Charging Order? The myth

peakbg35

will the loan agreement/terms appear on the title register and what format should this be in?Perhaps I am reading too much into this but not sure what the terms of the "loan" should be?

If no subsequent 'restrictions' were entered by other creditors, could the third party legal charge then be removed after 6 years (once debts unsecured debts are not legally enforceable)?

eggbox

peakbg35 wrote: »

will the loan agreement/terms appear on the title register and what format should this be in?Perhaps I am reading too much into this but not sure what the terms of the "loan" should be?

No the terms won't be shown on the title register. Regarding the terms it can be whatever you want such as payment of the loan upon sale of the property. A read HERE might help.

peakbg35 wrote: »

If no subsequent 'restrictions' were entered by other creditors, could the third party legal charge then be removed after 6 years (once debts unsecured debts are not legally enforceable)?

The charge can be removed anytime with the agreement of both parties concerned.

peakbg35

Thanks for your advice with this, it is really appreciated.

I thought the selection process for the third party legal charge would be simple, however the deeper i delve the more of a minefield it becomes!

eggbox

peakbg35 wrote: »

Thanks for your advice with this, it is really appreciated.

I thought the selection process for the third party legal charge would be simple, however the deeper i delve the more of a minefield it becomes!

It's not difficult you just need a solicitor to guide you through the process

peakbg35

It's more the choosing of a person to be the third party legal charge that is causing the problem. Does the money "borrowed" from a third party have to be to joint owners of the property or can it just be to me, as long as it is for more than the equity in the property?

Also, could it have any implications for the third party and would they ever be questioned on its legitimacy?

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but i 99% certain i need to take this course of action ASAP, but convincing my wife is proving tricky!

eggbox

peakbg35 wrote: »

It's more the choosing of a person to be the third party legal charge that is causing the problem.

I completely understand but apart from advising you that the person is 100% honest and won't get into debt; this is a decision only you and your partner can make on what info you both know, personally?

peakbg35 wrote: »

Does the money "borrowed" from a third party have to be to joint owners of the property or can it just be to me, as long as it is for more than the equity in the property?

No it doesn't have to be joint, but if it is only against your equity it won't protect against a charging order being made against your wife's share of the equity. If a CO is made it will split your beneficial ownership from "joint" tenants to "tenants in common".

This will then mean you no longer, both, own the whole financial interest in the property jointly and you will then have a 50% share each. So a legal charge on only your share won't protect your wife's share of the equity if a CO is granted against her.

peakbg35 wrote: »

Also, could it have any implications for the third party and would they ever be questioned on its legitimacy?

The only real implication is that the third party would have an "asset" as they would be the owner of the amount agreed on the legal charge. So you and your wife would be vulnerable if they ever had anyone chasing them for a debt as its an asset they can go after.

peakbg35 wrote: »

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I 99% certain i need to take this course of action ASAP, but convincing my wife is proving tricky!

I understand your wife's hesitancy as the decision is a minefield and I will repeat again that my advice would be to sell up before any action can proceed against you. What you can't do at this point, however, is nothing as the info you have supplied means a sh*t storm is coming your way.

peakbg35

eggbox wrote: »

I completely understand but apart from advising you that the person is 100% honest and won't get into debt; this is a decision only you and your partner can make on what info you both know, personally?


No it doesn't have to be joint, but if it is only against your equity it won't protect against a charging order being made against your wife's share of the equity. If a CO is made it will split your beneficial ownership from "joint" tenants to "tenants in common".

This will then mean you no longer, both, own the whole financial interest in the property jointly and you will then have a 50% share each. So a legal charge on only your share won't protect your wife's share of the equity if a CO is granted against her.


The only real implication is that the third party would have an "asset" as they would be the owner of the amount agreed on the legal charge. So you and your wife would be vulnerable if they ever had anyone chasing them for a debt as its an asset they can go after.


I understand your wife's hesitancy as the decision is a minefield and I will repeat again that my advice would be to sell up before any action can proceed against you. What you can't do at this point, however, is nothing as the info you have supplied means a sh*t storm is coming your way.

A joint legal charge it is then. We have someone that is ideal. Is it prudent to make the charge significantly more than the equity in the property?

eggbox

peakbg35

Yes it is but this is where a solicitor can help as (I believe) you make arrangements for further lending in to the charge that will enable it to remain the first on the register in the same way a mortgage can allow for further lending. This will cover you should house prices rise substantially for any reason giving you a lot more equity.

eggbox

Hi Land Registry Rep

If you're around could you advise on the following if possible? I've ordered some title details off the LR site for a parcticular address (I need to know who owns the property.) The address I required displayed when I used the search engine to locate the property concerned, however, the title details sent through are for the land purchased (presumably by the property developer who built the house) and doesn't show the property that I searched for and displayed on the LR site?

The house concerned is new but has been built for a while and the occupants concerned have lived there for at least 4 months? So I'm unsure why the details for the property haven't been sent through?

Any help greatly apppreciated!

Land_Registry

eggbox wrote: »

Hi Land Registry Rep

If you're around could you advise on the following if possible? I've ordered some title details off the LR site for a parcticular address (I need to know who owns the property.) The address I required displayed when I used the search engine to locate the property concerned, however, the title details sent through are for the land purchased (presumably by the property developer who built the house) and doesn't show the property that I searched for and displayed on the LR site?

The house concerned is new but has been built for a while and the occupants concerned have lived there for at least 4 months? So I'm unsure why the details for the property haven't been sent through?

Any help greatly apppreciated!

eggbox it reads very much as if the actual plot sale has not been registered yet. Until it is their specific title won't be available

If they completed 4 months ago and the solicitor submitted it shortly afterwards it is probably not too far from being done but the devil is always in the detail so IF for example there are a lot of plot sales on that development to be done it may be in the Q a little longer