Charging Order? The myth

Gimbal

Well, I seemed to have reached a stalemate.

Thank you all for your help so far, I really appreciate it.

Persimmons solicitor are insisting on the RX4 forms being issued before they will continue.
While NR are likely to comply (they have actually been pretty good since they realised they had cocked up), Shoosmiths are not budging.

I had an email from my solicitor saying they she had spoken to them and they would remove the charge (restriction) once any surplus money from the sale was paid to them.

My solicitor asked how i wanted to proceed and I responded that as there was no legal obligation to pay them anything, they could..... well, you get the idea.

So there we have it.
A week has passed with nothing happening.
They are essentially blackmailing me over any money that is 'surplus' from the sale of the house.
If it was my debt then I wouldnt have a problem paying them the money. But as its not, i do.

Patience is wearing thin now and unless something happens that we can move in the next week then I think we will have to back out and look at other options.

Not the outcome I would have liked after fighting this since August but its really beginning to take its toll and I would like to be settled in time for Christmas.

Gimbal

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

eggbox has also explained the most likely outcome regarding the automatic cancellation of a form K restriction if the application lodged is to register a transfer by two or more proprietors to a third party for value AND the required certificate has been provided. In other cases, unless it is absolutely clear that, as a result of the registration being completed, the charging order no longer affects any beneficial interest in the estate, then the restriction can be left on the register and hence a need for an RX3 or RX4 to then be lodged if the restriction is to be removed - it may have been this scenario to which we refererd when rung?

So,
If the registration has been completed (the house sold) and the certificate has been provided to the restriction holders, the restriction no longer affects the beneficial interest (the restriction holders cant claim on a property no longer owned by the debtor).

If this is the case then why would the restriction be left on the register?
Wouldnt that now fall into the realm where it would be automatically removed?

Please correct me if i have interpreted this incorrectly.

thanks

Land_Registry

You have interpreted the post quite correctly.
Although I recall mention of a Transfer of equity in earlier postings and as explained by eggbox this may be a reason why the restricitons remained on the title at the time
If you believe that they have been left on the title in error then Contact Us by email or phone to ask for it to be investigated. Simply quote the title number/address and circumstances and ask the questions you feel require a response. As mentioned before legal advice cannot be provided but an explanation of our processes and procedures can.

If there are reasons as to why the restrictions remain then they need to be provided in context and through direct contact rather than any conjecture on my part.

Gimbal

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

You have interpreted the post quite correctly.
Although I recall mention of a Transfer of equity in earlier postings and as explained by eggbox this may be a reason why the restricitons remained on the title at the time

Well, just to bring you up to speed on this particular case I own the house with my ex and the restrictions have been registered against her only.

All of the paperwork has been completed for the sale (I am part exchanging the house with persimmon) and its just the solicitors wrangling over these restrictions (standard form K).

There is no transfer of equity involved.

Persimmons solicitors want the charges removed before we complete but the RX4 forms wont be filled in by one of the restriction holders until they get a large chunk of money (which i believe we have no legal obligation to pay) so we are at an impasse where I feel I am being blackmailed for the money.

I've tried explaining to Persimmons solicitors that the restrictions will be removed after the registration once they inform the restriction holders of the change of registration and there will be no claim by anyone against the house.
The problem with this is that they 'dont want to take [my] word for it' that this is the case and seem unable to pick up the phone to yourselves for confirmation.

Is there anything I can do?

thanks for the quick reply.

eggbox

Gimbal

If Persimmon have a fear of the Restrictions being their problem after a sale then I'm sure our friend from the LR on here can put there minds at rest that its not possible for that to happen.

This would not be advice just a representation of the facts.

Gimbal

eggbox wrote: »

Gimbal

If Persimmon have a fear of the Restrictions being their problem after a sale then I'm sure our friend from the LR on here can put there minds at rest that its not possible for that to happen.

This would not be advice just a representation of the facts.

Cheers.

I have copied and pasted some of the posts from here into an email for Persimmons solicitors along with the links so that they can be verified so fingers crossed.

Hopfully this, along with all of the other information that I have already passed along will be enough to ease their concerns.
If the info straight from the LR isnt enough then I dont know what is.

My solicitor explained that even though the information was correct (i had managed to convince her), if the other solicitors didnt want to accept it, then there was nothing we could do and we would have to work towards getting the restrictions lifted.
This probably isnt going to happen as we are kinda being held to ransom over one of them.

If this fails then they will have lost the sale and we will have to look for another way to approach the problem in the new year.

Its just so frustrating as the information is right there....they just dont want to see it.

This forum has been such a help and I wouldnt have made it as far as i have without your advice and support and for that, I thank you all.

I shall (of course) continue to keep you all updated as to how things progress.

AMILLIONDOLLARS

very interesting reading!

eggbox

Gimbal

I can only wish you luck and hope Persimmon come to see that their position on the matter is pretty silly given the facts and it may lose them a house sale through an unneccesary and intransigent stance.

If it does go down the pan at least you will have this experience to, hopefully, get you where you want to go in future.

FBaby

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

You have interpreted the post quite correctly.
Although I recall mention of a Transfer of equity in earlier postings and as explained by eggbox this may be a reason why the restricitons remained on the title at the time
If you believe that they have been left on the title in error then Contact Us by email or phone to ask for it to be investigated. Simply quote the title number/address and circumstances and ask the questions you feel require a response. As mentioned before legal advice cannot be provided but an explanation of our processes and procedures can.

If there are reasons as to why the restrictions remain then they need to be provided in context and through direct contact rather than any conjecture on my part.

I beleive this is me This is great news. I have no intention of selling the house at the moment, but it is nice to have confirmation that the restriction holder cannot make a claim on the property. If the restriction could be lifted, that would be even better of course!

Once again, thank you so much eggbox for all your support on this thread and thank you land registry representative for taking the time to confirm the information.

Gimbal, I really wish you good luck and hope the solicitor finally gain confidence in the process.

Gimbal

eggbox wrote: »

Gimbal

I can only wish you luck and hope Persimmon come to see that their position on the matter is pretty silly given the facts and it may lose them a house sale through an unneccesary and intransigent stance.

If it does go down the pan at least you will have this experience to, hopefully, get you where you want to go in future.

Thanks again.
I will post the outcome on here.
Although their position does indeed seem silly it comes down to 1 person who may well decide the best course of action is to dig her heels in.

Whatever the outcome, I have learnt a massive amount about this subject and think that the creditors and solicitors have had it far too easy.
These are the the people that are supposed to be advising us (the general public) as to the best course of action.
As this clearly isnt the case in a lot of peoples situations, I think that this needs to be be shouted about a lot more and people made aware of their legal obligations (or lack thereof) of these restrictions and what they actually mean.