Charging Order? The myth

eggbox

joan1920 wrote: »

I ask this one question of you EGGBOX if you were owed a considerable amount of money say for instance £10,000 and somebody offered to pay you a nominal amount of just say £5 aweek would that be acceptable to you knowing that the debt would not be cleared for approximately 45 years I think not!!!

You seem incapable of grasping the basis of this thread and what its about. It's not about debt avoidance its about fairness. The creditors lent money on the basis it was UNSECURED.


The loan repayments they receive are, therefore, much higher than a secured loan as those repayments are what the MOJ call "insurance for bad debts". These creditors, remember, are collecting these higher premiums on ALL loans made and not just on those customers who have run into problems. Despite this, the law allows creditors to persue "security" for these debts by attaching a charge on the debtors property or financial interest in the property. This action has the potential ability to cause the debtor to lose his home.


In many cases, especially on credit cards that had rocketing interest rates, the creditor had been repaid the original amount it had lent and what it was chasing was hugely inflated compound interest amounts.


That is far, far different from someone who loans £10k and is still owed £10k. If you can't see that I feel sorry for you.

joan1920

Eggbox
On the contrary I fully grasp the thread and the fact remains that when taking out an unsecured loan there are insurance policies in place that you can take out to safeguard the payments to the credit companies surely a few pounds a month spent is better than losing everything in the future should you be made redundant ,suffer ill health etc etc. Secondly the mortgage company would have to give permission for a charge to be placed on your home, this again could be avoided if their is sufficient equity in your property to both realise the redemption figure owed to the lender and to pay off the credit card company then why not release the equity and pay the debt off? therefore safeguarding your home and not incurring further interest charges from the cca's. As for your last statement you are saying that if a person owed you £10,000 you would not want interest on the debt that is laughable. Last but not least you can ask the for the interest to be frozen on a debt, if it is from a bank providing the initial debt is paid then the bank should be happy with this arrangement, it is only companies that charge extortoinate interest rates such as wonga, payday loans to name a couple should be avoided at all costs .

kanute50

eggbox wrote: »

You seem incapable of grasping the basis of this thread and what its about. It's not about debt avoidance its about fairness. The creditors lent money on the basis it was UNSECURED.


The law now obviously allows the Lender to place a charge on a Debtors Property, whether this is fair or unfair is a matter of opinion. This is a matter that should be taken up with an MP or the FCA (formerly the FSA).


The loan repayments they receive are, therefore, much higher than a secured loan as those repayments are what the MOJ call "insurance for bad debts". These creditors, remember, are collecting these higher premiums on ALL loans made and not just on those customers who have run into problems. Despite this, the law allows creditors to persue "security" for these debts by attaching a charge on the debtors property or financial interest in the property. This action has the potential ability to cause the debtor to lose his home.


I have read this thread from start to finish. It would appear to me that the possibility of anyone losing their home is remote. You have stated on your posts that Orders for Sale are as rare as hens teeth. The problems arise when the property is sold. The dilemma facing the Vendor is "should the creditor be paid?", If they feel that they should not then they have to find a Solicitor who is clued up on the laws surrounding Charging Orders or Restrictions. Then of course there is the problem of the Purchasers Solicitor!!


In many cases, especially on credit cards that had rocketing interest rates, the creditor had been repaid the original amount it had lent and what it was chasing was hugely inflated compound interest amounts.


As Martin Lewis has said on many programmes, Credit Card balances should be cleared each month or you will find yourself in very dangerous territory. If you are living on Credit Cards you are living beyond your means. I do not have a Credit Card and would not be tempted to have one.


That is far, far different from someone who loans £10k and is still owed £10k. If you can't see that I feel sorry for you.

Presumably you have not sold your jointly owned property so you have not had to find a Solicitor who would be compliant with your ex wife's wishes?? You mentioned in your earlier posts that you are the Father of a Solicitor. What are your Daughter's views on Charging Orders and Restrictions, and the payment of these when a property is sold?

joan1920

eggbox
Futhermore to my above statement only when debt on a property superceeds the lenders debt ie the mortgage could an enforcement for sale be imposed, and even then this would depend on the equity in the said property, so surely it would be more frugal to approach the bank and obtain a secure loan on the property in order to pay off the unsecure loan and therefore pay of the debt at lower interest rate, if however their is insufficient funds available to do this then it is unfortunate for the homeowner but again the onus is on the person who borrowed the money initially, not the credit company for wanting back what is rightfully theirs, everyone is aware of the implications of going into debt that they can ill afford it is very unfortunate for people who find themselves in this situation but they do have options such as down sizing and lowering living expenses where possible, again however sometimes this is not alwayspossible which I do sympathise, but if possible then that should be the option they take rid themselves of debt, lower their expenses and live life as best they can with the resources they have at their disposal

eggbox

joan1920 wrote: »

when taking out an unsecured loan there are insurance policies in place that you can take out to safeguard the payments to the credit companies .

