Charging Order? The myth

eggbox

I'm assuming the search here is because you have a Restriction showing at the LR (you haven't explained your situation?) But it's doubtful you will find anyone passing on a conveyancer's details on here as those who have sold, sadly, don't seem to return to the board anymore?

Is the purchaser requiring a mortgage or is it a cash sale?

lady123_2

Just been reading a good few pages of this thread.
Why is Martin Lewis not highlighting this in the media? surely if you take out an unsecured credit card/loan at a very high interest rate then that stops it becoming a secured loan? am i wrong?
Its like fraud, how many people would have taken out a credit card if they knew they could lose there family home?
Where does it say on a credit card agreement that your home is at risk? I have never seen this on any agreement!
is there no financial body that can look into this?
It seems much more important than fixing your Gas and electric which Martin always seems to highlight when making TV appearances.
Im shocked at this this thread.

Sparklyfairy

yellowduck wrote: »

no it is an unsecured loan. The charging order the means by which it could be turned into a secure loan, all this is legal I am afraid. I am just so appreciative of the depth of knowledge that Eggbox has and how much clarity he\she sheds on the current and proposed changes in the law. This thread has helped me sleep soundly again and I am very grateful.:T

Yes they can unfortunately be given a co, BUT what I meant in my last post was where Trident threaten "taking possession of your home" is NOT acceptable & should be reported asap. Before I recv'd my co I NEVER had any threats that my home would be repossessed due to my unsecured cc. This is unnecessary harrassment from a DCA & frankly illegal. I say report 'em! x

Sparklyfairy

Non, that's the million £ question! I suggest ringing around to all the convayencing sols you can find & test their knowledge on the procedure...if they don't cut it, they aren't worth of your business! I've said this ages ago on here...finding a knowledgable convayencing solicitor can take some time & really should be done before you put your home on the market imho...

Sparklyfairy

lady123, I know what you mean. But tbh this thread highlights the BENEFITS of having a CO on a jointly owned home which = a Restriction = not worth the paper it's written on. The questions you've highlighted are leaning more towards charging orders themselves.

I agree with you & the points you raised, esp about turning unsecured debt into secured, but as this thread doesn't really go into that, you might get a better response if you post your question in a new thread?

lady123_2

Sparklyfairy wrote: »

lady123, I know what you mean. But tbh this thread highlights the BENEFITS of having a CO on a jointly owned home which = a Restriction = not worth the paper it's written on. The questions you've highlighted are leaning more towards charging orders themselves.

I agree with you & the points you raised, esp about turning unsecured debt into secured, but as this thread doesn't really go into that, you might get a better response if you post your question in a new thread?

Hi Sparkly, I just find it undeliverable that MARTIN LEWIS is not highlighting this problem seeing as he is on the tv every other day!
Martins been fantastic with regards to his money saving campaigns but this is more important than all of them as Credit card/loan company's are turning unsecured credit into secured without people knowing! surely the FSA or Financial ombudsman should be looking into this.
Does Martin look in on these threads now he's sold the website?
I'm not having a go, but we live in a world where are government doesn't work for us so its people like Martin that can highlight wrong doing by large corporations.
I appreciate the thread is about making people aware that a restriction means that Solicitors dont HAVE to pay the charge but just saying....

eggbox

lady123

There was concern from the OFT a while back but it quickly diminished, presumably, through pressure from the banks to do so under the threat they would pursue bankruptcy more often. There was also mutterings from the Government that they would impose a £25000 minimum limit for CO's to be granted but that, also, quickly evaporated possibly for the same reason?

The real scandal is that there is no redress of the interest rates charged when a CO is granted. The high, variable interest rates they were allowed to charge was due to the loans being unsecured become grossly unfair to the consumer if a creditor can then gain "security" without having to redress those high rates.

But you are not the first person to ask why this subject hasn't had wider coverage by the site's creator?

lady123_2

eggbox wrote: »

lady123

There was concern from the OFT a while back but it quickly diminished, presumably, through pressure from the banks to do so under the threat they would pursue bankruptcy more often. There was also mutterings from the Government that they would impose a £25000 minimum limit for CO's to be granted but that, also, quickly evaporated possibly for the same reason?

The real scandal is that there is no redress of the interest rates charged when a CO is granted. The high, variable interest rates they were allowed to charge was due to the loans being unsecured become grossly unfair to the consumer if a creditor can then gain "security" without having to redress those high rates.

But you are not the first person to ask why this subject hasn't had wider coverage by the site's creator?

Im just shocked and disappointed that this allowed to go on, ive heard horror storeys about District judges not even knowing the civil proceeder rules!
when a corporations/Banks can sell peoples debts to a DCA because they want a tax right off because someone is ill or lost there job or got into trouble for through no fault of there own, these parasites hire the best lawyers and then charge people that need help most extra for legal fees and then package it all nicely into a charging order bundle.... well, surely if this country cant protect us then Europe should! the answer is in the European court! anyone looked at that angle?

Sparklyfairy

lady123 wrote: »

Im just shocked and disappointed that this allowed to go on, ive heard horror storeys about District judges not even knowing the civil proceeder rules!
when a corporations/Banks can sell peoples debts to a DCA because they want a tax right off because someone is ill or lost there job or got into trouble for through no fault of there own, these parasites hire the best lawyers and then charge people that need help most extra for legal fees and then package it all nicely into a charging order bundle.... well, surely if this country cant protect us then Europe should! the answer is in the European court! anyone looked at that angle?

Yes, yes, YES! Lady, you are completely speaking my language! I completely agree with you as a person who wasn't allowed CPR in the courts + had the dreaded 8% interest added to my ruddy co (restriction.) It's so wrong & makes my blood boil, but what I think is that if any lawsuit was brought against the gov't or creditors it would have to be from some very wealthy people & clearly we are all not that & expect the gov't to protect us from shoddy district judges..it's just shocking. However, my personal crusade is to not take out any credit (at least cc or loans) & not give anyone any more of my money at all. I could care less about a new car, etc., I just want no debt & I'll be certain that never happens again. Also to add, that is why this thread has been my salvation in the knowledge that - you now what, sod em, they can that that "8%" added - but they will never, ever see it! x

eggbox

Just so we understand our current Governments thinking, the DoJ has already paved the way for CO's to be allowed even where an installment order is in place (as from October); and next on their list is 3rd Party Debt Orders. Currently creditors can only put an order on solely owned accounts but they are making plans to widen the accounts creditors can freeze in order to gain repayment. You have been warned!