In a letter addressed to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skill (BIS), John Kirkpatrick, Senior Director of the CMA, argued that a privatised registry may create a financially driven monopoly. 

He wrote: “Our particular concern is that attaching higher prices to Land Registry data would harm consumers, while restricting innovation and choice in the flourishing app and website markets that rely on this as an input.”

John cited property app developers as the main victims of a privatised Land Registry, and suggested that the government should seek to make access easier rather than potentially more expensive.

“We believe that consumers and the economy would be best served by a model that promotes wide access to Land Registry data at cost-reflective prices, encouraging its use and commercial exploitation by a range of individuals and businesses,” he added.

Anti-privatisation campaign ‘We Own It’ also opposed the proposals, highlighting the £119.1m the Land Registry returned to the Treasury last year, and polls indicating that 70% of the public want it to stay public. 

As a result, John urged the government to publish a detailed assessment of how registry fees may vary under a privatised registry, and its impact on consumers and the downstream markets.

His letter also outlined a range of necessary safeguards, including separate accounting and an enforced obligation to provide fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory access to data.

The most recent proposals for the privatisation legislation were published in the Queen’s Speech on 18th May 2016.