Charging Order? The myth

DAKOTA45

UPDATE: I've made an application to set aside the CO, due to maladministration of the court in not issuing my defence/counterclaim in the mistaken belief that I did not pay a court fee.. will let you know what happens as and when D45

DAKOTA45

Still nothing from the court by way of explanation for their !!!! up… In the meantime, here is something of interest for those needing to sell properties…

Happy New Year!! D45

' THE CONVEYANCE FRAUD '

Michael Joseph updates and revises his first book, which annoyed the Legal Profession in that he accuses them of maintaining ' a confidence trick of massive proportions ' He says in his introduction -- the traditional system of house purchase and sale (conveyance) as operated by solicitors; is so bad in the service they give the client, and so far removed from the claims they make for it amounts to fraud. --- The art of conveyance, as practiced by solicitors, is to do as little work as possible, while relieving the house buyer and seller of as much money as possible. The fraud lies in the solicitors' claim that they safeguard the house buyer in the most important purchase, whereas what they actually do is not only useless, it is worse than useless.'

Published by Michael Joseph. ISBN 0 9505023 3 2 1989.

N.B. The above book is a must for those who do not wish to be robbed by solicitors, the legal profession have been fleecing you for a very long time. Do your own conveyance and save yourself lots of money. Go online and search this book out, some copies are relatively cheap, and that is all in your favour.

sjhopewell

I've been reading through this thread and am glad to see it is still alive. I was under the belief that I had a charging order against me, but having read through this thread and looking at my Title Register, it appears it is only a restriction (probably as the mortgage is in joint names).

Having got divorced recently, ownership of the house will be transferred solely to me. Would this mean the restriction becomes a charge as a result?

I have been told that transferring the ownership to myself is classed as a 'disposition', so in line with the restriction, I need to let the person who has the interim charging order aware of the disposition - what information do I need to let them know? Can I simply say "In accordance with the restriction registered on 04/08/2011, this is written notice of the disposition of Property X"?

They will obviously think from this that there is a chance of getting some money after 5 quiet years, so it is unfortunately probably going to provoke some sort of reaction from them.

As I was never aware of the Charging Order/Restriction until recently, because at the time they sent it to an address I wasn't living at (which they knew), I have the option of trying to lodge an application with court to get the 'charging order' set aside, so at least it won't remain on the Title Register, but I wonder whether it is worth keeping it on there if it really as ineffective as this thread suggests??

terryw

DAKOTA45 wrote: »

Still nothing from the court by way of explanation for their !!!! up… In the meantime, here is something of interest for those needing to sell properties…

Happy New Year!! D45

' THE CONVEYANCE FRAUD '

Michael Joseph updates and revises his first book, which annoyed the Legal Profession in that he accuses them of maintaining ' a confidence trick of massive proportions ' He says in his introduction -- the traditional system of house purchase and sale (conveyance) as operated by solicitors; is so bad in the service they give the client, and so far removed from the claims they make for it amounts to fraud. --- The art of conveyance, as practiced by solicitors, is to do as little work as possible, while relieving the house buyer and seller of as much money as possible. The fraud lies in the solicitors' claim that they safeguard the house buyer in the most important purchase, whereas what they actually do is not only useless, it is worse than useless.'

Published by Michael Joseph. ISBN 0 9505023 3 2 1989.

N.B. The above book is a must for those who do not wish to be robbed by solicitors, the legal profession have been fleecing you for a very long time. Do your own conveyance and save yourself lots of money. Go online and search this book out, some copies are relatively cheap, and that is all in your favour.

An excellent book for the time when written. Alas, with the passage of time it is out of date as a DIY text to follow.

Well worth reading though for background knowledge, and indeed the delightful wit of the author.

sourcrates

This is a great thread, plenty of info for anyone threatened with a CO.

Good to keep it going for future reference !!

angelof

Can anyone advise ? on our situation ?

In June 2009, we received Interim charging order (ICO) myself & co owner debt £22k
Court paperwork included Land Registry charges register included Proprietor: & Equitable charge these are dated 2007 ? two years before the ICO? Is this the mortgage company?
2009, 6 other creditors debt £10k total debt £32k
2015 debts now £15k with two creditors £1k and £14k (we will have about £10k equity if we sold)
We would like to sell, clear debts & start a fresh, what is the best thing to do?

