Scottish people to vote for independence [‘A’].
·        [‘A’] has a political knock-on effect in Northern Ireland [‘NI’].
·        Labour announce a referendum to decide upon re-joining the EU Single Market [‘B’].
·        The result of B is that the people of NI vote to re-join the EU, because:
–      Sinn Féin (‘SF’) supporters want to obtain the economic and service benefits enjoyed by their neighbours south of the border.
–       For Ulster Unionist Party [‘DUP’] supporters, the issue is a no-brainer as their party would cease to exist as a political force following Irish Unification, i.e. B is existential.
Then B will have the following consequences:
·      Labour will have preserved the Union because:
–      In Scotland it will have diluted the political power of the SNP.
–      In NI, by supporting B, the DUP will have pinned their colours to Labour’s mast.
·        People throughout the Union will ask – ‘what was the point of Brexit?’, i.e. because the UK will no longer be free to sign up to FTA’s.
Therefore, a strategic question for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is how he can design a path for restoration of the UK’s economic fortunes following Brexit and the Mini-Budget, by engaging in a discussion with the EU about the NI Protocol (which is not working and has not conferred the benefits promised)/re-negotiation of the entire Brexit deal, without his Government being toppled by the ERG (i.e. the right wing European Research Group of MP’s in Westminister).
Since those within his own party have questioned the political mandate of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, see:
‘All hell will break loose: General election impossible to avoid when Rishi Sunak made PM, says Dorries’ (the ‘Independent’ 25.10.2022), 
and he himself has said that his party is facing an existential threat – ‘Incoming prime minister says Tories must “unite or die” and rules out early general election’ (Guardian 24.10.2022), then at some point in the coming months he will have to make a decision about when to ‘take the bull by the horns’ and confront the ESG with economic reality, i.e. hard facts v. wishful thinking and the unorthodox/radical economic theory of a ‘cult’. In other words, Rishi Sunak is sitting on a political time-bomb and the clock for a general election is ticking! Can he square the circle?

See also:

Rishi Sunak could be forced out in six months, says Labour as ‘fuming’ Tories cancel membership (msn.com)

Australia fears UK trade deal could be scuppered (msn.com)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/25/rishi-sunak-prime-minister-system

A wary Europe greets Sunak’s premiership with relief | Financial Times (ft.com)

Rishi Sunak should bin the EU law bill | Letters | The Guardian

The vindication of Rishi Sunak – POLITICO

UK and EU must work together, bloc’s chairman tells new PM Sunak | Reuters

Where e.g. there is a dispute about the construction of a home made will, costs can be saved and a tax-efficient settlement obtained, by having a conversation before mediation is proposed/proceedings issued.
The parties solicitors will still need to undertake preliminary due diligence about the existence of documentary evidence, e.g. diary entries and correspondence; to take proofs of evidence from key witnesses; and to obtain office copies.
These disputes are fact specific, and the armchair questions to ask at this stage may typically include:

·        If T drafted the will, then what did he intend?

·        If someone else drafted and typed the will, did T understand the scheme of gifting under the will as drafted? i.e. is the will valid?

·        Did T know the full extent of his estate, i.e. did  T have mental capacity?

In such disputes, the ‘big ticket’ asset is likely to be the family home (‘P’).
A logical analytical starting point is that if the will is valid, the gift of P (or of an equitable interest in P) may fail because of a defect in drafting, in which event, T’s beneficial interest in P will fall into residue for distribution in accordance with the terms of the will.

Where T is survived by S, I do not think a judge is going to remove the roof from over his/her head, so what is the point of litigation?

S may also have a claim under the Inheritance Act for lack of provision, and other claims in equity (which could be funded on a CFA basis).

Depending upon the date of T’s death, the re-structuring options potentially include:
·        Disclaimer of the devise.
·        Deed of Variation.
·        Rectification – which is an ‘eye of the needle’ exercise, and is therefore the most expensive option.

