Charging Order? The myth

eggbox

Iwishlifewaseasier

Your not hijacking, all posts are welcome on this subject here!

Charging Orders are not included in bankruptcy so will not be "dissolved" as you put it.

And yes, Restrictions are treated differently.

stuart30

eggbox wrote: »

Do you know what debt the Charging Order was for and, by your memory, whether your wife was a joint signatory to the loan or service?

I believe it was with GE Money and for work done on a new Porch on the house.

Think she would have been as the sales person wanted us both there...so id say yes she most likely would have been.

stuart30

Iwishlifewaseasier wrote: »

Sorry to have butted in but thank you for your response. I will contact Lloyd's bank myself rather than pay the solicitor to do if and see if they're willing to reduce it to clear it.

Would I be right in thinking its a different story for restriction registered on a jointly owned property, there is a restriction K on my home I believed had been dissolved in my ex husbands bankruptcy in 2008, it was only years later when he left me that I discovered it hadn't been. The unfortunate thing is that I bought his beneficial interest from the OR for a token payment in 2009, so wondering how this situation may be dealt with when we go to divorce and settling the finances.
Really sorry again for hijacking, I promise I will start a new thread for my own questions in future.

No im just asking lots of questions...i believe its an open thread for us all to ask/discuss and hopefully learn from each other.

Seems eggbox is a wealth of knowledge so a big thanks to them for the help.

DAKOTA45

Iwishlifewaseasier wrote: »

Sorry to have butted in but thank you for your response. I will contact Lloyd's bank myself rather than pay the solicitor to do if and see if they're willing to reduce it to clear it.

Would I be right in thinking its a different story for restriction registered on a jointly owned property, there is a restriction K on my home I believed had been dissolved in my ex husbands bankruptcy in 2008, it was only years later when he left me that I discovered it hadn't been. The unfortunate thing is that I bought his beneficial interest from the OR for a token payment in 2009, so wondering how this situation may be dealt with when we go to divorce and settling the finances.
Really sorry again for hijacking, I promise I will start a new thread for my own questions in future.

It's not hijacking… unlike the other place, this is a forum where we all have something in common and can learn from everyone else… at least that's how I see it and I prefer this site to the other one and the accusations of hijacking and orders to 'start your own thread'…


D45

DAKOTA45

eggbox wrote: »

Iwishlifewaseasier

Your not hijacking, all posts are welcome on this subject here!

Charging Orders are not included in bankruptcy so will not be "dissolved" as you put it.

And yes, Restrictions are treated differently.

Eggbox… I'm just wondering about the fact that some creditors do not bother to get the final CO and leave it at the Interim stage… I was informed that whilst the ICO is in place, you can't sell the property until the final CO is implemented. It's very confusing…. D45

DAKOTA45

This is from the Govt National Archives… It states that you can't sell your home until the decision for the final charging order to go ahead. So… if there is only an interim CO in place, would it be worth challenging it?

Stage one - the interim order
The creditor makes an application for a charging order and the court will make what is called an interim charging order if it is satisfied that you own, or have a part share (an interest), in the property in question. This is not the final order. An interim charging order is usually made automatically without a hearing and a date for a full hearing is set. A copy of the interim order will be sent to you. This should be done at least 21 days before the hearing date set by the district judge. The hearing is for the court to decide whether or not to make the charging order permanent ('Final'). This hearing is likely to be held in the district judge's private rooms.
The creditor will also register the interim charging order as a 'caution' on your property with the Land Registry who should inform you of this in writing. This means you cannot sell the property before the hearing.

Stage two - the final charging order
The second stage is the court hearing in front of the district judge. At this hearing the court will decide whether to make a permanent charge on the property. This is called a final charging order. If you object to a charging order being made final then you should send the creditor and the court written evidence stating why you object. You should do this at least seven days before the hearing. This could be in the form of a letter of objection outlining all the arguments you have for why the charging order should not be made. This should be sent by registered post to both the creditor and the court.
If you do this then your arguments should be taken into account by the district judge at the hearing. You should still go to the hearing and if you do not send any written evidence then it is vital that you go.
WARNING
The court can refuse to make the charging order so you must serve a notice and go to the hearing. If you cannot attend on that date, contact the court for a different hearing date to be arranged. If you do not go the charging order is likely to be made final by the court at the request of the creditor.

Perhaps Land Registry Representative could add to the discussion?

D45

eggbox

Dakota

A lot of creditors don't follow through to the Final stage (to save costs) as the interim stage, basically, gives them the same protection (this is certainly true where only a Restriction can be placed on the deeds.) But as LRR has stated, the deeds don't always, accurately, reflect what should be registered.

eggbox

Dakota

If he is around, it might help if Land Registry Rep explains if the Land Registry have to treat interim orders differently from final orders?

From what is stated in their PG76 it would appear not? The info you provided, also, does not distinguish how the interim order is registered on the deeds?

eggbox

stuart30 wrote: »

I believe it was with GE Money and for work done on a new Porch on the house.

Think she would have been as the sales person wanted us both there...so id say yes she most likely would have been.

I wouldn't worry too much, then, about locating the CCJ as it seems you would both have been responsible which is why an equitable charge has been registered.

I'd concentrate more on seeing how much they will settle for?

DAKOTA45

eggbox wrote: »

I wouldn't worry too much, then, about locating the CCJ as it seems you would both have been responsible which is why an equitable charge has been registered.

I'd concentrate more on seeing how much they will settle for?

But also, if it's just an ICO, whether there should be a hearing in order to possibly challenge whether it should be made into a Final CO… I know that most ICO do progress to a final charge, but is there any argument perhaps against making it final…(like the absence of a CCJ)... they are entitled to object if there is a good reason for doing so, surely? D45