Railway tunnel searches were the subject of a CLC reminder in April 2014 following an incident in which construction work penetrated an operational railway tunnel near Old Street, London. The incident highlighted the importance of checking search coverage, investigating title entries and recognising the limitations of mapping.
Originally published on 8 April 2014. Updated in October 2026 with revised presentation, an updated source link and related reading. The CLC reminder described below is historical.
The CLC’s railway tunnel searches reminder
At the request of the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB), the Council for Licensed Conveyancers issued a reminder concerning searches for sites where underground railway infrastructure might be present.
The reminder identified the following locations and railway organisations:
- Inner London, including Docklands: Network Rail and Transport for London tunnels.
- Central Newcastle: the Tyne and Wear Metro.
- Central Glasgow: the Glasgow Subway.
The underlying concern was whether the searches commissioned for a particular site would identify relevant railway infrastructure. Ordering a routine search package did not necessarily establish that enquiries had been made of the organisation responsible for a tunnel beneath the property.
The Old Street railway tunnel incident
On 8 March 2013, piling work at a construction site penetrated a railway tunnel between Old Street and Essex Road stations in London.
A train driver reported water entering the tunnel. A second driver, instructed to examine the area at low speed, stopped before reaching two large drilling augers that had penetrated the tunnel and obstructed the railway.
The piling rig operators were unaware that they were working above an operational tunnel. Its position was not shown on the site plan or on the maps available to the developer and local planning authority. Network Rail had therefore not been consulted during the planning application process and was unaware of the construction activity.
Why the searches and mapping missed the tunnel
The warning drew attention to three connected problems.
1. The search package did not include the tunnel owner
The searches undertaken when the development site was purchased did not include an enquiry of Network Rail. The specialist search provider used for the transaction had not offered that organisation among its available search options.
This illustrates the importance of understanding what a search package covers and whether additional enquiries are needed for the particular property and proposed use.
2. Maps did not reveal the underground infrastructure
The tunnel was omitted from the mapping available to those involved. The RAIB identified the fact that not all railway tunnels appear on Ordnance Survey mapping as an important learning point.
A schematic underground railway map should also not be treated as a precise plan of a tunnel’s alignment beneath individual properties.
3. A title entry was not properly understood
The registered title excluded subsoil formerly vested in the Great Northern and City Railway. Although that railway company no longer existed, its assets had passed to successor organisations.
The developer proceeded without understanding the significance of that entry. The incident demonstrates why an unfamiliar reference in a title register may require investigation rather than being dismissed as an obsolete historical detail.
Conveyancing lessons from the tunnel incident
The incident brought together search coverage, mapping limitations and the interpretation of title information. Each issue needed to be considered alongside the intended development of the site.
For conveyancing firms, useful questions include:
- What organisations and information sources does the proposed search package cover?
- Does the title refer to excluded subsoil, railway interests or rights that need further investigation?
- Could the client’s intended works make underground infrastructure particularly relevant?
- Has an unanswered enquiry or unexplained title entry been followed up?
- Have relevant findings, limitations and outstanding issues been explained clearly to the client?
The appropriate enquiries will depend on the property, the proposed transaction and the scope of the firm’s instructions. The historical reminder should not be treated as a complete list of locations where railway-related enquiries may be relevant.
Search coverage and lender acceptance are separate questions
Whether a search investigates the relevant risk is a different question from whether a mortgage lender accepts a particular search product or provider. Both may need to be addressed on a financed transaction.
Our article on personal searches and conditional lender acceptance explores the importance of reading the conditions attached to a lender’s answer.
For another historical example, see our earlier article on lender requirements for water and drainage searches. These articles provide background; current lender instructions should be checked for a live transaction.
Explain significant findings in the Report on Title
Obtaining information is only part of the process. Where a search or title investigation identifies a relevant issue, the client needs a clear explanation of its significance and any further enquiries or specialist input required.
A Report on Title should distinguish between an established finding, a limitation in the information obtained and an issue that remains unresolved. The explanation should relate to the particular property and the client’s stated intentions.
Keep your Report on Title wording under review
Search findings and unusual title entries can require explanations that go beyond a standard description of the documents obtained.
Explore Lexsure’s Report on Title precedent paragraph and notification services to support reviews of your client reporting documents. Suggested wording should be adapted to the facts and enquiries on each file.
Read the RAIB investigation report
The RAIB investigation identified learning points concerning information in land ownership records and the omission of some railway tunnels from Ordnance Survey mapping. Its recommendations also addressed the availability of railway infrastructure information for property-related searches and development enquiries.
Read the official RAIB report on the penetration and obstruction of the tunnel between Old Street and Essex Road stations for the findings and recommendations.
Leave a Reply