To head a probate claim off at the pass, PMA involves:
·        Executors instructing counsel to provide an opinion about construction of the will, and the options available for re-structuring, see my article – Back to the future’ – Part 1 – Mediation and the tax-efficient settlement of probate disputes. Taxation (Tolley) 01.03.2022 (and you will find a link on the ‘Publications’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk).
·        Having a round table WP Zoom call between Counsel [C’], the executors, beneficiaries and their legal advisors so that C:

(i)          As ‘Counsel’, can state his/her conclusions and reasons.
(ii)         As a ‘Mediator’, can start and facilitate a conversation between the B’s and the E’s about the options for solving the problem on mutually satisfactory and tax-efficient terms without incurring litigation risks and costs, i.e. so that estate money is spent on fixing the problem instead of fighting each other.

Provided the value of the claim is within my PI cover, and after scoping the work involved, I can quote a fixed fee for this two-stage: (i) written advice; and (ii) mediation service. To enquire please send an email to clerks@1ec.co.uk.
See also ‘Mediation of Probate Trust & Tax Disputes’ at www.carlislam.co.uk).

Video hearings in the FTT – Davies v. HMRC [2022] UKFTT 369 (TC) is a recent example. The decision of the judges states:

‘With the consent of the parties, the form of the hearing was V (video). All parties attended remotely. The remote platform was the Tribunal’s Video Hearing System. A face to face hearing was not held because of the ongoing effects of the Covid-19 pandemic and it was considered in the interests of justice to hold the meeting remotely. The documents to which we were referred are a Hearing bundle of 588 pages, an Authorities Bundle of 284 pages, a second witness statement and exhibits of … The HMRC officer who been dealing with the enquiry and had issues the information notices, … an additional authority drawn to the party’s attention by the tribunal, the skeleton arguments of the appellants … and the respondents … and an extract from a book admitted in the course of the hearing. It was not possible to complete the hearing in the time allotted and it was agreed, and the tribunal gave directions accordingly, that the parties closing submissions should be made in writing. We also have before us the respondents’ written closing submissions  … The appellants written closing submissions  … And the respondents’ written reply. For the applicable PD – Google, ‘ Pilot Practice Direction: Video/Audio Hearings in the First-Tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal.’  Paragraph 4 of the PD stets;

‘Where a tribunal decides that: a) a hearing in a particular case should take place; b) the proceedings are to be conducted wholly as video or audio proceedings; and c) it is not practicable for the hearing to be broadcast in a court or tribunal building the tribunal may direct that the hearing will take place in private, where this is necessary to secure the proper administration of justice.’

A Mediation with HMRC may also be conducted online using Teams. I am currently writing an article for Taxation (Tolley) about the ‘Mediation of Tax Disputes’ which is planned for publication in December.

‘The UK is in the grip of a credibility crisis’ (By Emma Haslett, the New Statesman 19.10.2022)

‘The UK’s fiscal credibility is the reason our economy has historically been so stable: it has kept borrowing costs low, the pound strong and ultimately helped to control inflation. If anything goes wrong, markets reasoned, the government and the Bank of England will find a way to fix it. That makes the UK a relatively safe place to invest, build a business and create jobs.

All that came crashing down after the mini-Budget last month. “Credibility translates itself into real economic and financial market metrics pretty quickly,” said Simon French, chief economist at Panmure Gordon. “Lenders need to take a view on what decisions [their borrower] will take because their money is being locked away.” He points to “credibility signals” as an important factor in how lenders decide how much to charge for their money. “If you start to cast doubt on the wisdom of those decisions, you will require higher interest rates in order to absorb the risk that they might do something stupid.”

Even before Kwasi Kwarteng delivered his mini-Budget on 23 September, watchers of those credibility signals had already seen red flags go up. “What took place before was relevant,” said French. “The siloing of the OBR [Office for Budget Responsibility], the briefing against the Bank of England and the sacking of Tom Scholar signalled that the institutional checks and balances were being, if you’re being charitable, diluted; if you’re being less charitable, they were being sidelined.” 

