Charging Order? The myth

charlie84

Thanks for this info it really has helped us. We put our house on the market on Monday coming up (and have a viewing on Monday too, we got our credit file last week and tried to work out the CCJ's which we couldn't so we rang the courts and gave them the reference number and they told us they are all charging orders (although only 2 of the 6 are in joint names). Hopefully I can get the title register from the Land registry on Monday as their site is down today and find out for sure what it says. (will be asking for more advice on monday about these lol)

Fingers crossed it will work in our favour that we only need to worry about paying two off in full then we can use the rest of the equity to tackle the other £57K debt.

Sparklyfairy

thechippy wrote: »

All the solicitor has to do is inform the creditor of the impending transfer 14 days prior to completion and give the buyers solicitor a letter of undertaking that the restriction will fall away at the point of sale.

This came up earlier on this thread...where exactly does it specify 14 days? None of my paperwork from Land Regsitry or the court says this..all it says in layman's terms is that notice needs to be given before safe...before in this case can mean anything. Also this link here from bllaw states that there isn't a stipulation saying 14 days is required...

thechippy

Actually sparkly, I think you're correct.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that some are saying that 14 days notice "should" be given, but it's not law.

AFAIK, the restriction automatically falls away at the point of sale, as it relates to the debtor and the home and not the buyer and the home, so the restriction can't remain. I don't think you have to apply for removal.

However, I'm fairly sure that the solicitor does have to give a written undertaking that it will fall away at the point of completion to the purchasers solicitor.

Does this make sense??

Sparklyfairy

thechippy wrote: »

Actually sparkly, I think you're correct.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that some are saying that 14 days notice "should" be given, but it's not law.

AFAIK, the restriction automatically falls away at the point of sale, as it relates to the debtor and the home and not the buyer and the home, so the restriction can't remain. I don't think you have to apply for removal.

However, I'm fairly sure that the solicitor does have to give a written undertaking that it will fall away at the point of completion to the purchasers solicitor.

Does this make sense??

Yes, thanks. I was one thinking it was 14 days earlier on this thread, but others have said no. It is so confusing to the average person & I just wanted to clarify that the 14 days thing isn't law.

englishmade

Hello, I have read this thread with great interest as I also have a restriction in my name registered to our jointly owned home which I am proberly going to have to sell this year.

I agree; a restriction is not a charging order but is often refered to being the same thing, although it is intended to be.
Okay, a buyer is found, my solicitor will issue an undertaking to remove all charges on completion to the buyers solicitor and inform the Land Registry on exchange. You say; my solicitor will inform the person who has the benefit of the restriction of the intented sale ( normally there is a period of 28 days between exchange and completion) at 14 days before completion (if correct), okay, what does the creditor have to do before completion? Do they have to go to court and obtain a court order or something of simular nature? If so, how long would this take?
(you say; my solicitors duty is to only inform the creditor of the sale) If this is correct, then the transaction will be won or lost if the creditor is required to go back to court and time is of the essence.

Can somebody expand on the creditor proceedure as there has been little said on this part of the transaction to date.

Many thanks.

Sparklyfairy

If done in time, I suspect it would be no different to how a creditor collects their charge on a proper, full charging order. I'd be very surprised if court would be entered into AGAIN (as it was already a court order to grant the charge). I'm unsure about the actual process & would also welcome advice!

mdj1

I've been reading this post with interest.

I'm going to court with a friend of mine tomorrow against Nationwide who are applying for a final judgement and then a charging order.

She is now registered disabled and can no longer work, which is why she can only pay nationwide £10 a month from her benefits.

I know that there is talk of the court not favouring charging orders for familys with children or disabled persons, but what if the only person owning and living in the house IS disabled.

She has been consulting with the CAB, which to be honest have been absolutely useless, the woman who was helping her is only there for 3 hours a week so it took forever to get anything done!

Thanks in advance for any help

thechippy

Judges can be unpredictable. They "may" grant the fco, but a forced sale is highly unlikely.

Providing the owner has no intention of selling, I'd not worry too much.

geoffky

great thread that must bring relief for some..

mdj1

She's more worried that one day she will have to go into care and that her house will help pay for that care, however if there is a CO on her house it will impact on her quality of life / care at a later stage. Surely the courts cant place a CO on the home of someone who has a neurological illness that will one day see that person probably needing full time care.