Charging Order? The myth

[Deleted User]

Eggbox & LR thanks for your reply.


The case involves a problem between executors of a will. One executor has a in place a sealed caveat as the other two executors have removed around £125k from the estate without any authority. The caveat was sealed over 6 months ago and it has now reached stalemate. Thoughts were to place a restriction on their family home to ensure the funds are available before going to court.

eggbox

Brynogwy

LRR may be able to advise better here as the restriction you are referring to isn't the type this thread deals with where a creditor has obtained a charging order.

Land_Registry

Brynogwy wrote: »

Eggbox & LR thanks for your reply.

The case involves a problem between executors of a will. One executor has a in place a sealed caveat as the other two executors have removed around £125k from the estate without any authority. The caveat was sealed over 6 months ago and it has now reached stalemate. Thoughts were to place a restriction on their family home to ensure the funds are available before going to court.

It's very much legal advice you need here to ascertain what the interest is and if it's protectable on the register. Our PG 24 may be of more relevance now you have provided the additional detail.

Two things to note are that the interest appears to be in the beneficial ownership so that will limit your options re the legal ownership which we register. And secondly having a restriction on the title does not 'secure funds' in the way I think you are referring to. Settlement in court may secure those.

[Deleted User]

Thanks LR, finding a solicitor who has this knowledge, as highlighted throughout the thread is a shot in the dark. Imo 999 out of a 1000 are egotistical money grabbers with no interest in justice.


Thanks again

Land_Registry

Brynogwy wrote: »

Thanks LR, finding a solicitor who has this knowledge, as highlighted throughout the thread is a shot in the dark. Imo 999 out of a 1000 are egotistical money grabbers with no interest in justice.

Thanks again

The issues raised by eggbox and others in this thread are very specific to a restriction already registered on a title and which does not follow the norm. That's not to excuse a lack of understanding on anyone's part but could be used in mitigation.

Your scenario is a very different one as whilst it relates to a beneficial interest it does not relate to a legal owner.

A conveyancing solicitor familiar with wills, inheritance and the like should be more than capable of explaining the legal position although if there is a pending court action then I assume that has already been obtained/achieved.

I hope you are able to find a solution

Routerman

Hi all,
New on here, looking for guidance re the interest rate that can be attached to Charging Orders on property.

TBI obtained a charging order for a credit card debt in April 2009 (£8,000 and therefore unregulated), at that time our creditors were being handled by Eurodebt, on receiving notice of the court case at Reading I rang their solicitor who advised me that going to the court probably wouldn't make much difference to the outcome, rather naively I accepted this and didn't attend.

I accept that the charging order would have been made anyway but what I didn't know at the time was that post judgement interest would be added which has almost doubled the debt, had I attended I may have been able to argue against this.

My question is has there been any change in the law regarding interest because at the judgement a rate of 12% was applied ie 8% plus current bank rate 4% ?

Was this correct in 2009 and has anything changed because the latest statement from TBI now shows a rate of 8%?

If TBI have been applying the wrong rate all this time is there any way of getting the money back?

I've Googled the question but nothing much came up.

Incidentally this seems to be TBI's modus operandi since the law changed allowing creditors to find out who had debts but substantial equity, one of their employees was even bragging about it on a tv prog a couple of years ago.


Have posted this on another thread also but perhaps this one may be more appropriate?


Thanks in anticipation.

Vegan64

So, I attempted to remove the Form A restriction by submitting an RX3. Unfortunately, this was returned unactioned by Land Registry, as: 'insufficient evidence has been lodged to cancel the Form A Restriction. Also there are other trust restrictions on the register, (ie restrictions protecting charging orders) that how the equitable share has been encumbered'.

I also came across an ST5 which I guess needs to be submitted with evidence to remove the Form A Restriction? I've been in contact with a Conveyancer to help who advised the only way for me to proceed to re-mortgage would be to obtain a court order. I'm at my wits end as the current mortgage matures on 01.06.2019. I have little money available to get solicitors involved and two other conveyancers I contacted said I need family litigation when all I want to do is re-mortgage my home, which has interim charges in my ex-husbands name.
Eggbox/Land Registry if you are there are you able to shed any light to the end of a very dark tunnel please?

Land_Registry

Vegan64 wrote: »

So, I attempted to remove the Form A restriction by submitting an RX3. Unfortunately, this was returned unactioned by Land Registry, as: 'insufficient evidence has been lodged to cancel the Form A Restriction. Also there are other trust restrictions on the register, (ie restrictions protecting charging orders) that how the equitable share has been encumbered'.

I also came across an ST5 which I guess needs to be submitted with evidence to remove the Form A Restriction? I've been in contact with a Conveyancer to help who advised the only way for me to proceed to re-mortgage would be to obtain a court order. I'm at my wits end as the current mortgage matures on 01.06.2019. I have little money available to get solicitors involved and two other conveyancers I contacted said I need family litigation when all I want to do is re-mortgage my home, which has interim charges in my ex-husbands name.
Eggbox/Land Registry if you are there are you able to shed any light to the end of a very dark tunnel please?

I'm sorry to read of the issues you are facing but a form RX3 on it's own will never remove a form A restriction.
As a bare minimum, and as you now appreciate, a form ST5 is often the supporting evidence you need to accompany the form RX3 and which sets out how and why the form A is no longer required.

Unfortunately if the charging orders still exist against your ex-husband and you are still joint owners then the form A still applies. The COs in his name effectively charge his beneficial ownership, which in turn severs the joint tenancy making the form A still valid.

Eggbox will have a better idea of what impact the COs have and how to deal with these

From a purely registration perspective, and to some extent the lender's, the form A restriction prevents a sole registered owner from charging (mortgaging) the property. If it's registered in your joint names still then you could get a mortgage provided the lender is willing to secure the loan with the COs/form K restrictions having priority.

I am guessing, but can you confirm, that you are trying to mortgage the property in your sole name as maybe it's been registered that way after your husband became your ex and it was transferred to just you. And the form A and form K restrictions remain in place?

That is presumably why the legal advice you have been given is to go back to court to seek an order of some type.

Vegan64

Thank you LR. The property & the mortgage currently remain in joint names. I need to re-mortgage in my sole name as the current mortgage MATURES on 01.06.19 and I have no means to pay off what is owed.
When ex left earlier this year it was only then I discovered the COs attached. I then applied for the form A restriction myself to stop anything further happening without my knowledge. However, it is this Form A restriction (imposed by me) that is now stopping the new lender from proceeding in my sole name. (hope this makes sense)

Land_Registry

Vegan64 wrote: »

Thank you LR. The property & the mortgage currently remain in joint names. I need to re-mortgage in my sole name as the current mortgage MATURES on 01.06.19 and I have no means to pay off what is owed.
When ex left earlier this year it was only then I discovered the COs attached. I then applied for the form A restriction myself to stop anything further happening without my knowledge. However, it is this Form A restriction (imposed by me) that is now stopping the new lender from proceeding in my sole name. (hope this makes sense)

It does but IF the property is still in your joint names you won't be able to mortgage it so that is something else you need to resolve as well.

Have you tried your local CAB to see if they have a list of solicitors who are willing to offer a 30/60 mins appointment for a minimal fee for example? It may help to focus in on the specifics involved here and establish a way forward.

As it stands if your ex has left then you need to resolve the COs/form K restrictions, the legal ownership from joint to sole names and then look at what options you have.

And I am uncertain how a lender has made a mortgage offer to just you in the circumstances you describe. It seems that there are simply too many obstacles in the way.