Highland Titles Scam

The title for this blog is modelled on the website highlandtitlesscam.com.

*EDIT 23 August 2016 – that url now directs to a suitably bland website. Some of the original content at that URL is archived here*

Despite the url, it is a website that defends the business model and practice of a company called Highland Titles Limited.

Earlier this week, it found itself in a bit of a Twitter-storm. This storm, Storified here, involved a number of Scots law qualified individuals, including me.

Highland Titles was moved to reply [EDIT: the original reply has been taken down, but see the comparison below which features some of the text of that reply].

Although there is no reference to my Storify in that page, I suspect someone involved with that website has read it. Here is a comparison of extracts of the two pieces of writing.

As an academic, if I had two students submitting work that was this similar I would be asking to speak to them both about plagiarism. Also as an academic, I would be a little disappointed in the legal content of one of the pieces of writing, although I have to admit it is a masterful piece of selective prose.

Another masterful piece of carefully worded prose is provided by the Scots law firm J&H Mitchell, whose “Scottish Legal Advice” is linked to by Highland Titles. Although meticulously worded, it does nothing to counter the arguments Twitter user @loveandgarbage was probing away with (supported by the most recent edition of “Scottish Land Law” by Gordon and Wortley).

Since I published the Storify, literally thousands of people have read it. No-one has convinced me my line of thinking is incorrect.

As a user of social media who advertises himself as an academic lawyer, it is fair to say I have a number of legally minded followers. Not one of them has challenged me. In fact, my thoughts have been shared with gusto by other lawyers, within and outwith Scotland.

And this is not a new topic of conversation. I am not the first person to opine on this matter.

Here is a letter to a newspaper from Dr. Craig Anderson, of Robert Gordon University, explaining the law in clear and simple terms.

Here is an article from Registers of Scotland which appears in the Journal of the Law Society of Scotland. (It will be recalled that the Keeper of the Registers of Scotland is a very important woman in the grand scheme of Scots property law.)

Here is an article co-authored by my colleague Dr Douglas Bain (with Catherine Bury of Ledingham Chalmers) which appears in the Aberdeen Student Law Review.

Paragraph 12.83 of the Scottish Law Commission’s Report (2010, number 222) on Land Registration is also in point where (in relation to the earlier legislation) it is noted.

Section 4(2)(b) of the 1979 Act forbids the Keeper to accept souvenir plots for registration in the Land Register…We have seen it suggested that the non-registrability of souvenir plots means that ownership in them passes by simple contract. That is not so (emphasis added).

Choose your own friends here. I have made my choice and I am happy with the company I keep.

So what happens now?

In the vernacular, it is time for someone to shit or get off the pot.

In property law terms, someone who has been made “owner” by Highland Titles could try to register a plot of land with the Keeper. Such a person is bound to fail in that quest owing to section 22 of the Land Registration etc. (Scotland) Act 2012.

Alternatively, someone who has been made “owner” by Highland Titles could raise an action called a declarator at the relevant Sheriff Court, to establish who the owner of the land is. If that was to happen, I would very much enjoy watching Highland Titles’ argument develop in court (if indeed Highland Titles got involved). I would bring the popcorn.

Another possibility would be if someone were to occupy the land in question, with a view to obtaining ownership by possessing the land for a certain period of time and registering a deed with the Keeper (if she accepted that deed, such acceptance being by no means guaranteed) (this process is known as positive presciption in Scots law; in English law and similar legal systems this is called “adverse possession”). The owner of the land is, as you would expect, entitled to take steps to stop this happening. Which “owner” would step forward to object here? (Nota bene: I am not advocating that anyone actually go to Glencoe, or wherever the land actually is, to do this. I am simply flushing out a perfectly competent Scots law device that could operate.)

Stepping away from Scots property law, but staying within private law, is defamation relevant here? If Highland Titles is actually bothered by what is going on, a defamation action could be raised against the “Twitter trolls”. (For my part, I am comfortable with everything I have written on my blog, on Storify or on social media, even when I told Highland Titles to “fuck right off”.)