The mini-Budget itself added two extra red flags: first, it indicated that the people with the keys to the UK economy weren’t the types to think through their decisions properly and, by rejecting the OBR’s forecasts, it also indicated they weren’t prepared to take advice from experts where it was needed. Second, it pitted the government against the Bank of England: after the Bank had spent months preparing investors for inflation-controlling measures such as higher interest rates and a bond sell-off, the reaction of the pensions market forced it to step in and start buying bonds – essentially an inflationary move. When parents fight, it makes the children nervous.

Credibility itself is an intangible thing, but the impact of its loss can be measured. French estimates the government is being asked to pay an additional 0.75 percentage points to borrow (this extra risk premium has already been nicknamed the “moron premium” by the economist Dario Perkins). Yael Selfin, chief economist at KPMG UK, said the mini-Budget will add “one and a quarter percentage points” to interest rates over the long term. As a result, “we’re predicting a fall in house prices of between 10 and 15 per cent,” she warned. 

Meanwhile, Hunt has reduced the length of the energy price guarantee from two years to six months. That means inflation is likely to spike to 11.9 per cent when it ends next April, according to economists at Goldman Sachs, and household energy bills have been predicted to rise 73 per cent in that single month.

How can the government restore credibility? “We need a plan,” said Selfin. “We had a plan that wasn’t going to work, so the government backtracked, but they haven’t really replaced it. It’s now a bit of a patchwork. They’re just putting a plaster over it and trying to buy some time.”

Selfin suggested that markets are giving the government until the announcement of its medium-term fiscal plan on 31 October to come up with a watertight replacement; after that, its credibility may be lost completely. “[Truss] doesn’t have a lot of time in the sense that people aren’t very patient,” she said. “But the longer we are in this limbo, the more the actual cost in terms of the impact on the economy, in terms of potentially higher cost of capital – more uncertainty, people postponing investment and everything else.”

Even when the government does have a plan, it won’t automatically regain the credibility it has lost. “It requires hundreds of small decisions on a daily, weekly, monthly basis to do it,” she said. “Lots of small actions that suggest you have started to read the room, you’re starting to listen to experts.”

What won’t happen is a “seminal moment” in which government bond yields suddenly drop. “It’s going take months and probably years to convince people that our political class have worked out that people listen, investors listen,” said French. “If they keep hearing incoherent, contradictory thoughts, they will put their money elsewhere. You need to regain that trust.”

Selfin, meanwhile, believes there’s only one way credibility can be fully restored in the UK: “A new Prime Minister.”’

If house prices fall between 10 and 15 per cent, anybody selling a house in order to buy a newbuild will get less for their home. Unless they have savings they will require bridging finance to fill the gap between what they sell their home for and the price of the newbuild. The annual inflation rate in the UK rose to 10.1% in September from 9.9% in August, returning to the 40-year high hit in July and surpassing market expectations of a 10% rate. Consequently, the price of a newbuild has increased. Higher mortgage rates = fewer buyers. Add it all together = fewer sales of newbuilds. Because there is less cash received than expected, some building companies, subject to leverage, will have to borrow to finance operating costs. The cost of borrowing to finance short term liquidity has increased and on its current trajectory is expected to exceed 6% in January. That cost erodes profit margin, which impacts upon shareholder value. If banks will not lend to a building company, it may become insolvent. Therefore, another casualty of the mini budget may be the inter-related double whammy of: (i) a housing crash; and (ii) the insolvency of major building companies.  This is not an environment for investment, lending, and economic growth.

