HM Land Registry cancelled application after purchase of Wiston property as conveyancer points to possible seller misrepresentation

A PEMBROKESHIRE homebuyer was left unregistered as owner of his cottage months after completing the purchase while a historic building control application remained live and incomplete, Pembrokeshire County Council has confirmed.

Wayne Davies bought Kingfisher Cottage, Three Ways, Wiston, on December 17, 2024, for £158,000. But HM Land Registry later cancelled the registration application linked to the purchase, leaving him in limbo while questions mounted over historic building control issues, the presence of a log burner shown in marketing particulars, and what was disclosed during the sale.

The council has now confirmed that building regulations application BR/0735/04 relating to Three Ways, Wiston remains a live application and was never completed.

In a statement to The Herald, Pembrokeshire County Council said the application was “not complete” and confirmed that its records showed the development was incomplete at the time of the sale.

Communications officer Lee Day said: “Yes – our records historically would show and still shows that the development is incomplete and awaiting completion, this requires the client to contact building control for final inspection for sign off which then follows the formal completion certificate for the development.”

The council also confirmed that the original application was made for “Three Ways Wiston, the now known Kingfisher Cottage,” and that it related to a holiday let.

Mr Day added: “It has come to our attention that the building is now being used as a residential home. We have been in contact with the current owner to establish whether the conditions have been met and if a completion certificate can be issued.”

No completion certificate

Documents seen by The Herald include a conditional approval of building plans dated April 22, 2005, relating to the provision of a holiday accommodation unit at Three Ways, Wiston.

That approval included a condition under Part J covering combustion appliances and fuel storage systems, requiring details of any proposed combustion appliance and associated works to be submitted and approved before commencement.

The council said no completion certificate had ever been issued and confirmed no formal enforcement action or notice had been taken.

The case only came to light after Mr Davies made enquiries following concerns relating to a log burner at the property.

Sales particulars seen by The Herald showed the log burner in place and referred to it in the property description.

However, Cardiff-based Gateway 2 Conveyancing, which acted for Mr Davies in the purchase, later stated that it had not received the sale particulars and had therefore been unaware there was a log burner in the property.

In a formal complaint response sent to Mr Davies and seen by The Herald, Robert Dudden, Financial and Compliance Director at Gateway 2, said the firm had requested the sales particulars from the estate agent but did not receive them.

He wrote that Gateway instead carried out an online search and found older rental particulars, which did not mention a log burner and did not make its presence clear from the photographs.

Mr Dudden said the firm had relied on the seller’s TA6 and TA10 forms, which he said now appeared inaccurate in light of what had since come to light.

He said the seller had answered “no” to questions relating to building works, unfinished works, breaches of planning permission or building regulations conditions, guarantees and warranties, and electrical installation matters.

Gateway also said the TA10 fixtures and fittings form made no reference to any free-standing heater, stove fuel, oil, wood or LPG.

Possible seller misrepresentation

In the complaint response, Mr Dudden stated: “It would appear that the information contained in TA6 and TA10 was not accurate from the seller in light of the information now known.”

He continued: “It would appear that there maybe misrepresentation from the seller and we advise you to take advice from a litigation solicitor.”

Gateway said it was unable to uphold Mr Davies’ complaint against the firm, maintaining that it had undertaken the expected enquiries based on the documents and responses it received.

The firm said the historic planning and building control issues were linked to the wider address of Three Ways rather than clearly to Kingfisher Cottage, and said the local authority search report did not reveal the problem in the way it later emerged.

Gateway also said it had made enquiries with the seller’s solicitors about the entries shown on the local authority search, and had been told that the conditions and requirements had been met.

Mr Dudden said the firm was continuing to assist with registration of the property and had recently received contact from the seller’s solicitors.

Land Registry cancellation

The Herald has seen correspondence from HM Land Registry confirming that the original application was cancelled on April 1, 2026.

In a further update sent to Mr Davies, Land Registry said the cancelled application had also led to cancellation of the newly created title linked to the transfer.

Land Registry also confirmed that Gateway 2 had lodged an Official Search on April 1, 2026, giving a priority period until May 15, 2026, and stating that it was now in Mr Davies’ interest for a fresh transfer application to be lodged before that date.

Mr Davies says he has also been contacted by his mortgage lender and told that no mortgage charge has yet been registered because the property has still not been registered in his name.

Estate agent and solicitors

The Herald has previously seen correspondence from Popular Move stating that the issues raised by Mr Davies should have been picked up during the conveyancing process. The agent also indicated that sales particulars showing the log burner had been supplied.

Price & Son Solicitors declined to comment. In an email to The Herald, the firm said: “We do not discuss with the Press whom we act for nor the business affairs of those we do represent.”

Gateway 2 also declined to comment directly to The Herald on the specifics of the case, citing client confidentiality and data protection, but its position is set out in the complaint response later provided by Mr Davies.

Questions remain

The dispute raises a number of serious questions, including whether the unresolved building control position should have been more clearly identified before the sale completed, whether the seller’s replies accurately reflected the true position, and whether the registration failure could have wider consequences for both the buyer and his mortgage lender.

For Mr Davies, the situation remains unresolved more than a year after he instructed solicitors to handle the purchase.

He alleges he has been left fighting on several fronts at once: trying to secure legal title to the property, resolve the building control position, and establish who is responsible for the omissions that have now come to light.