Whilst all of this has provided a bit of entertainment and hopefully a bit of education, I think that is probably enough from me on the matter, but I will note a couple of side issues before I go. First, two people contacted me to highlight the land management practices undertaken by Highland Titles: see here and here. These links are offered without comment. A further side issue relates to titles, and I do not mean title to land here. I have some new social media contacts from the world of Scottish clans, who found the whole debate interesting. I suspect they have a view on the model of lordship offered by Highland Titles.

Finally, does this blog make me some kind of über-troll? Only if trolling is now taken to mean having a knowledge of Scots law and a wish for it to be applied properly.


About basedrones

Bachelor of Laws. Scots academic lawyer. English law qualified. Took far too long to write this bio. Blogs on legal issues, with occasional veering into other purportedly intellectual stuff from time to time. Tweets about legal issues, education, law clinics, fitba, music, rogue cell division and not at all about politics at @MalcolmCombe.
This entry was posted in Law, Property and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to Highland Titles Scam

  1. A Reader says:

    Is there not a Human Rights aspect to this? I could at least see the possibility of a P1A1 claim – that the land owner has a right to sell as they wish, and any refusal by the Register to record that transfer is not HRA complaint?

    • basedrones says:

      If A1P1 said everyone “is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions” and nothing else, then a restriction like this might engage A1P1. BUT there is important further wording in A1P1 that allows for control of use of property in accordance with “the general interest”. Plenty of case law is available on that point.

      • A Reader says:

        Yes, agreed re general interest. What’s the case law like on tests of general interest and the margin of appreciation?

  2. Pingback: I can’t believe it’s not ownership – or the curious tale of HIghland TItles selling | Love and Garbage – some commonplace musings

  3. scotclans says:

    things are hotting up on the Clan Facebook page you mention above – the owner of HT has waded in with a string of personal insults and his cohorts are backing him up with some fake Facebook accounts. we are generously supplying copious lengths of rope 🙂

  4. Pingback: Who owns Lord Glencoe’s plot? | Land Matters

  5. Pingback: Highland Titles’ Twitter Battle with Scottish Lawyers (result: home win) :

  6. Pingback: On the naughty step: The Low Road edition - Nearly Legal: Housing Law News and Comment

  7. Laird Lucan says:

    Some of the stuff on highlandtitlesscam.com appears less than honest. Take this page ‘debunking’ a Mirror story about the Telephone Preference Register and branding the reporter, Nick Sommerlad, ‘a slovenly reporter too lazy to check his facts’:


    Then compare these two documents:



  8. Pingback: Highland Titles Scam - Speymouth

  9. Laird Lucan says:

    More posts have been deleted from highlandtitlesscam. A copy from 9th February is currently available in the Google cache:


    The first post in the cached copy (“Lies from Weston Park”, 19th January 2015) is worth a read.

    It picks up on an assertion the Earl of Bradford makes on his website that Dr Bevis was responsible for an episode of cyberbullying reported in the Evening Standard (“Cyber attackers target restaurateur earl ‘for warning against buying fake titles’”, 24th July 2012) in which someone posted fake Daily Telegraph and Evening Standard articles about an outbreak of food poisoning at the Earl’s Porters English Restaurant.

    And of course highlandtitlesscam debunks the assertion: “Having finally caught my breath, I would advise you to treat this with the contempt that it deserves… To invent such a story is sad. To lay it at the door of a man with charitable intentions and a track record of good works is nasty…”

    The site debunks the (correct) Mirror report on the Telephone Preference Register with similar verve.

    The burning question is why, if the Earl’s assertion – which he has made very publicly – is untrue, the response was a denial on highlandtitlesscam rather than a lawyer’s letter? It would be interesting to see the matter proceed to a libel action as then court orders could be obtained to determine the ownership of the domain with the fake newspaper articles.

    Anyone see this happening?

  10. Pingback: Highland (lack of) Titles… | Paul Cruikshank

  11. Pingback: Scots Property Law, Souvenir Plot Ownership & Social Media at its Best | ScotsLawBlog

  12. lairdofthemanor says:

    From what I can see souvenir land can be registered in England & Ireland, I registered 18ft of land I bought in Northern Ireland for the grand sum of £18 with the Northern Ireland Land Registry. Surely, the issue here is that unsuspecting people do not realise that the Scottish Government are not playing fair? This is such a simple fix, RoS should be permitted to register the sale of souvenir land plots. Job done.