‘The cost of long-term borrowing for the Government rose to its highest level since the Bank of England launched its £65bn pension bailout, as analysts warned the jump signalled further market turmoil could be on the cards.  Yields on 30-year gilts rose above 4.5pc, bringing them to their highest since going over 5pc just before the Bank’s intervention on 28 September. 10-year gilt yields also rose by 2.5 basis points at 4.25pc. The surge in borrowing costs came as the Bank announced it will ramp up its market intervention before it closes on Friday. It will also launch a scheme to provide liquidity to banks whose clients are struggling with sudden cash calls. Its decision comes after eight auctions so far in which the Bank offered to buy £40bn worth of bonds but only succeeded in buying £5bn worth. The Bank has been purchasing the gilts using newly created money in a process known as quantitative easing. However, analysts have warned that the intervention fails to adequately address the underlying issue. Antoine Bouvet, senior rates strategist at ING, said: “The suspicion is that risk reduction by pension funds has been too limited so far. “The question is do they have enough cash to meet new collateral requirements if the gilt market sells off again, as the gilt purchases by the Bank of England end this week.
“I think the fear is that the answer’s no and that it will trigger the same snowball effect that we had two weeks ago.”’ (Matt Oliver, the Daily Telegraph online 52 minutes ago).

My application for membership of the Revenue Bar Association has been accepted.
Tax Appeals – From January, I am available to be consulted and instructed as an advocate by a member of the:
(i) Chartered Institute of Taxation;
(ii) Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales; and
(iii) The Chartered Association of Certified Accountants,
under either the RBA:
(a) ‘Joint Advisory Scheme’; or
(b) ‘Special Advocacy Scheme’.
For more information please visit www.revenue-bar.org.
As an accredited Mediator I am also available to be appointed as Mediator or Co-Mediator for a Tax Dispute.
I have been commissioned by Trusts & Trustees (Oxford University Press), to write an in-depth article entitled, ‘Mediation of Probate Trust & Tax Disputes – Challenges & Tools’, which I am aiming to complete before the end of October.
I am also a full member of STEP, and a member of the Chancery Bar Association.

In August I wrote a Blog about ‘The embedded structural cost of tax cuts’. Find using the ‘search’ box at the top of this page or under August in the indeax of blogs on the right hand side of the page.

In the blog I observed that official forecasts in 2017 implied that lower tax rates for the self-employed and company owner managers relative to employees will cost about 15 billion in 2021-22. If there are tax cuts, that cost will rise. Independently, and in parallel, the cost of government borrowing may increase. UK general government gross debt exceeds £2,365.4 billion (Quarter 1 – Jan to Mar 2022) = 99.6% of gross domestic product (GDP), see my previous blog ‘What is the economic impact of Brexit on the cost of living crisis?’ ‘[HMRC] research highlights that most [SME] owners … are not employing others, investing or growing – let alone doing anything that produces positive ‘spill-overs’ to wider society. … This serves to demonstrate how poorly targeted the tax breaks are.’ (‘Principles and Practice of Taxing Small Business’, by Stuart Adam and Helen Miller, Chapter 5 of ‘The Dynamics of Taxation’, edited by Glen Loutzenhiser and Rita de la Feria).

£50bn (not taking any account of the £15bn I mentioned) will increase GND by 2.1%. [An article in the Observer Newspaper that day stated], ‘Truss, … has gone much further, pledging tax cuts she claims will cost £38bn annually, but which economists believe could actually cost more than £50bn a year. She claims this will promote growth, but these kinds of tax cuts will do nothing to address the real reasons for Britain’s dire productivity growth – a lack of investment in infrastructure, skills and other forms of capital – while significantly reducing the resources available for public services at a time when inflation is eroding the real value of budgets in hospitals, schools and care homes. Most of the conversation about the cost of living crisis has, understandably, been framed through the lens of household budgets. But it will have just as damaging an impact on Britain’s public services. … Inflationary pressures, including higher wage bills and energy costs, are predicted to cost the NHS billions this year.’ If this economic analysis proves to be correct, then:
(i) tax cuts will not increase economic growth; and
(ii) the economic cost of cuts will be GND = 101.71% of GDP.
That is an economic tipping point.