Yep, it was called PPI - The banks are currently repaying BILLIONS to consumers it ripped off as it was not fit for purpose. But you (again) missed the point it was the CREDITOR who was insured by the higher premiums

joan1920 wrote: »

Eggbox
Secondly the mortgage company would have to give permission for a charge to be placed on your home.

No they don't. A Charging Order will be placed regardless. It will just be be a lower priority charge by the date issued

joan1920 wrote: »

if their is sufficient equity in your property to both realise the redemption figure owed to the lender and to pay off the credit card company then why not release the equity and pay the debt off? .

Because the debt was never secured on the property so why would you have to use equity built up in your property to repay? - There was no "your home may be at risk etc on CCA agreements"

joan1920 wrote: »

As for your last statement you are saying that if a person owed you £10,000 you would not want interest on the debt that is laughable. .

That's not what I said; but, again, you seem incapable of understanding the difference between someone who has lent you £10k and received NO interest against a creditor who has lent you £10k but has already received HUGE amounts of interest due to the "unsecured" nature of the agreement.

joan1920 wrote: »

Last but not least you can ask the for the interest to be frozen on a debt, if it is from a bank providing the initial debt is paid then the bank should be happy with this arrangement,.

Again, you should do your research before you make such silly statements. And be aware that a change in the law has now enabled creditors to persue a CO even if you have arranged a payment schedule and have not missed any payments on that arangements

eggbox

kanute50 wrote: »

Presumably you have not sold your jointly owned property so you have not had to find a Solicitor who would be compliant with your ex wife's wishes?? You mentioned in your earlier posts that you are the Father of a Solicitor. What are your Daughter's views on Charging Orders and Restrictions, and the payment of these when a property is sold?

For CCA debts she thinks they are as corrupt, immoral and as unfair as most other people would who look at the facts. She is a Family Solicitor and quite often sees the devastation families suffer through unscrupulous DCA's who banks have sold these debts off to for less than 10% of their value. And don't forget even the MOJ agreed they were unfair because the loan was sold on an unsecured basis with high interest rates etc.


But despite the overwhelming information from the OFT (who wanted a £25k threshold) CAB and a vast array of other debt charities who warned on the problems of these types of debts; the weight of the financial lobbying reduced this threshold to just £1k.

harisumo

Quite right Eggbox, how can a loan from a private individual compare to a bank who quite happily awards it's senior staff millions of pounds in bonus payments every year and sells off debts at a fraction of their value and I don't suppose they lose out on that either probably offsetting the losses in a way that will further boost their massive profits. Sad to see such a valuable and useful thread turn into a soapbox which is completely evading the issue.

Lazy_B

Wow, this thread has taken a swerve!
Anyway, wanted to update you and the sparkly one, house sale completed on Friday, restriction unpaid, happy camper, thanks to this thread (which is about charging orders, btw!)

eggbox

Lazy B!!!


Firstly, well done!


Secondly, please update as much as you can on how this happened regarding how everybody was happy to go along with your wishes and what, if anything, the creditor has said?


Your info will be gold to others on here struggling with non compliant conveyancers!

wembley14

I 've got to agree with lazy B regarding the other recent posters, they have gone off on one crazy tangent.


Great news as well from Lazy B.


Thought I would give you latest update with my plight.
Having made many phone calls, mostly to secretaries who are not clued up, "sorry you must remove restrictions". I was unable to speak to conveyancers personally.
I then started to visit as many offices as possible to speak face to face. Eventually I found a secretary that was aware of the restriction laws and she said would put all the available info which I gave her, to her boss.
I received a phone call from him this evening telling me that it is a standard FORM K RESTRICTION. Which I gratefully acknowledged. He would therefore contact the buyers solicitor and explain that the restriction would be removed once the property was sold for value. But he added he would not be giving a written undertaking as it should not be needed as long as the creditor is notified early of pending sale in compliance of restriction.
I wonder if this is what happened with LAZY B. I agree with you Eggbox about him giving us some more info about his outcome. I don't want to count my chickens but there seems to be a chink of light at the end of this long tunnel.
I will keep you all posted.