Charging Order? The myth

eggbox

Well it depends on why you want to prevent a CCJ? If it's because it could affect your employment I understand that but for credit the default on the account will do as much damage. The only other reason is to prevent them going for a CO which you would be giving them anyway?


And simple maths tell you that you will be adding £240 to the debt every year which may not happen if you opted for the ccj.

sentient73

Yes it was to avoid the credit issue, however it's not like I'll be looking for credit in the next few years anyway. Maybe it was also to avoid the psychological factor of having a CCJ, which I guess I'll just have get over.

They have said that they'll be going for a CO if it goes to court anyway.

I probably do need to look at it logically, which would obviously mean not increasing the total amount of the debt. I need to decide tomorrow as 24th is the deadline I need to revert to court by.

Thanks for you input eggbox, it really is appreciated.

eggbox

No problem and I do understand your concerns but you have to realise a default on your CRA file knackers getting "normal" credit for 6 years anyway. The stigma, however, of having a CCJ is virtually non existent and you would be amazed how many people have them.

But not caving in to a voluntary charge now gives you some breathing space and, if you so wish, make "alternative" arrangements regarding your house.

sentient73

eggbox wrote: »

No problem and I do understand your concerns but you have to realise a default on your CRA file knackers getting "normal" credit for 6 years anyway. The stigma, however, of having a CCJ is virtually non existent and you would be amazed how many people have them.

But not caving in to a voluntary charge now gives you some breathing space and, if you so wish, make "alternative" arrangements regarding your house.

Is there a difference in any way between a voluntary charge and a court ordered charge? I am also intrigued by the alternative arrangements for our house. Would this be necessary if any CO would actually just be a restriction anyway?

eggbox

As far as I am aware a voluntary charge couldn't attach to your legal estate if your property is jointly owned. But I would research that just to make sure.

(The "alternative" arrangements would be no property in your name no CO available)

sentient73

eggbox wrote: »

As far as I am aware a voluntary charge couldn't attach to your legal estate if your property is jointly owned. But I would research that just to make sure.

(The "alternative" arrangements would be no property in your name no CO available)

Sorry, I thought any type of charge, voluntary or court ordered, would actually just be a restriction, given the fact the debt is single and the property is joint?

Unfortunately wife doesn't earn enough to allow us to put the propert just in her name, although given the fact that the CO will just be a restriction anyway does that really matter?

Sorry, just trying to get my head around it all.

eggbox

sentient73 wrote: »

Sorry, I thought any type of charge, voluntary or court ordered, would actually just be a restriction, given the fact the debt is single and the property is joint?

I'm pretty sure that's the case, but if you go down that road I'm just saying make sure that is the case? If Land Registry Rep is around he may be able to confirm what Restriction is registered in the case of a voluntary charge (as opposed to one made by a court?)

eggbox

wembley14 wrote: »

Her response was that she could not instruct her client to purchase the property with the restriction in place only when it is removed before sale.

From Land Registry Practice guide 23A (CO) Section 3;


P9: Will the restriction entry stop me from selling or mortgaging my property?


A9: Not necessarily. The restriction will not stop you from selling or mortgaging, provided that its terms are complied with (if they apply). It would however be up to a buyer or a lender to decide whether to proceed if there is a restriction on the register

Further proof that it is Solicitors who are unneccessarily preventing property sales from proceeding (by insisting Restrictions are removed prior to a sale) and not the law.

sentient73

eggbox wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that's the case, but if you go down that road I'm just saying make sure that is the case? If Land Registry Rep is around he may be able to confirm what Restriction is registered in the case of a voluntary charge (as opposed to one made by a court?)

I have spoken to the Land Registry this morning. They were not able to answer this specific question, and they said that only a court can apply a Charging Order, and that if something was being applied outside of court then it is more likely to be a notice. I'm now trying to find out what type of notice it would be, and what the implications of a notice are in relation to my situation.

wembley14

eggbox wrote: »

From Land Registry Practice guide 23A (CO) Section 3;


P9: Will the restriction entry stop me from selling or mortgaging my property?


A9: Not necessarily. The restriction will not stop you from selling or mortgaging, provided that its terms are complied with (if they apply). It would however be up to a buyer or a lender to decide whether to proceed if there is a restriction on the register

Further proof that it is Solicitors who are unneccessarily preventing property sales from proceeding (by insisting Restrictions are removed prior to a sale) and not the law.

Thanks for the additional info eggbox.
This shows that the buyers solicitor is not acting in their best interests, if she is not willing to use the laws that are there. So what possible benefits is she actually achieving for her clients.


My wife is now telling me to bite the bullet and pay the debt off out of proceeds and go back to our original solicitor due to him having all the info. She wishes I had never seen BLUEBACK'S initial thread, I am gutted, just like to say to BRIGHTONIAN a big well done in succeeding. I will keep you all posted on final outcome.