Excluded from the calculation is the reduction of revenue (i.e. to fund public services) which resulted from BREXIT. Figures produced by the Centre for European Reform show that by the end of 2021, the UK economy was 5% – or £31 billion – smaller than it would have been if the UK had stayed in the EU. ‘The CER’s analysis shows that Brexit has cost the UK billions of pounds in lost trade, lost investment and lost tax revenues.’ (ITV News Business and Economics Editor Joel Hills 10.06.2022). The Government’s mini-budget has been estimated to contain total tax cuts of £45 billion by 2026/27. What is the actual cost of the tax cuts announced today?

What is the social cost, i.e. what signal does it send if a Government:
(i) passes laws to restrict access to welfare benefits during a recession & cost of living crisis;
(ii) passes a law encouraging reckless speculation by Bankers;
(iii) gives what is estimated to be a £55K hand out to every millionaire; and
(iv) passes laws making it illegal to strike.
Answer – The Government does not care about “us”. It is looking after “them.”

In other words, the social cost is an even more divided society.

Sending out this message is not a catalyst for economic growth.
Instead, could it turn out to be a potential catalyst for general strikes and civil unrest?

Are we heading back to 1973?

If I am right, and I really hope that I am wrong, and that the new Government is economically competent, could this also be political suicide for the Conservative Party? Will the red wall collapse?

As I write, gilts are in freefall and sterling is dropping off a cliff! Unless this is put into reverse, it appears that the market is not confident that the mini-budget will result in stable conditions for investors. In which case, if the market is proven to be right, what was the point of the tax cuts?

‘The Chancellor’s massive package of tax cuts will boost growth in the short term but drive up interest rates and spark an additional £411bn of borrowing over five years, a major think tank has warned.

The Resolution Foundation, which analysed the numbers in the absence of an official OBR forecast, said the worsening economic outlook and new energy support are estimated to have increased borrowing by £265bn over the next five years.

Tax cuts of £146bn raise that to £411bn – the biggest increase in borrowing by any Chancellor.

Torsten Bell, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: “Without significant cuts to public spending, debt will be on course to rise in each and every year. 

“This is not what sustainable public finances look like. Every scrap of Treasury orthodoxy has been torn up.”’ [The Telegraph Newspaper 23.09.2022 at 3.34pm].

‘The Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) said he was “betting the house” by putting government debt on an “unsustainable rising path”. Only those with incomes of over £155,000 will be net beneficiaries of tax policies announced by the Conservatives, with the “vast majority of income taxpayers paying more tax”, said the respected financial think tank in a scathing assessment of the plans.

The Resolution Foundation think tank said the chancellor’s measures would involve an extra £411bn of borrowing over the next five years.

It said the tax cuts do very little to boost the incomes of those who need it the most, pointing out that someone earning £1m a year would gain more than £55,220 a year, while someone on £20,000 would gain only £157.’ (Sky News 24.09.2022).

See also: Mini-Budget response | Institute for Fiscal Studies (ifs.org.uk)

‘Our findings on the effects of growth and unemployment provide evidence against supply side theories that suggest lower taxes on the rich will induce labor supply responses from high-income individuals (more hours of work, more effort, etc.) that boost economic activity … they also show little support for the influential political–economic idea that tax cuts for the rich ‘trickle down’ to boost wider economic performance. They are, in fact, more in line with recent empirical research showing that income tax holidays, windfall gains and tax cuts targeted at the top decile of the income distribution do not lead individuals to significantly alter the amount they work. …

Overall, our analysis finds strong evidence that cutting taxes on the rich increases income inequality but has no effect on growth or unemployment. …

Our results have important implications for current debates around the economic consequences of taxing the rich, as they provide strong evidence that cutting taxes on the rich increases top income shares, but has little effect on economic performance. These findings are in line with a growing pool of macro-level panel studies on the economic consequences of cutting top marginal rates of income taxation.’ (‘The economic consequences of major tax cuts for the rich.’), by David Hope & Julian Limbergg, Socio-Economic Review, Volume 20, Issue 2, April 2022, Pages 539–559).