    • basedrones says:

      What do you mean by “the Scottish Government are not playing fair”? The rules of the (Scottish) game are eminently clear, and have been since the Land Registration (Scotland) Act 1979.

  13. Pingback: Highland Titles’ Twitter Battle with Scottish Lawyers (result: home win) | responsive

  14. Pingback: Lord Glencoe On The Highland Titles Glencoe Estates Scam | Lord Glencoe

  15. Pingback: A Square Foot of Old Scotland: Ownership of Souvenir Plots | basedrones

  16. Pingback: #HighlandTitlesDay | basedrones

  17. Pingback: A Story about Highland Titles, a DMCA Notice and US Copyright Law | basedrones

  18. Pingback: My 2015 in Review | basedrones

  19. Pingback: Some thoughts on legal blogging, with reference to raptor persecution, surveillance and access to land | basedrones

  20. Pingback: Plotting my next move (or “Yes, Peter, I would like a free square foot”) | basedrones

  21. Pingback: Wildcat Haven v Wightman – Defamation | basedrones

  22. Ugo says:

    Hi! Thanks for the insights. I got hooked in a similar offer and I have a few questions if you’d be so kind.
    – Is it true that in Scotland it is allowed to sell souvenir plots of land which cannot be registered under one’s own name?
    – If so, what would happen to the ownership of such a souvenir plot in the moment that the registered owner (the one who sold the souvenir plot) ceases to be the registered owner?
    – Is it true that in Scotland it is not only legal but also traditional that whoever owns a piece of land, no matter how small, is called Laird, and that this can be translated as Lord (without any aristocratic/nobility ambition)? If so, would that also be true for souvenir plots?
    – Which Scottish office/entity/authority would be able to look at a Google Map image (with coordinates and boundary lines) and tell me if a piece of land is truly registered at the name of those who are trying to sell it to me?
    Thanks a lot!

    • basedrones says:

      Thanks for the comment, Ugo. I’m pretty sure I’ve covered all the points 1-3 in this and other blog posts on this blog. In terms of determining who owns land in Scotland, Registers of Scotland maintain public records and (depending on whether the land has been transferred since the new Land Register was introduced) it can be established pretty quickly who owns what. If the land is on an older register, you might need to have a bit more of a rummage, and professional search firms can help (e.g. Millar & Bryce).

      • Ugo says:

        Thank you for answering.
        I did read this post but apart for the quote of the section 4(2)(b) I hadn’t found anything which my brain could recognize as answer to my questions.
        I admit though, laws are like an extraterrestrial language to me, and anything written in a “lawyer style” is mostly incompatible with the operative system of my brain, and the longer the text the stronger the headache, so I was hoping in some very brief almost yes/no answer.
        Anyway, I took the courage to open the link to the article of lawscot.
        What about if I tell you what I understood and you tell me yes or not?
        1) Laird means inhabitant, and can’t be used in the form of Laird X of Y. So, no Lord of Glencoe.
        Now question 1 section b: what about simply “Laird X”? Like, I buy land in Scotland, am I Laird Ugo?
        2) ownership of souvenir land doesn’t grant rights against thirds, right?
        3) if answer to 2 is yes: this means that what Highland Titles call “owning” souvenir plots can be actually translated as “we (HT) are the real owners but we generously allow you to call yourself owner just for fun and to come visit this plot which you do not own, and in the same way we allow you this we can take this permission back anytime and you can’t do anything about it”.
        4) if HT sells its land to someone else, who therefore registers or at his name and becomes the de facto real owners with real rights against thirds, we “owners” of souvenir plots would not have any kind of right over that plot and the new owner could forbid us from ever visiting it again etc. Right?

        Now, bonus question which can’t be answered with yes or not: could you explain in an easy way, like elementary school for people with cognitive difficulties, what’s this “personal right” which HT talks big time about, and which supposedly does grant ownership of some kind (not clear if against thirds too)?
        You see, in the article of lawscot the keeper, talking of souvenir plots, says:
        “the fact that the Keeper is obliged to reject registration does not necessarily mean that “ownership” can be obtained by some other means”.
        And it’s that NOT NECESSARILY which catches my attention. It makes me wonder, why is she not saying “it can’t be obtained by any other means, period”?

