Charging Order? The myth

Sparklyfairy

Hi Idanni1, probably best to start your own thread as this one is for Charging Orders, not ccj's, sorry. More people will be able to help you there as well. xx

covey

happy days

eggbox

covey

Firstly, you have the money in your account and, as Sparkly has confirmed, there was no legal obligation for you to pay off the CO attached to the Restrictions when you sold your property. But your buyer (or their Solicitor) does have to give the LR notice that the property has been sold to enable the change of registration to happen. (There is also no time limit attached to this notification so don't worry on that score as long as it is done)

However, I'm going to add a word of caution here as this appears to have happened very much against the run of what other Solicitors are doing when a sale is made (see Dawny's case a few pages back!) and I can't help thinking your buyers Solicitor has been awfully quiet on the subject? So whilst you have done nothing wrong, legally, you do need to be "sensible" with what you do with the money now (if you get my drift!)

Your Husbands debts will now revert to a CCJ and, despite the fact they will fall off his credit record after 6 years, the Judgement doesn't expire. So, if you were to buy a new property with your husbands name on the details there is nothing to stop the creditor going after a CO again on the new property. And whilst I would be surprised if the creditor, once he realises he hasn't been paid, would chase you down again; don't leave anything to chance. So make sure you are "sensible" with the money before you start talking to the Solicitors, ok!

You will, also, be doing this thread a huge favour if you can get your Solicitor to confirm the reasons why he didn't feel obliged to pay off the Charging Order attached to the Restrictions on your property because, as we have seen in various other sales happening, Solicitors (seemingly without exception) DO feel obliged to clear the CO's attached even though they don't have to.

So if you can get some feedback posted from your Solicitor on this you will be helping a huge amount of people in the same position as you were.

ldanni1

I dont know if i have a chanrging order cause this was threatened????????????

eggbox

Idanni1

You won't have a CO yet if you hav only received the CCJ. But you need to apply to get the CCJ "set aside" on the basis you (presumably) did not have notification of the Court hearing?

ldanni1

I did get notice of the court hearing, but i didnt reply to this cause i was in touch with irwin mitchell themselves about paying a full and final settlement to them they just kept me holding on till it went to court and i had no idea thats what they where doing as i have never had this happen before thanks for getting back to me im petrified what is going to happen x

eggbox

Idanni1

Firstly, I know these dealings cause a lot of upset in the beginning but don't be petrified as your not being singled out and there is plenty of help and advice here.

You still need to apply to the Court to have the CCJ set aside using form N244 on the grounds that you were offering a substantial payment and you were misled by Irwin Mitchell.

Have a read here for some help http://www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/england_wales/factsheet.php?page=12_how_to_set_aside_a_judgment_in_the_county_court

Sparklyfairy

eggbox wrote: »

covey

Firstly, you have the money in your account and, as Sparkly has confirmed, there was no legal obligation for you to pay off the CO attached to the Restrictions when you sold your property. But your buyer (or their Solicitor) does have to give the LR notice that the property has been sold to enable the change of registration to happen. (There is also no time limit attached to this notification so don't worry on that score as long as it is done)

However, I'm going to add a word of caution here as this appears to have happened very much against the run of what other Solicitors are doing when a sale is made (see Dawny's case a few pages back!) and I can't help thinking your buyers Solicitor has been awfully quiet on the subject? So whilst you have done nothing wrong, legally, you do need to be "sensible" with what you do with the money now (if you get my drift!)

Your Husbands debts will now revert to a CCJ and, despite the fact they will fall off his credit record after 6 years, the Judgement doesn't expire. So, if you were to buy a new property with your husbands name on the details there is nothing to stop the creditor going after a CO again on the new property. And whilst I would be surprised if the creditor, once he realises he hasn't been paid, would chase you down again; don't leave anything to chance. So make sure you are "sensible" with the money before you start talking to the Solicitors, ok!

You will, also, be doing this thread a huge favour if you can get your Solicitor to confirm the reasons why he didn't feel obliged to pay off the Charging Order attached to the Restrictions on your property because, as we have seen in various other sales happening, Solicitors (seemingly without exception) DO feel obliged to clear the CO's attached even though they don't have to.

So if you can get some feedback posted from your Solicitor on this you will be helping a huge amount of people in the same position as you were.

Very good advice here, Egg, but I just want to throw something out there..say covey & her dh get a house in joint names. Say those same 4 creditors go back to court & get new charging orders (restrictions) on this new property. Surely it'll amount to exactly the same situation as what happened to them previously; when it comes time to sell, they use a clued up solicitor & once completion takes place, they receive their share of the equity, notice is given to the creditors (again) & the restriction falls away once the new owners are registered with the LR. This is, of course, assuming no legal changes take place in the meantime

eggbox

Sparklyfairy wrote: »

Very good advice here, Egg, but I just want to throw something out there..say covey & her dh get a house in joint names. Say those same 4 creditors go back to court & get new charging orders (restrictions) on this new property. Surely it'll amount to exactly the same situation as what happened to them previously; when it comes time to sell, they use a clued up solicitor & once completion takes place, they receive their share of the equity, notice is given to the creditors (again) & the restriction falls away once the new owners are registered with the LR. This is, of course, assuming no legal changes take place in the meantime

As things stand, Sparkly, I say you are right. But a CO isn't the only option for a creditor to pursue (just making the point they could if there is evidence of a financial assett) and I was only trying to point out that the best way to dissuade a creditor from pursuing you is to make him see you have nothing to pursue.

Your last point, too, though is very valid as I think more and more people will latch on to this "loophole" (for want of a better phrase) in the current regulations when the economy picks up and people start to move again in great numbers. At the moment, the balance of what happens on a sale is very much on the creditors side as they are getting paid off by Solicitors. However, if this balance shifts significantly I can see creditors kicking up a fuss and demanding better protection on their debt.

Sparklyfairy

Yes, Egg - I do wonder if this "loophole" will be changed & as sad as it might be, any government we may have in the future will, unfortunately, be tied to some degree to what the banks want. Hopefully it will never come to that & I would take a charging order over being forced into bankruptcy any day.