economic consequences of major tax cuts for the rich | Socio-Economic Review | Oxford Academic (oup.com)

The market is betting on failure. ‘Speculators have ramped up bets against the pound after sterling fell to its lowest level against the dollar in nearly four decades. Investors are betting on a further fall amid concerns that the new Government will need to borrow more to fund its economic growth plan. That includes an energy package for households and business costing up to £150billion. The pound’s value has dropped almost 8 per cent against the US dollar in the past month. It has now shed 20 per cent of its value against the greenback since January – hitting $1.09 on Friday. This shows there are almost 55,000 contracts out against sterling. … The Bank of England increased the cost of borrowing by half a percentage point to 2.25 per cent last week in an effort to tame rampant inflation, running at just under 10 per cent. [A] weak pound can fuel inflation as it increases the price of imports like oil or products made in China, such as clothing. ‘Tax cuts are not a guarantee of a sustained boost to growth,’ said Jane Foley, head of foreign exchange strategy at Rabobank.’ (Speculators ramp up bets against pound after sterling falls to lowest level against dollar in nearly four decades Patrick Tooher, Financial Mail On Sunday).

‘British companies are braced for higher costs after sterling tumbled to a record low on Monday, with the prospect of an accelerated rise in interest rates also weighing on industries such as housebuilding. Sectors including retail, hospitality and aviation are affected by the falling pound, which will make imports of commodities and goods more expensive for many companies already facing a cost-of-business crisis. “The dollar is very, very strong . . . and it has an effect,” said easyJet chief executive Johan Lundgren. “We have lots of expenses in dollars and we have revenues coming in pounds.” About 40 per cent of airlines’ operational costs are in dollars, including jet fuel and maintenance. Kate Nicholls, chief executive of UK Hospitality, which represents pubs, restaurants and hotels in the UK, said “a weak pound was not helpful for companies across the sector”. Smaller businesses, which are less likely to have in place hedges against currency movement, also expressed alarm about the lack of stability.’ (‘UK business braced for higher costs as sterling falls’ published in the FT 26.09.2022). https://www.ft.com/content/7ded25f4-8348-433e-ba50-cf27f9c3d9ab

‘The savage sell-off in the pound in east Asia overnight was further evidence – should any be needed – that confidence in the new Liz Truss government is rapidly draining away. Sterling fell to its lowest level against the dollar, and despite an attempt at a rally in early London trading, the likelihood is that parity against the dollar will be tested before long. [O]nce a currency hits the skids it is hard to stop it. Momentum trading took over in the aftermath of Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-budget and it has proved hard to halt. Kwarteng committed a schoolboy error by pledging further tax cuts in a full budget planned for later this year. If the markets are worried about the state of the government’s finances and the increase in borrowing needed to fund your plans, it is not the wisest course of action to add to those concerns. Kwarteng’s inexperience has been exposed.
Threadneedle Street raised interest rates by half a point last Thursday but there has been speculation of an emergency meeting of the Bank’s monetary policy committee as early as Monday.’
(‘Kwasi Kwarteng refuses to comment as pound hits all-time low against dollar’ Guardian Newspaper 26.09.2022). Kwasi Kwarteng refuses to comment as pound hits all-time low against dollar | Kwasi Kwarteng | The Guardian

‘Letters of no confidence in the premiership of Liz Truss have begun stacking up amid panic over her government’s economic proposals, a former Conservative minister has claimed.
An ex-minister in Boris Johnson’s government told Sky News that the letters which could trigger a confidence vote have already been sent to 1922 Committee chair Sir Graham Brady.
The MP accused Truss and her Treasury ministers of “playing A-level economics with people’s lives”, adding: “The issue is government fiscal policy is opposite to Bank of England monetary policy – so they are fighting each other. What Kwasi gives, the Bank takes away … You cannot have monetary policy and fiscal policy at loggerheads.”
It comes after the pound plunged by nearly five per cent to an all-time low as investors ran for the exits in the wake of the new government’s fiscal plan.
The currency tumbled to an unprecedented $1.0327, extending a 3.61 per cent dive from Friday when finance minister Kwasi Kwateng unleashed historic tax cuts’.
(‘Pound – live: Tories ‘submit no-confidence letters in Liz Truss’ as sterling falls’ The Independent at 14:45 26.09.2022).