        Thanks again.

      • basedrones says:

        A personal right is a right enforceable against one or a select group of people, whereas a real right is enforceable against the world, or that is at least what I say to my new law students.

        In terms of other stuff, can I direct you to my other writings, such as this piece for The Conversation: https://theconversation.com/can-you-become-a-scottish-laird-for-29-99-not-quite-54354

        Beyond that, I’m afraid if you want specific questions answered, I’m not going to delve any deeper for fear of the perception that I am giving specific legal advice, not to mention I have a truckload of dayjob admin to be getting on with.

      • Ugo says:

        Hi again. Please, do not have such concerns, nobody here mistakes your blog for a free legal advice center, surely not me.
        Also because, I don’t need any legal advice.
        I didn’t buy anything from HT. I did buy from Established, but they offer full refunds, and if not I still have PayPal buyer protection, and if not, well, that’s life.
        I surely am not going to sue anyone for this.
        But you have this blog, you address these topics, I guess it’s too be expected that people ask you questions.
        The precision of them is not to be seen as intimidating for you but just as simplifying for me (more complex questions mean more complex answers and I can’t cope with it).
        So, I’d appreciate if you can answer those previous questions, with absolutely no commitment, just as your personal opinion.
        You see, I’ve bought two plots, one for me, one for a friend. If it were just for me, I’d just ask the refund. But having already offered that gift as a token of friendship, it would look bad if I take it back. So, before I go the way of the refund, I just want to understand things better.
        Directing me to other long and complicated articles won’t help me.

      • basedrones says:

        Returning to your first three questions then:

        – If so, what would happen to the ownership of such a souvenir plot in the moment that the registered owner (the one who sold the souvenir plot) ceases to be the registered owner? SEE ABOVE.
        – Is it true that in Scotland it is not only legal but also traditional that whoever owns a piece of land, no matter how small, is called Laird, and that this can be translated as Lord (without any aristocratic/nobility ambition)? NO. I OWN LAND IN SCOTLAND AND I AM NOT A LAIRD. IF I WANTED TO FORMALLY CHANGE MY NAME THOUGH TO MR “Laird Malcolm Combe” THAT IS UP TO ME. If so, would that also be true for souvenir plots? SEE THE LORD LYON’S COMMENTS.

      • Ugo says:

        Thanks, much appreciated.

      • Ugo says:

        Hello again 🙂
        I’ve finally got my money back from Established Titles.
        Now I’m helping other people understanding the situation and that is not about them and the fun they can have with these titles, but about Scottish people and the respect for their real traditions.

        In the while Mr Bevin wrote me this:
        “As for Glencoe, there has not been a laird or lord of Glencoe for 200 years, which is why we have been able to register the name and offer it for the use of the thousands of people who buy souvenir plots of land from us.
        We have registered a variety of phrases or words with the United Kingdom trademark office as our intellectual property. It simply means we own the phrase or words in the same way as anyone might own a car or a house. https://www.gov.uk/search-for-trademark
        anyone can call themselves the Lord, Laird or Lady of Glencoe, with our permission because we control the use of our property in the same way as you might control the use of your car or your house.”

        Now, apart that I’m wondering who is behind the official blog of Lord Glencoe (where Highland Titles is heavily attacked) if it’s true that there’s no Lord of Glencoe.

        Anyway, does what he wrote seem plausible to you and does that mean that they are officially authorized to call themselves Lords of Glencoe and to let all those who buy souvenir plots from them call themselves so too?

        Thanks again

      • basedrones says:

        Hi Ugo, thanks for the comment. Good news that you got your money back without any issues. I’m not sure who is behind the Lord Glencoe blog, but there is no denying they are fairly sceptical of the Highland Titles set-up and also another apparent scheme to do with the old EHIC cards. Anyway, I’m not too sure I would entirely approach the use of trade marks [NB, there is a space in the UK spelling] that is described is one I would adopt wholesale. If they have such rights (which I have not checked) it might stop competitors trying to do the same thing, but it doesn’t elevate people who trade with them to lordship or ladyship.

  23. Pingback: Who owns Lord Glencoe's plot? - Land MattersLand Matters

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s