Charging Order? The myth

eggbox

harisumo wrote: »

Thanks for the further responses, I really don't understand junkimunki's thread at all!

You aren't on your own with that one!

harisumo wrote: »

Can anyone advise re the N245 form, it asks for details of my sole income and ependiture, as a married couple we just pool our income to pay everything and there is never much left at the end of the month. How would I reflect this on the N245 form? My income is part time and lower than my husbands, should I show a percentage figure for the outgoings they ask (ie mortgage, council tax etc).

The debt is against you so you only need to put down your earnings and your contribution amounts to the household bills (which I'm sure are substantial!)

Don't forget that if you are on a low income it's possible to get the N245 fee waived too!

harisumo

Thanks eggbox, you're a star, your advice and supportive comments really do make a difference. I will keep you posted how things progress

Sparklyfairy

Thanks, Harisumo. Yes I defaulted only 1 x on my dmp payment with MBNA & their solicitors were sharks. They know how to play the system & that's why sites like MSE, CAG & Legal Beagles (and others) are so useful. Creditors/solicitors pride themselves on the fact that most laymen haven't a clue about Restrictions & get their payments in the end. Just be sure to do your research for a good conveyancing solicitor if/when you do decide to sell - assuming you do end up with a Restriction (in which case you'd be welcomed into our exclusive club - lol!)

As for your income & expenditure forms - I found this on the LB site : http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?t=19592

There are 3 listed depending on which programme you have on your computer, so hopefully that should help you out when filling it in. Also, somewhere online there are guidlines on what you can/can't claim on these (i.e. pets, cigarettes aren't to be included but car upkeep, etc are ok). I can't find them at the moment but I'm sure CCCS/Payplan have something on their website. Hth, SF x

harisumo

Thanks Sparklyfairy, I remember seeing a really good one a while ago that actually gave recommended amounts to include on each section of the expenditure side of things, but I can't for the life of me remember where it was. Just heard on the news today that the Government have finally got shot of NR, sold at a huge loss to the taxpayer apparently!

headachesrus

I came across this thread last night, just before I was going to bed and haven't had time to read through it all properly, however, I am flabbergasted!!!

I worked for quite a few years for two large law firms, as a file handler, and I always paid off restrictions on the register prior to the sale proceeding (as I was told to do). One of the firms handled properties which had been repossessed, the repossessed person getting the remains of the sale monies if there were any left once the mortgagee, chargees and restriction holders had been paid off, I'm feeling quite bad now that these people should have been paid out more.

Sparklyfairy

Headachesrus - sad but true. I believe the majority of solicitors haven't a clue about the difference between co & restrictions. You were only doing as instructed so really the blame lies solely with the solicitors you worked with. It's a disgrace they can continue to practice law & not know their field...edited to add that I believe that if you knew then what you know now & educated your previous employers, you'd no doubt have been made jobless! You weren't to know. x

Harisumo, I also had a list but somehow lost it. I do know the advice I got for the limits I could use for my dmp were waaay less than what is allowed for someone going through a bankruptcy,i.e. food limit was much higher for someone going bankrupt & I believe there are allowences for things for them that aren't allowed on a budget for someone a dmp..but what exactly those differences are totally escaped me!

headachesrus

I'm trying to imagine the scenario in both jobs were I to bring it up. It rarely occured in the first one to be honest, but in the second, selling properties in possession, you can imagine how many there were. I think my immediate boss would have listened, but I always considered her a very capable and intelligent lawyer, I'm amazed that she didn't know this.

On a more personal basis, my DH has two charging orders on our property, from a failed business years ago. Neither of the companies are being paid, and haven't for years and years. I thought they were charging orders, but if what you are saying is correct, then as the debts were in his name, and this is a joinly owned property, they must only be restrictions. We are not planning on selling, but on leaving the property to our two children, we only have a few years left on the mortgage. I'm now trying to think how we can get these off for them when the time comes.

Sparklyfairy

headachesrus, I believe the changes occured around 2003 - read this from earlier on in this thread. Although it's written to warn solicitors/creditors about the pitfalls for them when considering co & restrictions are one in the same, it is valuable to read it in black and white. It is almost impossible to find something in black & white by the land registry confirming all of this (I have tried, but if anyone has anything concrete, please post!) BUT Eggbox has confirmed this through a conversation he's had with the Land Registry (again, earlier on in the thread). Why they can't just come out & verbally explain the differences or even post it online - I thoroughly do not understand. It's not illegal to not pay a restriction upon completion, it's all well within the law, so why the secrecy?

Yes, I do believe you'd have a restriction as well & not a charging order. However, through all of my reading on restrictions I feel you might have a problem transferring your property to your children as I'm unsure they'd be classed as a third party - which is required when selling with a restriction.

headachesrus

I was thinking along the lines of a token payment in consideration of natural love and affection ... haven't put that much thought into as yet though.

I will take some time and read through the whole thread and the areas you have highlighted later, thanks for the pointers.

eggbox

headachesrus

You need to look at your Land Registry details to see if you have "Restrictions", "Notices" or "Caution against Dealings" on there as there are differences in what has to be done before properties can be sold.

Have a read here by a Solicitor who does a good job of explaining the differences the LR 2003 changes made. It's a bit of a read but if you read the paragraph before her conclusions you will see that she alludes to the fact Restrictions aren't really any use to creditors without actually saying that.

As Sparklyfairy states, I corresponded with a Solicitor from the LR and whilst it did take me three attempts she had to explain that the creditor only needs to be notified of a sale to satisfy LR changes. How and when you do that is not set down so can be exploited to the sellers benefit.