‘The plummeting value of the pound has sent the interest rate on government debts to a 12-year high, with money markets now predicting the Bank of England base rate could almost treble to 6% next year. Traders expect the central bank to convene a meeting of its monetary policy committee (MPC) soon to hike interest rates from 2.25% to 3% before increasing them further at a scheduled meeting in November. One analyst described sterling’s situation as “toxic”, while another said investors had digested the implications of Friday’s mini-budget, … and “seemed inclined to regard the UK Conservative party as a doomsday cult”. A further rout of the British currency could take it below parity with the dollar and into uncharted territory on international exchanges. … [S]everal MPC members have highlighted the fact that a drop in the value of the pound can fuel inflation via the higher cost of imported goods and raw materials’.
 (‘Markets warn sterling slump could lead UK interest rates to triple by next year’, the Guardian at 15:30, 26.09.2022). Markets warn sterling slump could lead UK interest rates to triple by next year | Interest rates | The Guardian

‘The Bank of England is understood to be preparing an intervention after the pound crashed to an all-time low against the dollar. The Bank is expected to issue a statement as soon as today amid mounting pressure on Governor Andrew Bailey for an intervention to help shore up the economy. This could be a verbal intervention to calm markets or, in a more extreme case, an unscheduled increase in interest rates – which were raised to 2.25pc just last week. It is understood that a statement today is probable, but not definite. The Bank declined to comment on the nature of any intervention. The possible intervention comes amid market turmoil after Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng last week unveiled the biggest package of tax cuts in 50 years and hinted at more to come. The measures, which include scrapping the additional rate of income tax and cutting stamp duty, are aimed at fuelling economic growth. But markets have been spooked amid fears Prime Minister Liz Truss is pushing up public borrowing to unsustainable levels. (‘Bank of England preparing emergency intervention after pound slumps to all-time low – live updates’, the Telegraph, 15:40, 26.09.2022). https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/09/26/sterlingpound-dollar-markets-live-news-tax-economy-ftse-100/

See also:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/truss-s-economic-plan-has-been-tried-and-failed/ar-AA12foXK?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=8f59eeb1fdb049848ed7d2e9a49702cb

Britain sends investors fleeing with historic tax cuts and borrowing | Reuters

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/pound-live-tories-e2-80-98submit-no-confidence-letters-in-liz-truss-e2-80-99-as-sterling-falls/ar-AA12dBYa

Brexit: UK pound has not crashed yet, but here’s why it will probably suffer in years to come (theconversation.com)

Why did the British pound collapse? A look back at economic history. | Fortune

How has Brexit affected the value of sterling? – Economics Observatory

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/sterling-suffered-its-worst-month-since-brexit-and-analysts-expect-it-to-plumb-new-depths.html

U.K. could trigger a global crisis as pound collapses while bond yields soar, Larry Summers says (msn.com)

Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng ‘ignored warnings’ from officials their mini-Budget would spark market chaos (msn.com)

Bank of England takes emergency action to prevent ‘material risk’ to UK financial stability (msn.com)

https://news.sky.com/story/imf-warns-uk-against-mini-budget-that-will-likely-increase-inequality-12706612

Pound tumbles despite Bank of England intervention in markets – business live (msn.com)

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/bank-of-england-buy-government-bonds-risk-uk-finances/

Bank’s £65bn move driven by pension fund panic – BBC News

New UK Chancellor of the Exchequer announces significant tax cuts | STEP

Update on Growth Plan implementation – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)