Please help me

fatbelly

magee737 wrote: »

The creditor cannot apply for enforcement by bailiff (warrant of execution) because the judge ordered 'ENFORCEMENT OF THE JUDGEMENT IS ALLOWED BY THE ISSUE OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CHARGING ORDER BUT NOT OTHERWISE WITHOUT FUTHER ORDER'

The DJ intended enforcement to be by Charging Order rather than distraint.

Thank you so much for your replys. Can i ask what this means in basic terms please? sorry

The District Judge (DJ) said that they could apply for a legal charge on your house (Charging Order) - are you OK with that?

... but that they could not use any other method to 'enforce the debt';

so they could not use bailiff/warrant of execution/distress/distraint - that's all the same thing ... at least they couldn't do this without a further separate court order.

magee737

Yea not bothered about charging order because the house is in neg equity by some thousands. Do you think they would look at getting a court order for baliffs?

Culex

magee737 wrote: »

Yea not bothered about charging order because the house is in neg equity by some thousands. Do you think they would look at getting a court order for baliffs?

Why should they?

Not only would that be contrary to the declared policy of the current kakistocracy, it would be less than likely to raise enough to pay the debt - or perhaps even to cover the bailiffs' fees!

It hardly matters if the house is in negative equity by £50,000 - the charging order means that the judgement would have to be satisfied before any of the proceeds of sale could be released.

Note to those twerps at Triton:
A charging order does not mean that the creditor would ever get possession of the debtor's property!