Charging Order? The myth

DAKOTA45

Parisian wrote: »

I wish I had read this thread 5 years ago!

Yeah, me too!

DAKOTA45

Ok… this question for anyone who may have an answer… perhaps Land Registration Representative might know…

When is an 'imposition' not an imposition?

Judgement Creditor states in a recent correspondence that an Interim Charging Order was 'imposed' on 9 May 2014.

I have the sealed article here which states that the application for the ICO was considered on 19 June 2014 and the actual stamped ICO is dated 24 June 2014…

Which of those dates could the ICO be construed as being 'imposed' upon me, please?

It is quite relevant to the point I'm at at the moment, as it could be that the JC's unlawful actions occurred before the ICO was granted, meaning that he was deliberately trying to prevent me from selling my property before he was actually entitled (?) to do so…

D45

Distracted

Just an update on my situation, waiting on my buyers mortgage offer to come through, which considering the sale was agreed in August is a little worrying

Their solicitors are not the most dynamic though, chasing Building regulations and planning permission from an extension that is 43 years old being an example. They finally received everything last week.

Fantastic news on Saprklyfairy sale, it still gives me hope. I expect this week to be a busy week so I'll aim to keep the updates coming regards the (potential) sale

eggbox

Distracted

Thanks for the update!

ALL information is valuable so thanks for keeping the board up to date.

Hopefully, Sparkly won't be too much longer confirming everything has gone as planned?

Burb147

Hello,
I am trying to get my mortgage and house in my own name after separating from my ex husband eight years ago. The problem I have is there is restriction on the land registry from a loan company under his name. At the point this was made the house was jointly owned. Which I understand means the loan company just needs informing of a pending sale. However four years later the tenancy was changed to tenants in common. Does this affect that original restriction made by the loan company? He is signing the house over to me and receiving no financial gain from it.

eggbox

Burb147

You became Tenants in Common, as far as the Law is concerned, when your ex partner received a Charging Order against his "Beneficial Interest" (his share of the equity.)

This is because its not possible to charge only part of a joint tenancy arrangement. So your tenancy is split to ensure the charge is only against the debtors share of the property.

Whilst your ex may be signing over his share to you, the Loan company's Restriction will still remain on the property deeds as transferring ownership does not remove the Restriction.

The only way to remove the Restriction is to,

ii) Request the Loan company to withdraw it (they won't)
ii) Agree to pay off the loan
iii) Sell the property whilst you and your ex are still registered as joint owners to a third party. Upon sale for value to a third party the Restriction will become "overreached" and therefore removed by the Land Registry.

Land_Registry

DAKOTA45 wrote: »

Ok… this question for anyone who may have an answer… perhaps Land Registration Representative might know…

When is an 'imposition' not an imposition?

Judgement Creditor states in a recent correspondence that an Interim Charging Order was 'imposed' on 9 May 2014.

I have the sealed article here which states that the application for the ICO was considered on 19 June 2014 and the actual stamped ICO is dated 24 June 2014…

Which of those dates could the ICO be construed as being 'imposed' upon me, please?

It is quite relevant to the point I'm at at the moment, as it could be that the JC's unlawful actions occurred before the ICO was granted, meaning that he was deliberately trying to prevent me from selling my property before he was actually entitled (?) to do so…

D45

Dakota45 - from a registration perspective we would be looking for the date of the stamped order so I would imagine that is the date it is imposed

Burb147

Sorry I'm confused the restriction is only for an interim charging order not a final charging order. And to meet the requirements of this as stated in the thread they only need to be informed of a sale. Which I thought would class as me buying the house in this case? The tenants in common was done after this order and was nothing to do with the loan company or a court. As far as I'm aware they know nothing about it?

Distracted

Well, I've just heard off my buyer directly (I know them) that their mortgage offer has come through with no problems.

Will wait for confirmation from our solicitor tomorrow, I guess then we can agree a date for exchange and we will discuss the notification process.

eggbox

Burb147

It's because a transfer (which you have indicated is what you are trying to do) isn't classed as a sale.

For a Restriction to become "overreached" and removed by the Land Registry, you have to have joint owners selling for a value amount to a third party.