Three discrepancies. Three decisions before paying a deposit.
An advert, a map and a document can tell different stories about the same property. These examples show how a buyer living abroad could turn a warning sign into specific evidence requests and a reasoned next step.
Fictional examples, not individual legal advice.All people, properties, figures, documents and outcomes below are invented. The evidence described has not been obtained or reviewed for a real property. A map or a preliminary screen does not establish title, planning status or permission to build; a lawyer and the relevant technical or public authority must assess the actual case.
01 / Plot boundary
The garden looks larger than the registered plot
Anna, a UK resident, sees a rural house advertised with a 1,050 m² plot. The Land Registry extract describes 930 m²; the cadastral graphic depicts 1,050 m². The fence also encloses a strip used for vehicle access.
Evidence trail
Anna first matches the registry property, its unique code and the cadastral reference. She checks that the two records concern the same land and that the figures both refer to plot area.
A surveyor overlays a measured plan with the cadastral graphic and the seller’s title. The extra 120 m² appears to include the access strip, but the papers supplied do not establish who owns it or whether a formal right of way exists.
Her lawyer asks for the neighbour’s relevant title or boundary evidence, a documented access right and the seller’s proposed route to resolve the difference. Any Registry–Cadastre correction would need the appropriate procedure; a fence or cadastral area alone cannot settle ownership.
The terrace and pool are visible, but the papers differ
Erik, who lives in Sweden, likes a villa with an enclosed terrace and a pool. The title and registry description record a 97 m² dwelling. The cadastral record shows 125 m² of built area and the pool appears on the plan.
Evidence trail
A technician measures the house, terrace and pool separately. That distinguishes a physical difference from a change in how floor area is counted; it does not establish planning permission.
The seller provides a municipal permit for the terrace, but no pool file. Erik’s lawyer requests the municipal planning record and asks a technician to compare what was authorised with what was built, including any open enforcement questions.
The pool’s appearance in Cadastre proves that it is recorded there for cadastral purposes, not that it was authorised or can be entered in the Land Registry. The route for documenting a building depends on the actual planning and technical evidence.
A coastal line crosses the parcel, but where does it affect the plan?
A Canadian couple considers a coastal house with space for a future extension. A preliminary map screen shows a coastal protection line crossing the cadastral parcel. It does not show whether the existing house or the proposed works are affected.
Evidence trail
They obtain the relevant approved coastal demarcation and protection information from the competent authority. A surveyor places the parcel, existing buildings and proposed extension on a referenced plan, rather than judging from a small map screenshot.
The drawings suggest that the line crosses the garden outside the present house, while the planned extension would be in the affected area. Their lawyer seeks written answers from the coastal authority and municipality about the specific location and proposal; neither the map nor the drawings alone grant permission.
They separate the value of the existing home from the unverified expansion project. They also continue normal title, planning and building checks for the house itself.
List the discrepancy, the document that raised it, the evidence still missing and the decision it changes. Our before-deposit tool can organise those questions; an individual legal and technical review must resolve the property-specific issues.
The official materials linked beside each example explain the general legal and documentary context. They have been checked for this page on . Their application depends on the property, location and current records.
General educational content prepared with AI assistance. Professional editorial review is pending. These are invented examples, not a report about a real property or a substitute for individual legal advice.
