Charging Order? The myth

eggbox

Sorry for the delayed reply. The decision on whether to pay a creditor upon sale will, usually, rest with your solicitor as most won't agree with not settling the Charging Order amount upon sale. So if your solicitor is willing to help you, then your home and dry. So I would have a word with them as they hold the key to this.

Angelcrackers

Since discovering I've got some I still can't find anything on exact figures and I'm looking to see if I could pay them off. Is it likely to "poke the bear" and mean they will start chasing me again. I've heard nothing from them since they seem to have gotten these without me knowing in the first place. But I'd like a figure as I was hoping to try a lower settlement figure just so we could hopefully eventually remortgage or move. 

Butts

I might be missing something here - but is Martin aware of this thread ?

If he were to do a program based around "The Charging Order Myth" it might mitigate the problems posters are having.

Would his gravitas not make Solicitors sit up and take notice eliminating the major stumbling block most people seem to encounter when trying to legitimately use the Law to enforce their rights with regard to this matter?

eggbox

Angelcrackers said:

Since discovering I've got some I still can't find anything on exact figures and I'm looking to see if I could pay them off. Is it likely to "poke the bear" and mean they will start chasing me again. I've heard nothing from them since they seem to have gotten these without me knowing in the first place. But I'd like a figure as I was hoping to try a lower settlement figure just so we could hopefully eventually remortgage or move. 

History shows that most creditors won't accept a settlement figure but there is no harm in trying. But remember you can remortgage with your existing lender without having to settle the CO and, as this thread is pointing out, if the CO is only registered by a restriction; then moving house without settling the charge upon sale is possible, too.

eggbox

Butts said:

I might be missing something here - but is Martin aware of this thread ?

If he were to do a program based around "The Charging Order Myth" it might mitigate the problems posters are having.

Would his gravitas not make Solicitors sit up and take notice eliminating the major stumbling block most people seem to encounter when trying to legitimately use the Law to enforce their rights with regard to this matter?

This thread has been running for over a decade now, so my opinion is that Martin (assuming he's aware of the thread) may find it too much of a grey area to deal with. The problem is the Law doesn't support what is being explained on this thread, it's rather that the Law is weak as it allows debtors the opportunity to sell up and not pay off the charge upon sale of a property if they so choose. Unlike an equitable charge, a restriction offers poor security to the creditor. This thread is just trying to point that out too posters and also compliant solicitors who should be looking after their clients money a lot better.  

Butts

eggbox said:

Butts said:

I might be missing something here - but is Martin aware of this thread ?

If he were to do a program based around "The Charging Order Myth" it might mitigate the problems posters are having.

Would his gravitas not make Solicitors sit up and take notice eliminating the major stumbling block most people seem to encounter when trying to legitimately use the Law to enforce their rights with regard to this matter?

This thread has been running for over a decade now, so my opinion is that Martin (assuming he's aware of the thread) may find it too much of a grey area to deal with. The problem is the Law doesn't support what is being explained on this thread, it's rather that the Law is weak as it allows debtors the opportunity to sell up and not pay off the charge upon sale of a property if they so choose. Unlike an equitable charge, a restriction offers poor security to the creditor. This thread is just trying to point that out too posters and also compliant solicitors who should be looking after their clients money a lot better.  

In that case have any Creditors lobbied for it to be tightened up closing the loophole ?

From the other side could someone not petition the SRA or Law Society to give guidance as to it's current validity ?

flippet

I've read quite a bit of the thread and think I understand it, mostly, but wanted to clarify something. My partner and I own 50% of a shared-ownership house and would like to sell our share, partly because we're really struggling financially, but there is a restriction in my partner's name.

Would the fact that the house is shared-ownership with a Housing Association change anything here? We can use our own solicitors and estate agents for the sale so I've been assuming not, but every conveyancer I've contacted has not responded properly or refused (I've tried 5 so far, the latest confidently assuring me "the land registry will not remove the restriction without a signed RX4 from the creditor).

If anybody has a contact for a conveyancer who understands the process, or advice on how to find one, I'd be massively grateful.

Land_Registry

flippet said:

I've read quite a bit of the thread and think I understand it, mostly, but wanted to clarify something. My partner and I own 50% of a shared-ownership house and would like to sell our share, partly because we're really struggling financially, but there is a restriction in my partner's name.

Would the fact that the house is shared-ownership with a Housing Association change anything here? We can use our own solicitors and estate agents for the sale so I've been assuming not, but every conveyancer I've contacted has not responded properly or refused (I've tried 5 so far, the latest confidently assuring me "the land registry will not remove the restriction without a signed RX4 from the creditor).

If anybody has a contact for a conveyancer who understands the process, or advice on how to find one, I'd be massively grateful.

The devil will be in the detail as to how the title is registered. If it's registered in just your joint names then this thread may well be relevant to how to move matters forward
However I suspect the 'shared ownership' aspect may well have the impact as suggested but you need to be looking at the registered details to see what's in play and whether the restriction can be overreached or, and as has been suggested, needs to be withdrawn first
This thread is based on clearly registered titles in joint or a sole name whereas you have the complication of a shared ownership scenario, which would take it out of the thread's remit.
eggbox may have more to say on that though from own experience 

eggbox

flippet said:

I've read quite a bit of the thread and think I understand it, mostly, but wanted to clarify something. My partner and I own 50% of a shared-ownership house and would like to sell our share, partly because we're really struggling financially, but there is a restriction in my partner's name.

Would the fact that the house is shared-ownership with a Housing Association change anything here? We can use our own solicitors and estate agents for the sale so I've been assuming not, but every conveyancer I've contacted has not responded properly or refused (I've tried 5 so far, the latest confidently assuring me "the land registry will not remove the restriction without a signed RX4 from the creditor).

If anybody has a contact for a conveyancer who understands the process, or advice on how to find one, I'd be massively grateful.

Unfortunately, the biggest obstacle in your aim is most likely going to be the Housing Association you have purchased the shared ownership property from. They will almost certainly insist that any Restriction is removed prior to any form sale. So I would contact them in the first instance to see what their reaction is.

chkymonky

Hi All, 506 pages. WOW its been a while since I visited the site.

eggbox Well done to keep the thread alive and hope of forum members. Sincere Best wishes to you
Was wondering what if you havent paid the Debt Collector anything since the judgement and its been 14 years. can it be statute barred? 
Thanks