Charging Order? The myth

DAKOTA45 · 3 October 2016 at 6:48PM

eggbox wrote: »

SOLICITOR NOW VERIFIED AND AVAILABLE FOR SELLERS!

Just to let everybody know we now have a watershed moment as we have a Solicitor verified as genuine (they completed Sparkly's sale last week) and has indicated he is more than happy to take on new clients.

As we can't advertise details on the thread can anyone interested pm me in the first instance.

Eggbox

Wow… that's great news! :T

I will definitely be wanting to sell soon… I wonder what he would make of the modified restriction, though?

D45

eggbox · 3 October 2016 at 7:07PM

I have asked a couple of questions and will update the. thread accordingly

Eliaskash · 4 October 2016 at 5:19PM

[FONT=&quot]Hello,

Hope somebody ( Eggbox ? Land Registry rep?) can help with my question which I am still confused about after reading the 143 pages under this topic !
We have been waiting to exchange on a house purchase since February but have hit a stumbling block all because of some charging orders placed on the property we want to buy .

The restrictions read as follows :[/FONT]
4 () RESTRICTION: No disposition of the registered estate,[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
other than a disposition by the proprietor of any registered charge[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
registered before the entry of this restriction, is to be registered[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration or their[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
conveyancer that written notice of the disposition was given to[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
XXX at XXX, being the person with the benefit of an interim charging order[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
on the beneficial interest of Mr X and Mrs X made by the[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
Royal Courts of Justice, Queen's Bench Division on (date)[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
.[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
5 () RESTRICTION: No disposition of the registered estate,[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
other than a disposition by the proprietor of any registered charge[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
registered before the entry of this restriction, is to be registered[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration or their[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
conveyancer that written notice of the disposition was given to[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
XXX at XXX, being the person with the benefit of a Final charging order on[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
the beneficial interest of Mr X and Mrs X made by the[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
Royal Courts of Justice, Queen's Bench Division on (date).

As this is a jointly owed debt with the charging order written against both names does it mean it will have to be paid off before we can exchange?
Or the fact that it is explicitly written as a restriction ( and against beneficial interest) mean that it will be overreached on sale by both parties who own the property – Mr and Mrs X - to us?( aslong as notice is given to the named creditors).

Thanks in advance for the help knowledgeable people.[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

eggbox · 4 October 2016 at 5:33PM

Eliaskash

I'll defer to Land Registry Rep as the authority on this but, as I see it, the Restrictions registered still only require YOU (or your conveyancer) to give notification to the Land Registry that a sale is proceeding. If that is the case the Restrictions will become overreached and removed (and no the seller is under no obligation to settle any debt at the time of sale.)

There appears to have been an error as, if both owners owe the debt, then an "equitable" charge can be registered against the property. It would appear this hasn't been done by the creditor which, unless its a Land Registry error, is tough titty on the creditor?

Hopefully, LRR can clarify?

Sparklyfairy · 4 October 2016 at 8:31PM

Hi all, I just want to add that if my solicitor isn't able to help you out with your conveyancing, please be prepared to take 2/3 DAYS of ringing around quizzing solicitors on their knowledge of Restrictions. I believe someone above got fed up after ringing only 5..this isn't the time to be lazy & expect others to do the work for you! Put the work in & question each potential solicitor on what their knowledge of a Restriction is..that's it. If they don't know the difference between a charging order & restriction - MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE. Have a list of names & numbers in front of you. It honestly isn't difficult, just time consuming.

Eliaskash · 4 October 2016 at 9:10PM

Thanks Eggbox.
I am confused too as to why this was not registered as an equitable charge.
I hope LR can clarify this for us as I have searched a lot on the internet and cannot find any other example of this kind of scenario.

Thanks once again not just for myself but for the countless people you have helped.

Land_Registry · 5 October 2016 at 10:06AM

eggbox wrote: »

Eliaskash

I'll defer to Land Registry Rep as the authority on this but, as I see it, the Restrictions registered still only require YOU (or your conveyancer) to give notification to the Land Registry that a sale is proceeding. If that is the case the Restrictions will become overreached and removed (and no the seller is under no obligation to settle any debt at the time of sale.)

There appears to have been an error as, if both owners owe the debt, then an "equitable" charge can be registered against the property. It would appear this hasn't been done by the creditor which, unless its a Land Registry error, is tough titty on the creditor?

Hopefully, LRR can clarify?

Impossible to say if an error has been made without checking the specific title details.

In general terms the same applies re complying with the restrictions and their being overreached.

If they are for the same CO then unusual for the interim and absolute to both be protected - possible but rare and may offer a clue as to uncertainty/error by creditor here

eggbox · 5 October 2016 at 10:19AM

Thanks LLR!

Can I ask what the situation is, regarding the transfer of ownership of a property, if a creditor who has been granted a charging order, that can be registered as an equitable charge on the deeds, doesn't do so?

Eliaskash · 5 October 2016 at 10:59AM

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

Impossible to say if an error has been made without checking the specific title details. If you want us to take a look then email [EMAIL="customer.service@landregistry.gov.uk"]customer.service@landregistry.gov.uk[/EMAIL] with the title number

In general terms the same applies re complying with the restrictions and their being overreached.

If they are for the same CO then unusual for the interim and absolute to both be protected - possible but rare and may offer a clue as to uncertainty/error by creditor here

Thanks LR for the fast response.
I will email the address provided now and update the forum with any response received.
My gut feel is that it is uncertainty by the creditors as they are in a different jurisdiction ( foreign company).
Kind regards.

Eliaskash · 5 October 2016 at 11:12AM

Eliaskash wrote: »

Thanks LR for the fast response.
I will email the address provided now and update the forum with any response received.
My gut feel is that it is uncertainty by the creditors as they are in a different jurisdiction ( foreign company).
Kind regards.

I have sent the email as follows:

Can you kindly clarify two things about the above mentioned property title please?We need to understand the restrictions and why they have been set up this way in order to know how to proceed with a potential sale.

1)Why are there restrictions registered against both owner/party`s beneficial interest rather than them being equitable charges?

2) Secondly will these restrictions be overreached automatically when the condition of the restrictions are complied with ? ( notification of the sale to the creditor by purchasers/conveyancer).

Kind regards,

Charging Order? The myth

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free