Why land is not option for quick cash

While one appreciates the uniqueness of land as an asset with multiple values, and which can cushion one from volatile inflationary swings, policy wigs must continue to innovate methods to monetise it much faster.

Commonplace experience informs that several families still hold a great proportion of their wealth in form of land, and, inevitably, turn to it when in tight financial circumstances. But those in a hurry for cash from land have often met with limitations. Land officers and land registrars in public offices may share moving stories of desperate families out to quickly liquidate their properties.

But the hands of such officers are tied by procedure and law. Ironically, even with automation, monetising land may continue to be comparatively slower than with other forms of assets.

Much as we appreciate that the attendant laws and procedures are primarily meant to protect proprietors and their close ones, let’s challenge ourselves to continuously examine the attendant processes with a view to perfecting them.

The sale of leasehold land will for instance require the consent of the lessor, usually the county or national government. This takes formal applications and the payment of any outstanding land rents and rates, where applicable.

Where the transaction must undergo committee scrutiny, the approval must await scheduled meetings. If agricultural land, the local land control board must provide consent. This could take months. Where subdivision is involved, the process escalates to include planning and surveying processes.

Read:  Why we should celebrate recent court ruling on Ngara land lease

The comprehensive process may end up requiring the use of a conveyancing lawyer, a licensed surveyor and a registered planner at different stages.

Once all the documentation is ready for transfer, the responsible land registrar will need evidence of spousal consent. Else, there must be evidence that the property is not matrimonial and is exempt. Even with best attempts, these processes may call for six months or more.

Freehold land, most of which is agricultural, will usually call for consents from local land boards. These are organs whose procedures and timelines are in flux, constraining predictability.

Where subdivision is involved, just as in the case of leasehold land, planning and surveying processes kick in. Where land is matrimonial, transfer documents will need to be accompanied by spousal consent. All this takes time.

These processes will often take three to six months, an unfriendly timeline where there’s some pressing need. Can we do better? I think so. We can, for instance, demand a re-engineering of the pertinent stages to cut on time, and put in place rigid internal monitoring mechanisms.

In addition, we can harness the ongoing automation process to minimise human interaction by digitising all the sub-steps, including statutory approvals and land control board processes.

The writer is a consultant on land governance.