Charging Order? The myth

brightonian

I am happy to confirm that today I checked the Land Registry for £3 (my fourth such check) and I can confirm that:

1. The property is no longer in my name
2. There is no charge in my name in the record for the property
3. No money was sent to Natwest or their solicitors
4. Their solicitors (well, a call centre operative with less legal knowledge than me!) phoned yesterday and smuggly said (when told I did not recognise the debt) that they had a "charging order on my property" to which I replied "but I sold that property a while back".... this caused some confusion with said operative, who then had their head explode or something

So, read back at my tale, thanks to Eggbox and others for their support and remember DO NOT LET YOUR SOLICITOR BULLY YOU INTO THE EASY ROUTE.

In other news, I've just disputed the PPI element of the debt (the CCJ included the "balance" of the debt which, it turns out, included PPI which now looks to be very ropey) and the PPI interest being included. If I get Natwest to admit PPI is dodgy ("I was told it was included in the product and nobody said it was optional", "I was self employed at the time") then I will basically demand their solicitors ensure the CCJ is set aside and if they try and get a new CCJ then I will calmly explain they a) have told me there is no copy of the agreement and b) the last payment was 6 years and 6 months ago.

Thanks again to everyone who has helped me with this, Eggbox you were a star.

REMEMBER: IT CAN BE DONE!

fatbelly

brightonian wrote: »

REMEMBER: IT CAN BE DONE!

Thanks for posting. I have followed your case with interest and I am glad that you got there in the end.

eggbox

Thanks Brightonian but I think major thanks need to go to both Blueback, who originally started this thread and enlightened people to the CO difference on Jointly Owned property, plus yourself who has persisted with the information and has now placed a marker for everyone else who wants to do the same. Coming back to confirm your success is also hugely helpful rather than just disappearing as, sadly, so many others do after receiving help. So thanks for that as your experience will be extremely valuable to a huge number of people who are in the same situation.

I should also add that the Solicitors involved in your sale also need congratulating for listening to you and, correctly, allowing the sale to proceed unhindered. That can't be underestimated given the other Solicitor experiences related on this board. I hope they obtain more business in the future because of this.

brightonian

Thanks for pointing out Blueback's contribution Eggbox, and thanks are therefore sent Blueback's way!

I am convinced it's this document that swung it for me. It's written by a solicitor and covers exactly this situation, albeit explaining that Form K restrictions are something creditors may not think they are!

http://www.bllaw.co.uk/pdf/financeandrecoveries_0806_charging%20orders%20on%20property.pdf

eggbox

Hi Brightonian

The document has been referred to several times during this thread and anyone who read it couldn't fail to see the limitations of this type of CO. Sadly, this didn't (doesn't) seem to be understood by the conveyancing profession (or if they do they ignore it!)

I still maintain Solicitors are leaving themselves open to their clients making a claim against them for settling CO debts only notified by a Restriction, upon the sale of a property, when their is no legal requirement for them to do so. In doing so they are not acting in the bests interests of the clients paying them to protect those best interests.

brightonian

Eggbox,

I think my solicitor thought that I was "someone who thinks they know better".... I think that showing them that document (being almost 'official') rather than saying "well I read on a forum" or "the LR say 'usually'" (but crucially not 'always') was the tipping point. It spells it out very clearly!

eggbox

Brightonian

It's been related many times on this thread that Solicitors don't take kindly to a their (paying) clients opinions on this matter. So, as I said, your Solicitors efforts can't be underestimated in helping you on your sale and if it did the trick let's hope other Solicitors sit up and take notice!

Distracted

I was hoping some of you kind knowledgeable people on this forum may help me.

My Wife had a previous relationship, in which they had a joint mortgage together, this was drawn from a joint account. He started to not pay his half of the mortgage and then subsequently started taking the money that my wife paid in to cover the mortgage out to spend. Despite my wife’s attempts at the time they refused to close the joint account as he was not being co-operative and would not sign the relevant documentation, so she had little choice but to leave and let the house be repossessed. The house was later sold at auction and there was a shortfall of nearly £40k

My Wife started paying off the debt through a repayment, this was stopped when her former partner’s father offered to guarantee the money through the sale of his property.

We thought this was an end and several years passed before we bought a property together, my wife was named on the mortgage as we were struggling to get what we wanted on without naming her on the mortgage.

After we completed the purchase we started to receive letters again chasing up the debt, we ignored them in the first instance and sent a letter through a 3rd party stating that the debt was to be recovered upon sale of her former partner’s father. They do not seem to recognise that agreement now.

1) We have today been jointly issued with a Charge order on our current property – reading through the early part of the thread it would appear that they can only put a registration on a jointly held property, is this correct?

2) At what point in the proceedings should I raise this fact, should I wait until it is in Court, or a ruling has been made?

3) We would obviously prefer if it was not put against our property in the first place, could the Charge order be placed upon the former partner solely (I believe that he has a property)?

4) Another point, the deposit for the house was from me and my parents, I got a legal document signed to acknowledge that the equity in the house at purchase was mine and not my wife’s, and upon any sale that I would have 10% of the equity before it was split. Added to this, with us having a young family the reality is that I pay the mortgage and the bills as my wife can only work part time whilst looking after the family (a full time job I might add) and I can very easily prove this. So what if any charges against the property can they level if I have the greater financial investment and I have no liability for this debt?

Sorry if there may seem a lot of unnecessary background information, but I really just need to know where my wife and I stand with this.

terryw

Regarding
"1) We have today been jointly issued with a Charge order on our current property – reading through the early part of the thread it would appear that they can only put a registration on a jointly held property, is this correct?"

It will be a restriction.

Regarding
"2) At what point in the proceedings should I raise this fact, should I wait until it is in Court, or a ruling has been made?"

What stage is it at now. Has a CCJ already been obtained? Is there an interim charging order? Before the final charging order is given there will be a hearing at which any points can be made to the judge.

Regarding 3

"3) We would obviously prefer if it was not put against our property in the first place, could the Charge order be placed upon the former partner solely (I believe that he has a property)?"

The debt is joint and several. The creditor can enforce against either party or both. They usually chase the one where they have the best chance of obtainingg payment.

Distracted

Hi, thank you for your response.

I've just had a look at the letter that came today. It would appear that they have already gained a CCJ, and my wife is being requested to attend court for the judge to decide whether the charge should continue or should be discharged.

Would this be the time to contest the validity of an order over a restriction and how should I present that. Should I submit something written to the court or raise it verbally as a query?

What would the restriction entail, would it give them any claims whatsoever over money in the property or is it pretty much ineffectual.

Sorry if it appears I'm giving the 3rd degree here but as you can imagine I'm very concerned over the situation