[bartchamdo]

I disagree, why can’t land ownership be in sealed documents much like court documents can be sealed? It’s still registered as before but the documents are available to just anyone anytime without reason and they stay out of the clutches of the sleazy data dealers and such that get my address this way and send me junk and harass me in other ways. Obfuscation past this would still be possible as you said but the default should be privacy to the owner.

[StopHammoTime]

Because ultimately, the reason could be made up. ANYONE could say they want to purchase the property and make an enquiry anyway. People can always lie or come up with fantastical stories.

The problem is the baby is being thrown out with the bath water. The solution is good, the modern pillaging of the data is not.

[figassis]

The government should have no responsibility in facilitating land deals. If you want to buy land, buy it from the markets, and if the owner has not listed it, then likely they don’t want to sell it. And if you really want to buy it and think maybe if I just show them how much I’m willing to pay for it they’d sell, but they still haven’t listed it and you don’t know anyone that knows the owner, either tough luck or hire a private investigator.

The government should only be involved in the ownership transfer process after a sale has been made.

If you go to the government and ask about a piece of land, they should only be able to tell you if it’s owner by someone or by the state itself. If the latter, then you can buy it from them.

Everything else seems like it exists due to lobbying.

[philipwhiuk]

"from the markets"

How do you know the person you are buying it from actually owns it.

[figassis]

This is a solved problem. How to you buy a car from someone?

[dragonwriter]

> This is a solved problem

Sure, but the solution that makes it a “solved problem” is—exactly—what is used now.

> How to you buy a car from someone?

Governments make publicly available title records by VIN for cars. If you are financing a car, the financer will probably insist on verifying it just as the person financing your home purchase will want similar verification.

If you aren't financing it (more likely with cars than real estate) maybe you won't do any verification first, accept a pink slip or deed at face value, and file the required paperwork with the government to record the transfer, accepting more risk.

EDIT: But even if you are doing it without financing, the risk profile is different: an expensive car is a cheap plot of land, which makes the opportunity for profit from fraudulently selling real estate to people who are willing not to independently verify title a lot greater per act than with cars. There's a reason that the saying is “If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you.” and not “... a car to sell you.”

[drekipus]

Yes, that's definitely what we need this day and age, more secrecy.

[cykros]

If your tree falls on my house, I need to know who to sue for damages. If your failure to adequately look after drainage causes flood conditions, same. Insert any number of ways your property could cause damage to the person or property of another and you have a valid reason for why its ownership information needs to be public.