Charging Order? The myth

StevenM1990

Sorry when I say my details I mean mine and my joint ownership details with my wife.

If that’s what you mean in regards to that. It’s a jointly owned home with a jointly owned mortgage

eggbox

Land_Registry wrote: »

It reads like a form K to me and not a form L?

You're right of course, I misread the wording as the OP said the wording was slightly different? My bad!

Wookiee501

StevenM1990 wrote: »

You say the buyer has to inform the creditor?

I thought it was myself who has to inform them?

If the buyer has to do it that could be more troublesome as getting a buyer to agree to not inform them until last minute would be a lot harder

eggbox wrote: »

"without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration or their conveyancer"

That's the buyer or their conveyancer

Nothing in the restriction defines who must notify the restrictioner - the restriction simply demands that the applicant certifies that the restrictioner has been notified.

Land_Registry

Wookiee501 wrote: »

Nothing in the restriction defines who must notify the restrictioner - the restriction simply demands that the applicant certifies that the restrictioner has been notified.

As eggbox posted the applicant for registration is the person applying to change the register so in a sale/purchase scenario that would be the buyer.
So in this context it would be the buyer or their conveyancer who notify the restrictioner and then provide a letter certifying that they did exactly (and precisely) that when they lodge their application to register the purchase

The timing of when they notify the restrictioner, in this case the creditor, would be decided on as part of the conveyancing process so after they have committed to the purchase and before they apply to register their purchase.

In my experience the trigger point is usually about 2 weeks before the latter occurs but of course that depends on when they commit to the purchase

eggbox

Wookiee501 wrote: »

Nothing in the restriction defines who must notify the restrictioner - the restriction simply demands that the applicant certifies that the restrictioner has been notified.

It defines that it must be the buyer or their conveyancer that provides the certification, of the notification, to the LR. So you can expect the LR to insist notification has been carried out by those people?

But I'm happy to be corrected by LRR?

Land_Registry

eggbox wrote: »

It defines that it must be the buyer or their conveyancer that provides the certification, of the notification, to the LR. So you can expect the LR to insist notification has been carried out by those people?

But I'm happy to be corrected by LRR?

Typing a reply at the same time, so no need for any corrections..... and we insist that we have a certificate confirming that it has been done

eggbox

Thanks for confirming LRR!

Wookiee501

eggbox wrote: »

It defines that it must be the buyer or their conveyancer that provides the certification, of the notification, to the LR. So you can expect the LR to insist notification has been carried out by those people?

But I'm happy to be corrected by LRR?

LR has no right to insist on any such thing, they can only insist on compliance with the restriction. Provided the applicant is able to certify that the beneficiary of the restriction has been notified, who actually did the notifying is of no moment and is actually none of LR's business.

eggbox

I'm not sure I can go along with it being none of the Land Registry's business as they have to be confident the notification has been made?

But LRR does always say the devil is in the detail on restrictions so over to you LRR.........:)

Land_Registry

Wookiee501 wrote: »

LR has no right to insist on any such thing, they can only insist on compliance with the restriction. Provided the applicant is able to certify that the beneficiary of the restriction has been notified, who actually did the notifying is of no moment and is actually none of LR's business.

It's a fair point and shows how words are crucial here. The key for us is that we get a certificate from the defined applicant or their conveyancer. Clearly they need to be sure when giving that certificate.

But you are right anyone could notify the creditor but in my experience it will nearly always be the applicant's conveyancer as they are acting for the applicant.

Conveyancers tend to be quite reluctant to certify something unless they are 100% sure and in this case that tends to be once they've notified the creditor themselves

I thought I had chosen my words carefully to cover the point that some people often think we need to see the notification evidence as well. That's not the case, just a certificate. But in doing so I missed the other point.

Hope that clears that up