If we make a f & f offer before we sell, will this remove the charging order?
If we do nothing & sell what will happen?
Does the charging order stand, we both had debts with them although the ICO was in my name, but my wife was included as co owner
Trying to get debt free !!!!
Once all debts clear we would like to get a mortgage if we can & start a fresh

asparagus18

[FONT=&quot]This is very interesting – a practical case from the buyer’s perspective, and it all went as it should have.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]http://boards.fool.co.uk/form-k-restriction-on-title-13121680.aspx?sort=whole#13121939[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Also, the information the OP got from a practising solicitor is as clear as can be. Especially th[FONT=&quot]ese[/FONT] bits [FONT=&quot]are[/FONT] priceless:

[/FONT]
“It's well known amongst litigation lawyers that such charging orders are virtually useless if the solicitors dealing with the sale and purchase of the land know what they're doing. This is because all the buyer is obliged to do is to give notice of the "disposition" (i.e. the transfer) to the person named - in this case Mrs Beneficiary.”

....


“The restriction is not against the legal title, so your solicitor can just pay the money over to Mr and Mrs C-V's solicitor in the normal way and the restriction will then be removed by the Land Registry when your solicitor applies for you to be registered as the new owner.

Ironically, this is precisely why I and other litigation solicitors do still apply for charging orders against one of a joint owner's beneficial interest. Even though it should be ignored by the conveyancers there are so many that are as clueless as your chap that it very often works in our favour.

What happens (as here) is that the buyer's conveyancer through ignorance refuses to proceed unless the charging order is removed. The only way the creditor will agree to its removal is by being paid the debt. So the joint owner is often forced to cough up out of the sale proceeds simply because the buyer's conveyancer is a numpty!”


[FONT=&quot]Might be useful for people faced with clueless conveyancers, trying to convince them that they are numpties! [/FONT]

Land_Registry

sjhopewell wrote: »

I've been reading through this thread and am glad to see it is still alive. I was under the belief that I had a charging order against me, but having read through this thread and looking at my Title Register, it appears it is only a restriction (probably as the mortgage is in joint names).

Having got divorced recently, ownership of the house will be transferred solely to me. Would this mean the restriction becomes a charge as a result?

I have been told that transferring the ownership to myself is classed as a 'disposition', so in line with the restriction, I need to let the person who has the interim charging order aware of the disposition - what information do I need to let them know? Can I simply say "In accordance with the restriction registered on 04/08/2011, this is written notice of the disposition of Property X"?

They will obviously think from this that there is a chance of getting some money after 5 quiet years, so it is unfortunately probably going to provoke some sort of reaction from them.

As I was never aware of the Charging Order/Restriction until recently, because at the time they sent it to an address I wasn't living at (which they knew), I have the option of trying to lodge an application with court to get the 'charging order' set aside, so at least it won't remain on the Title Register, but I wonder whether it is worth keeping it on there if it really as ineffective as this thread suggests??

sjhopewell - COs are normally protected by way of a restriction where the property is held in joint names although to some extent when dealing with these matters that also means any mortgage is also in joint names. However it is important to link the issue to joint ownership and each owner's then beneficial share rather than to the mortgage.

A transfer from the two of you to just the one would not automatically switch the restriction to a charge - applications would be needed to remove the restriction and register a charge if that is what the interested parties require. So it is important to treat the register on merit and take each step one at a time rather than perhaps think 'this is the current position and it will all end up like this' - hopefully others will be able to help re what a creditor is likely to do in such cases, if anything.

A Transfer from the two of you to just you would indeed be a 'disposition'. eggbox and others will have covered the issue of what wording to use elsewhere in this thread. From a registration perspective the wording of the restriction is key to considering any application to register the disposition. So the applicant or their conveyancer should certify (that makes it a certificate) that they have given notice as required so we would expect the certification to refer to the Transfer details and the creditor's interest, namely the CO as detailed in the restriction.
itself.

As you appear to already be aware a form K restriction will not be overreached by a Transfer from the two of you to just you so the certificate provided could enable the Transfer to occur but the restriction would remain.

Land_Registry

angelof wrote: »

Can anyone advise ? on our situation ?

In June 2009, we received Interim charging order (ICO) myself & co owner debt £22k
Court paperwork included Land Registry charges register included Proprietor: & Equitable charge these are dated 2007 ? two years before the ICO? Is this the mortgage company?
2009, 6 other creditors debt £10k total debt £32k
2015 debts now £15k with two creditors £1k and £14k (we will have about £10k equity if we sold)

I suspect there is little we can usefully add here to explain possible outcomes but if you can provide wider details re the registered entries this may help

No names needed but can you expand on what you mean by Proprietor: & Equitable charge these are dated 2007?
And are the other debts you refer to registered in some way as well?
The key thing to consider from a registration perspective is what will fall automatically and what would need to be removed - this is how any buyer would look at it as well.

asparagus18

I know it’s frowned upon if you post the same query in more than one section but there is so much traffic over at the House Buying etc. board that I don’t think I’ll get a reply.

Maybe some of the regular readers on this thread are/have been in a similar situation and could offer some pointers – I would be most grateful!


My thread is here

Many thanks!
asparagus