Of Certificates and Ballots

Guest post by Samuel G. Njenga

Did u know that the Kenyan Government only recognizes title deeds and allotment letters as bona-fide documents to show proof of ownership of land? And by the way, from our previous lessons, the allotment letter is just an offer and the expectation after receiving the offer is to accept it by way of paying the charges therein.

So, when you purchase a plot from a land buying company and all you receive is a certificate from the said company, then please take note that the government does not recognize that you own the plot. In fact the agreement may only say that you own a plot excised from the mother title so and so.

The origin of these certificates and ballots was by land buying companies whereupon the company would buy a big chunk of land, or would be allotted by the government. The shareholders of the company would then buy shares and you’d find a share would mean one or several parcels of land. Ideally, the shareholders would ballot for the available pieces, hence the ballot card and numbers. Thereafter, they’d pay some charges to be shown the parcel (s) and process the titles via the buying / ranching company. We have heard of Embakasi, Githunguri, Kihiu Mwiri, Kiganjo, Dandora farmers, Mboi Kamiti, Nyakinyua etc, all ranching companies that would apply this concept. Till today, you’ll find members who never paid the requisite charges to acquire title deeds still holding on to original documents (very old receipts, ballots & certificates) as proof of ownership. I once saw a mzee who had framed a certificate and held it so dear it was kinda comical. But then, they are / were original owners and any sale would mean a transfer is executed at the company offices.

Fast forward to today. Some guys will buy huge chunks of land, subdivide physically and sell using certificates. My biggest question has always been why a serious investor in land would behave like that. But purchasers are also to blame; why do you buy a plot with a certificate worst of all from an individual? This is plainly lazy on the part of the guy selling.

In some cases, the concept is acceptable like the Mhasibu case where they sell a concept and members buy into the concept. When cash enough to commit to the deal has been received, the deposit is paid and the balance is paid upon completion by those interested. Title processing comes much later after members have fully paid and subdivision is completed. Notice the advantages of such a concept in the fact that members fully enjoy economies of scale because the bigger the land, the cheaper it becomes. Again, when well negotiated, the members acquire the plots at a cost which is way below the market prices.

For the former case where an individual just buys a huge chunk and sell plots with certificates, take note of the risks therein:

1. For the individual / company selling, if they decide to use the land as collateral, who would stop them? I have heard cases where dubious fellows use the land as collateral only for the purchasers to be left in a fix when the fellow defaults. You’ll end up lining up with a bank somewhere where the bank claims lenders interest and the purchasers claim purchasers’ interest.
2. For the purchaser, you can never use the land as collateral because no bank will accept those certificates. The ownership of that property only reaches the purchaser upon transfer of the title in their name.

I have also witnessed interesting cases especially in Ruiru (Murera Area) where guys subdivide land into tiny plots measuring 60ft by 40ft and sell using certificates. What purchasers should know is that you can never get a title with that size of a plot around that area. In fact the smallest piece you should buy must be a minimum 40ft by 80ft or equivalent area. My advice is that we avoid these certificates at all cost. However, whenever purchasing any land in those schemes, then it is wise to demand for those original documents as part of due diligence.

Next we’ll look at joint property ownership and the legal implications.