Charging Order? The myth

joan1920

Hi Jasmine stocks can I just clarify that I did not voluntary hand my keys to the house back to the lender, it was the purchaser of our property that failed to make the mortgage payments and therefore the house was repocessed.The purchasher bought it on a buy to rent back basis, we left the property and new tennants took up residence, deferred payments of rental in advance and retained equity were to be paid either on or completion of any sale, but due to a shortfall of the redemption figure owed to the Bank Of Ireland we were instructed by the new buyers soilicitor that they could not proceed with the purchase until our charge was removed ,despite having a unilateral notice and a legal charge we were powerless to stop this from happening, we were told that because the Banks loan superceeded ours we had to relinquish our charge. Having said this I am now persuing a negligency claim on the solicitors concerned in our property on the grounds that a lien should have been placed on the property as the purchase price was not payed in full at time of completion, and therefore they failed to safeguard my interest in the propertyshould it be sold or indeed repocessed, had this been in situ then the Bank of Ireland may not have let it get repocessed and sold at auction at a fraction of its worth I am still doing lots of research and am comtemplating taking this matter to the public interest office as what has happened to me is very likely to happen to several more people who find themselves in my position now, as many of us used the same firm of solicitors that were appointed by the purchaser who consequently is now Bankcrupt eggbox is correct in saying that restrictions can be left unpaid on the proviso that the charge orders give consent I think that is what he said no doubt he will correct me if I'm wrong

eggbox

Creditors have commercial interests. They aren't going to waste time and money chasing debtors who have no means to repay (other than sending a letter saying you still owe blah, blah, blah....).


Your Mom was only originally pursued simply because she had an asset (the house) on which they could attach their debt to. Once that asset is gone so will they be.


joan1920 has just verified that the primary charge holder (in your case the mortgage company) takes priority over all others. But if your chump of a conveyancer understood anything about Restrictions she would be negotiating with the charge holders to allow a sale to proceed so they get paid.


Your Mom was only in their pocket when she had something they could take away from her. When that's gone she really can bin anything else they send to her. The CCJ will stay on her CRA file for six years after which she will be back to normal anyway.

JasmineStocks

Thank you Joan1920 and Eggbox for your replies. My poor step father was not competent in dealing with his financial affairs because he was so ill and drugged up due to the constant pain he was in. My poor mother is not sleeping and is in very poor health herself. I am doing my best to try and sort things out and you have helped so much, thank you.

kanute50

Hi JasmineStocks, how sad for your Mum to lose your Stepfather the way she did and then have to try and sort out such a tangled mess.


If you cannot make the Charge Holders see sense to allow the sale of the house to proceed, then your Mum will have no alternative but to give the house back to the Lender. Considering that all she wanted was to do the right thing, that is awful.


This thread has been very interesting and informative, as other threads on the Forum have too.


Joan1920 and I have a debtor in common, and have been able to assist and give strength to each other. Without this forum we would not have been able to make contact.


We posted on the House Buying, Renting and Selling section some time ago about the Sell and Rent Back pitfalls that affected us. Sadly, the proprietor of the company concerned had the posts removed. Hopefully we will be able to post an update, and give useful information in the very near future, that will help others in the same situation. We are now in touch with many of the victims of the unscrupulous property developer.


Forums such as this one are of great help to people.


Very best wishes to your Mum, I hope she can sort things out to her advantage. She is so lucky to have your support. Good luck to you both.

JasmineStocks

Ah thanks Kanute50 for your kind words. This forum is fantastic, I have learnt so much! It just makes me feel so sad about all the worry people have to go through but it's good to know there are people who care and give their time and knowledge freely to help others. Thank you everyone.

JasmineStocks

Well, I've written letters to all the charging order and restriction companies telling them that none of them will get paid unless the buyer's solicitor receives a written undertaking that they will remove the restrictions on completion. I'll let you know what response I get. My mum's conveyancer just rang me to tell me that they have to ALL be paid. I quoted what the register of title says that the restriction owners only have to send a certificate to say that they have had notice of the sale but she still maintains that the shortfall has to to be paid before the sale will go through. She said that I am reading too much into the actual words of the register of title and that the restrictions are just as important as the charging orders, although she does admit that the mortgage company have first claim to the money from the sale. She says that it doesn't matter what order they are on the title they ALL have to be paid. I just can't convince her that the restrictions are not the same as charging orders but she won't accept it. She says that the restrictions are charging orders under another name.

eggbox

Hi Jasmine

pm me your email address and I will send some info to give your conveyancer.

JasmineStocks

Hi Eggbox, just sent you a pm. Thank you so much.

eggbox

Hi Jasmine


Email sent.


I forgot to add that it's because of her lack of understanding of how the law stands, that she is wrongly prioritising third party interests over her, own, clients best interests.


Something you should also explain to her!

JasmineStocks

Hi Eggbox, at last some wonderful news! I rang the restriction companies up today and they were so helpful and absolutely lovely. They both confirmed everything you have been telling me. They both told me that there is a specific order of priority for the charges and restrictions and that if there wasn't enough money for the last restriction to be paid then they accepted that, which is totally opposite to what the conveyancer told me. They said that my mum wouldn't be liable for the debts as the restrictions weren't in her name and that the money could only be taken out of my step dad's half of the house. If there wasn't enough money left then they said that would be fine and they didn't expect to be paid. They were so helpful and understanding. The conveyancer is still insisting that they have to be paid first when I rang her to tell her what they said. They told me that they wouldn't object to the sale and would let the conveyancer know this. I can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel. It just goes to show that you should choose your solicitor/conveyancer wisely and not just go with the one, which the estate agent recommends, which is what we did.