Providing resources for studying law
Custom Search
   Home      Kingsnorth Finance v Tizard

Kingsnorth Finance v Tizard [1986] 1 WLR 783

Mr Tizard was the sole registered proprietor of the matrimonial home in which his wife had a beneficial interest. The marriage broke down and Mrs Tizard moved out but returned each day to look after their twin children and would stay the night if her husband was away. Mr Tizard mortgaged the property. On his application for the loan he stated that he was single. He arranged for the inspection to take place on a Sunday when he knew his wife and children would be out. The agent inspecting the property noted that there was occupation by the children but he found no signs of occupation by the wife. Mr Tizard had said that she had moved out many months ago and was living with someone else close by.


Kingsnorth Finance took the property subject to the wife’s interest. The discrepancy between what Mr Tizard had stated on his application form and what the agent found when he inspected the property put the lenders on notice. The lender had failed to take reasonable steps to avoid being fixed with constructive notice. The inspection was inadequate since it was at a pre-arranged time.

Back to lecture outline on the doctrine of notice in land law

Back to lecture outline on overreaching