Charging Order? The myth

eggbox

Tkk73 wrote: »

I believe that they are not Charging Orders but restrictions, the same thing that we would be getting as the house was bought in 1997 in joint names. So they would be in the same position as us or would they? I have no idea how we would stand if we got this restriciton and then applied to make him bankrupt. Would we be third in line behind the other 2? or would it be fourth after the mortgage company? either way there probably won't be much left.

Don't get confused as there aren't two types of Charging Orders.

The term "Restriction" is just reflecting how the CO can be registered at the Land Registry when there are joint owners of the property in question.

The creditor with the "Restriction" still has a Charging Order on the debt and can still (although it's extremely rare) try to force you to sell your house to recover their debt as they could if the property was solely owned.

But, yes, if you went for BR on the builder you would be 4th on that list after the Mortgage company, then CO number one and then Charging order number two.

Tkk73

eggbox wrote: »

Don't get confused as there aren't two types of Charging Orders.

The term "Restriction" is just reflecting how the CO can be registered at the Land Registry when there are joint owners of the property in question.

The creditor with the "Restriction" still has a Charging Order on the debt and can still (although it's extremely rare) try to force you to sell your house to recover their debt as they could if the property was solely owned.

But, yes, if you went for BR on the builder you would be 4th on that list after the Mortgage company, then CO number one and then Charging order number two.

So getting a charging order on a joint property is really worthless then?:(
This all seems like one big way to get out of paying. All he has to do is sit back and do nothing and even though in a court of law it was proven that he owes us 13k he doesn't have to pay, gets to keep his house and gets away with it! How is this process in the least bit fair? Sorry to rant. :mad::mad:

Sparklyfairy

Tkk73, I am so sorry to learn about your hassle. Some people, as in your builder, shouldn't be able to get away with it & it should be illegal.

I know you probably realise this by now, but in future - all work done by a builder, plumber, electrician, etc should be paid after the work is done (less their deposit). If I were you & knowing what you now know about this guy, I'd try to force the bankruptsy route....even with the £1,000 fees. Perhaps try the CAG forums to ask this question as you might get a better response. I'd try to make his life as uncomfortable as possible, but as he's wise to going bankrupt & starting again - I'd tend to write an email to that TV show (forgot the name!) where they chase those dodgy builders as you might get the best response! Good luck xx

Tkk73

Sparklyfairy wrote: »

Tkk73, I am so sorry to learn about your hassle. Some people, as in your builder, shouldn't be able to get away with it & it should be illegal.

I know you probably realise this by now, but in future - all work done by a builder, plumber, electrician, etc should be paid after the work is done (less their deposit). If I were you & knowing what you now know about this guy, I'd try to force the bankruptsy route....even with the £1,000 fees. Perhaps try the CAG forums to ask this question as you might get a better response. I'd try to make his life as uncomfortable as possible, but as he's wise to going bankrupt & starting again - I'd tend to write an email to that TV show (forgot the name!) where they chase those dodgy builders as you might get the best response! Good luck xx

Thanks for the advice but I just don't have £1,000, the tv show sounds good though. X x

Sparklyfairy

We should do a whip round for you! It must be so frustrating as most of these places are geared up for people being taken to court via the banks, not taking dodgy builders =(...You can find the CAG forum here . Not exactly sure where you start as it's massive, perhaps try the non retail subforums? Keep posting until you get a response - or they'll move your post to the correct place..you're bound to find some help there. Or even on the Consumer Rights or possibly the DIY boards on here, all worth the question, right? I know somewhere the Office of Fair Trading should be contacted about this at least. I really hope you get some positive, useful advice - that man deserves all the s%$£t he deserves! x

Sparklyfairy

Tkk73 - Watchdog! Or the Rogue Traders part of Watchdog ( I knew dh wouldn't let me down!) x

Tkk73

Sparklyfairy wrote: »

We should do a whip round for you! It must be so frustrating as most of these places are geared up for people being taken to court via the banks, not taking dodgy builders =(...You can find the CAG forum . Not exactly sure where you start as it's massive, perhaps try the non retail subforums? Keep posting until you get a response - or they'll move your post to the correct place..you're bound to find some help there. Or even on the Consumer Rights or possibly the DIY boards on here, all worth the question, right? I know somewhere the Office of Fair Trading should be contacted about this at least. I really hope you get some positive, useful advice - that man deserves all the s%$£t he deserves! x

I've posted on the CAG forum so fingers crossed and just waiting now. Thanks for all your help will keep you updated with any progress x x

maz1964

hiya guys

i was in court last week and ive meant to come back and see what ive achieved so others learn too from my experience

i was paying a mere 5.00 a month for a while but stinky they let the court know last week that as this amount was not good enough they wanted to know if i owned property and that they were requesting an interim order i believe, to secure the debt,

as the house is jointly owned and i had prepared my increased offer, the judge read the letter out but i didnt understand other than the above and retorted that he was not going to do their work for them as their rep didnt turn up

thus the order that arrived last week states

""having read the letter from claimant and heard the defendant in person,

it is ordered that

- the order made previously date of --/--/-- be varied so the debt and costs are repaid at a rate of £10 per month the first payment due no later then the begininning of feb 2012. ""

Thus have i understood from what the judge tried to explain to me that as long as i continue to pay this amount and do not default on it each month they cannot go for a charging order ?

********

just also wanted to add that previously they had wanted the money on a forthwith request but i did the n244 form last year and the 5.00 was accepted by the judge to be paid for 4 months and then it was a request that it was reviewed at the end of the year hence the court presence, and now the judge has accepted my slight increase to be paid from now on
huge thanks maz - fully appreciate it:T

HARSA

blueback wrote: »

The restriction is placed on the land and has nothing to do with the mortgage so the same would apply.

I am not a solicitor so check anything I say with them

If you are remortgaging to a new lender with addtional lending required then I think this will come up doing the remortgage processs. The new lender would therefore want to know why the restriction in place and will possible withdraw the mortgage offer.

Sparklyfairy

Maz, that's utterly BRILLIANT news! Yes, keep paying the £10/month, to keep them at bay. They may try it on again, but your judge sounded very switched on (and much better than the one that heard my case!) x