Skip to main content

Customers support time-saving form RXC

Posted by: , Posted on: - Categories: Law and practice

Following customer feedback we have just published version 2 of our form RXC. And we’re delighted to hear some of our biggest customers are adopting the form and embedding it into their own systems.

Christine Walsh, Post Completions Manager at Stockport-based O’Neill Patient Solicitors LLP, said: “We are incorporating [form RXC] into our case management system as it will mean we can automate the form for signature, therefore freeing up time for the case managers to deal with other aspects of their files. This will help with the reduction of requisitions.”

Requisitions – or requests for information – cause extensive delays both to conveyancing and registration times, and compliance with a restriction in the register is one of the main reasons for raising a point.  For example, between 1 October 2020 and 31 October 2021 more than 1 million applications received a requisition in relation to restrictions, with more than 134,000 points raised for one of 60 reasons.

It’s why we devised the form RXC and why it’s good to know it is helping our customers.

What prompted an updated version?

At HM Land Registry, we really appreciate feedback from our customers about all aspects of our services. Recently, we’ve used this feedback to help us make changes to form RXC.

Form RXC (RX=restriction; c=consent/certificate) is a new way to provide a consent or certificate to comply with a restriction in the register and has been available to our customers since the end of July 2021.

In September, we held a series of popular webinars to introduce form RXC. If you missed them, a recording is available on GOV.UK. This gave us the chance to hear first-hand what you, our customers, thought of the form and how we could improve it. We have also had a good response to our request for feedback through our online blogs.

Thanks to this, we have made some improvements to the form and a new version is now available.

What’s changed and why

You told us:

  • The wording of the consent given in panel 4 should be to the disposition and its registration – both often need to be confirmed as part of a conveyancing transaction.

We have revised the wording in panel 4 to allow a consent to be given to a disposition and its registration, making it easy for both consents to be provided.

  • More guidance should be available around how to complete panel 3 of the form to indicate who is providing the consent or certificate.

We have expanded our guidance on some of the terms we use in panel 3 of the form. This now explains what we mean by “personally named”, and which boxes should be ticked if a restriction describes an individual’s status or job title, without naming them. This further guidance will help you choose the option most appropriate to the circumstances.

We have added a quick reference table to Practice Guide 19 – new section This gives you a convenient, at-a-glance way to determine which parts of panel 3 you need to complete in various circumstances.

  • It is not clear how the form can be used by developers to provide a bulk consent or certificate.

We have included new guidance on this in panels 4 and 5 of the form, including the wording to use when describing different plots in a development.

  • There is not enough space in the text boxes on the PDF version of the form.

We have amended the PDF version to include larger boxes so that more text can be inserted when required.

What’s next?

We hope these changes will enable more customers to follow O’Neill Patient’s lead and adopt form RXC, which makes the process of complying with the terms of a restriction easier for everyone involved.

The form will continue to evolve based on customer feedback, which you can provide by completing our short survey.

Sharing and comments

Share this page


  1. Comment by Megan Jenkins posted on

    Thank you for amending this form and making it much more useful.

    One further change would be useful. Please can RXC deal more thoroughly with bulk consents from developers selling plots from a parent title. PG41 Supplement 4 para 9.1 requires the developer to confirm whether the restriction is to be carried forward to a transfer of part but there is no box for this on RXC.
    PG 41 suppl 4 link

  2. Comment by Anju posted on

    Thank you for your message, we will pass this on to the team who manage the form

  3. Comment by Joanne Barnett posted on

    I have recently listened to the podcast on RXC Forms and you have confirmed that some conveyancers have incorporated the form into their case management system. Do you have intentions to provide training to larger management companies who could incorporate the form when providing consents required by many common restrictions on titles?
    Many of the major delays in registration for us relate to incorrect wording on non RXC Form certificates from management companies.

    • Replies to Joanne Barnett>

      Comment by Gavin Curry posted on

      Thanks for your comment. We are planning to target management companies with specific information about form RXC, aiming to increase take-up in this sector. Use of the form is optional, however, so although we can encourage management companies and offer them support and guidance, we can’t insist they adopt it.