Charging Order? The myth

DAKOTA45

eggbox wrote: »

If any of the site team are monitoring this thread I've got the problem of not being updated of new posts if you can have a look, please?

I did wonder where you'd got to… D45

PS: Solicitor instructed… watch this space!

eggbox

DAKOTA45 wrote: »

I did wonder where you'd got to… D45

PS: Solicitor instructed… watch this space!

Hi Dakota, I know I keep having this problem every so often?

Can you, kindly, send me a PM when you have a minute as not been updated by anyone yet on how the new Solicitor has been?

eggbox

chkymonky wrote: »

Hi Eggbox,

The landregisrty has the restriction still under northernrock's name. its been almst 4 years since northern rock sold ro marlin. I dont pay anything to marlin. when the loan was sold I asked Marlin to prove the debt and the last letter i received was my file is on hold.

Now my lender wants this restriction to be paid or cancelled before he lend me for remortgage.

Do you think should I try setting aside original CO using Form N244: as Marlin still hasnt transferred the CO and its been now 4 years from NR to Marlin?

I havent recd anything from Cabot abt transfer.

by the way MY CCJ is gone off from my credit file.

Thanks

You should only attempt set aside if you have grounds that the original CCJ should not have been granted? (which after so long would be very tricky?)

You should have been notified of any transfer but often the company's concerned don't apply? But unless the original CCJ has been transferred by a Court then it still, technically, belongs to Northern Rock (which is why you probably haven't heard back off anyone?)

Your CCJ will have gone off your credit file as it is over 6 years old. But that doesn't make any difference to, either, the validity of the CCJ or the Charging Order.

If Land Registry Representative is around he may have some advice on how to approach this and how applying to have the Restriction removed, using an RX form for the reasons you have stated, would be treated by the Land Registry?

DAKOTA45

eggbox wrote: »

Hi Dakota, I know I keep having this problem every so often?

Can you, kindly, send me a PM when you have a minute as not been updated by anyone yet on how the new Solicitor has been?

Will do… but basically the guy deals mainly in commercial property, so a woman is acting for me…Nothing to report as yet, only just instructed her.

D45

eggbox

Cheers Dakota!

When is it you are going to Court with your action against your neighbour as I thought you were booked in months ago?

DAKOTA45

eggbox wrote: »

Cheers Dakota!

When is it you are going to Court with your action against your neighbour as I thought you were booked in months ago?

Trial is in January… we are supposed to be trying to settle in the meantime… no movement from the other side, so may need to take the initiative…

He has cost me so much by his unlawful and malicious actions, but right now, I'd settle just to have the charge removed, so I can move on with my life… the stress is making me ill, to be honest. D45

eggbox

Well I would ensure all attempts by you to settle the matter to save going to Court are clearly documented. If it still has to go to Court, the Judge will then be able to see that you have made a genuine attempt to do so in order to save the matter proceeding to Court.

Don't underestimate how much this will influence the Judge, especially if the other side are refusing to negotiate, in how he decides to settle the matter?

And, as ever, keep your negotiation simple eg: if you are happy to settle for just the removal of the Charging Order then offer that to drop the Court claim? If he accepts you get what you want?

But what it also does is to put pressure on his Solicitor to explain to his client the risks of not accepting the offer (no matter how much they feel they can win the case?) His Solicitor will have to explain the perils of going to Court and that a Judge may well decide to find in your favour (especially as the previous application to dismiss was not granted?)

Once he's pointed out the costs that may be incurred if the case is lost, then your opponent may decide its not worth the risk? Just don't expect it to magically happen overnight? Very often the decision to settle is taken at the 11th hour when the threat of losing about to becomes real? So don't get too disheartened if you hear nothing until closer to the trial?

Land_Registry

eggbox wrote: »

If Land Registry Representative is around he may have some advice on how to approach this and how applying to have the Restriction removed, using an RX form for the reasons you have stated, would be treated by the Land Registry?

For us it's generally all about whether the interest still exists. That's why, when they are transferred, from one creditor to another they very rarely apply to update the interest on the land register.

Inaction on that point would not be grounds for removal. If the CO has been dismissed then that would be but I assume no ref on credit file is not the same thing.

eggbox

Thanks for the update LRR

Can I just ask, however, what happens if the debtor makes an application to the Land Registry to remove the Restriction but the company named as the beneficiary (in this case Northern Rock) no longer exists?

Land_Registry

eggbox wrote: »

Thanks for the update LRR

Can I just ask, however, what happens if the debtor makes an application to the Land Registry to remove the Restriction but the company named as the beneficiary (in this case Northern Rock) no longer exists?

The two are not directly related with regards an application to cancel (not withdraw) a restriction. As such the key for the debtor is to demonstrate that the interest has come to an end.

We will cancel the restriction if we are satisfied that the restriction is no longer required. The fact that the named beneficiary no longer exists does not, in my experience, satisfy the requirement that the interest has come to an end.

If we decide that the interest has come to an end and the restriciton can be canceleld we will then consider serving notice on the creditor. It's at that point the Northern Rock name and details might become relevant

So applicaiton and supporting evidence comes first. Failt to get past that hurdle and nothing is likely to happen