Questions developers ask
Mostly from people who already pay for a land-data tool. Honest answers.
I have a map and a filter bar already. Why would I need this?
Keep them. You have the map and an hour on Monday. We have run every registered parcel in the territory against sixteen tests, read what changed since last week, checked each candidate against the reasons it might be wrong, and written up the ten that survived. The tool is where you look; the brief is what was found.
Ten sites is too few.
Ten is the number you will actually read. The other candidates stay in the pool and come back when something changes — a permission enters its last months, an appeal is allowed nearby, an owner's company status changes. A quiet week is stated as quiet; it is never padded to ten.
It is only Torbay.
By design. Exclusivity only means something in a territory small enough to have a seat cap. Your patch opens when it has demand — name it.
How is this different from a saved search with alerts?
A saved search fires on one dataset. Every site here rests on a join a saved search cannot make — company ownership × Companies House status, a permission × the absence of commencement evidence, an allowed appeal × nearby capacity — and every one has been checked against the ways it could be wrong, with the checks shown on the page.
Your ownership comes from the company-owned-titles dataset. I can do title lookups.
Correct, and we say exactly how each match was made — at address level or only at postcode level — and where it is uncertain we say so. A title purchase is the next action, at cost. We never name private individuals.
I already pay £195 a month for a tool.
Then this is not a replacement and we will not pretend it is. It is the analyst you would hire for Monday mornings if one existed for £149. One site pursued pays for years of briefs.
Do you send letters to owners, or help me to?
No. We never contact owners and never build contact lists. The Land Registry licences forbid using ownership data to approach proprietors, and the product is the site, not the mailshot. The tools do letters; we do not.
Prove it.
The method page publishes both replay runs — 24% vs 8% on any planning application, 6.5% vs 0.6% on residential development applications — with the caveats and the two checks a sceptic would run. From the second issue, every brief carries its own hit rate.
Is this investment advice? A valuation?
Neither. It is research. Every number shows its method and its source; verify before you buy anything.
Annual contract?
Three months on the first seat of a newly opened territory, then monthly. No auto-renewal into a longer term.
What happens to sites nobody pursues?
They stay in the outcome ledger. We publish what happened to them — sold, application lodged, approved, refused — because that is the honest test of whether this is worth paying for.
What do you do with my email?
Store it with the territory you named and the option you chose, and write to you about territories and the brief. Nothing else; see the privacy notice.