Charging Order? The myth
Options
Comments
-
If the Restriction is still showing on the deeds it has to be dealt with (one way or the other?)
But if your Mom is nowthe sole owner of the property she can still add someone she trusts to the deeds, to become a joint owner, and deal with the Restriction in the manner this thread is explaining.
Thanks eggbox. I see you have helped many people on here. I haven't been able to go through every page on this topic so I may have missed something. They were joint tenants before my father passed away. Reading around the subject it seems that my mom and the creditor are now tenants in common? Is there anyway to do a deal and reduce the debt amount and pay it off without selling the house? Or transfer it to the next house?0 -
Is the info in post 1 still valid for 2018?
Sorry but there's 3500 posts in it, and I cant read therm all.
Many thanksThe way things are going, soon we are all going to be victims of something or other.
Who will we blame then?0 -
Yes the information posted is still valid0
-
They were joint tenants before my father passed away. Reading around the subject it seems that my mom and the creditor are now tenants in common?
No the creditor is not a tenant in common and your Mom is entitled to be the sole owner. The debtor still only has a legal interest in the "beneficial interest" of the debtor and that will now have passed to the, legal estate, your father has left though his passing.Is there anyway to do a deal and reduce the debt amount and pay it off without selling the house? Or transfer it to the next house?
You can contact the creditor at anytime to see if they are willing to accept a reduced amount to settle the debt in full and final settlement.
Its won't be possible for the creditor to transfer the debt to another property, in your circumstances, as the debtor wouldn't be able to have an interest in the property through being deceased.0 -
Hi I need a bit of advice.
I jointly own a mortgaged property with my wife. I had two ccjs from personal credit cards that came with restrictions in 2009.
We are now at a point where we want to remortgage the property. there is still money owing on both the restrictions. has anyone managed to remortgage without clearing of these restrictions?
I am getting conflicting advise everywhere I go. I have a mortgage offer in principle waiting to go and I have spoke with them and they didn't seem too sure. and said it may have an impact on getting the mortgage they wont know until I go to the next stage, but it is at that point I have to start laying out fees. I don' want to waste any money if it is not going to be possible.
any help or recommendations of a solicitor who knows their way around this type of situation?0 -
SECONDCHANCES
Getting a remortgage is, normally, not possible. This is simply because mortgage companies insist on being the first charge on the deeds of your house. Any new lending, therefore, without removing the Restrictions wouldn't achieve this.
Mortgage companies insist on being the first charge holder as it retains "power of sale". Should you default on the mortgage the power of sale enables the first charge holder to remove any other charges off the deeds to enable the property to be sold "unencumbered".
As the mortgage amount will, usuaully, far outweigh any other loans or charges on the deeds the mortgage lender won't usually lend unless this criteria is met? Depending on the amount required, though, you may be able to aquire a secured loan where such criteria is less rigid as lenders will know they have to be behind the mortgage lender.0 -
Hi All
Can anyone recommend a solicitor they have used who is experienced in dealing with restrictions regarding house sales?0 -
Thank you so much for this response - I wasn't notified of a reply, hence the delay.
My sister has now had to get a solicitor involved. With threats of court, her ex has now provided a settlement figure from Toyota in the region of £14.5k. In that he's not even paying the CSA payments for their daughter, I'm sure the financial summary, income/expenditure form submitted to Toyota will be laughable.
There's clearly no way my sister now wants to pay off this level of debt (she was considering if it was a couple of thousand), espcially as her ex has clearly paid absolutely zilch since they divorced and agreed to the Court Order stipulating his responsibility for repaying this debt.
Given that the once sole debt became secured against a jointly owned property, do Toyota not have an obligation to update both parties in relation to this debt?
I'm pretty sure that under FCA regulations, they should have some obligations towards ensuring that my sister is kept fully aware of the status / level of debt secured against her property.
Can anyone offer any advice on this?
Although her solicitor is looking to take her ex to court regarding breach of the Court Order (so I understand), I am curious as to whether Toyota have been negligent in their responsibilities also?0 -
Its jointly owned but the CO split the ownership type to tennants in common (2 individual shares). The debt is only against on of those shares so they have no responsibility to inform the other share owner.
Given that the once sole debt became secured against a jointly owned property, do Toyota not have an obligation to update both parties in relation to this debt?
No they don't. The CO is not made against the property, it's against the debtors "beneficial interest" (share of the equity) in the property. So they have no obligation to explain anything to your sister as it's nothing, legally, to do with her. Once a CCJ has been granted the creditor also has no obligation to update the debtor, either.I'm pretty sure that under FCA regulations, they should have some obligations towards ensuring that my sister is kept fully aware of the status / level of debt secured against her property.
Toyota have no legal obligations in notifying your sister of the debt does not relate to her. To do so would also breach the Data Protection Act.Although her solicitor is looking to take her ex to court regarding breach of the Court Order (so I understand), I am curious as to whether Toyota have been negligent in their responsibilities also?0 -
No the creditor is not a tenant in common and your Mom is entitled to be the sole owner. The debtor still only has a legal interest in the "beneficial interest" of the debtor and that will now have passed to the, legal estate, your father has left though his passing.
You can contact the creditor at anytime to see if they are willing to accept a reduced amount to settle the debt in full and final settlement.
Its won't be possible for the creditor to transfer the debt to another property, in your circumstances, as the debtor wouldn't be able to have an interest in the property through being deceased.
Thank you eggbox. Is there anyway that, now my father has passed away, the debt does not need to be paid back? Or am I being unrealistic?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 248K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards