Creditor left interim charging and unilateral notice on my title deeds.

Slithery

If it's a small amount why not just pay the damn thing off and be done with all of this?

AdrianC

indielad1010 wrote: »

I don't think you are aware of the differeneces of an interim charging order and a final charging order. The debt is not secured and If I sell my house the water board are not compensated with any equity. They can only register an interest.

One that needs to be satisfied on sale.

I'm sure your conveyancer's word that they will be repaid on completion will be good enough to get them to allow the sale and remove the charge.

Do you think you should be allowed to sell the house without paying the charge? If so, why?

WHat we need is a judge to state how the debt is fairly enforced and how it is applied. The Water board are not allowing this.

Woah, hold on!
A court judged the debt was due in the first place.
A second court has granted the interim order.
Yes, a third court is required to finalise the order... But why do you think they'll take your side this time?

However, the advice to set the CCJ aside may be more appropiate, though it might be too late now.

Unless and until you do that, you are merely arguing with your creditor over the relatively fine detail of how and when you will repay the money you owe them.

indielad1010

The debt has been trebled to about £800. Now you may or may not think that charging orders for relatively small amounts, are fair or draconian, but this should be decided by a mediator. I did offfer to pay them cash , but they refused to provide a receipt, they would not even provide a giro slip to pa at the bank, which is why I'd rather a judge deal with it, the debt. Then the debt can be paid in a fair and provable way.

AdrianC

indielad1010 wrote: »

The debt has been trebled to about £800.

Yes, the fees and costs of all of the drawn-out wrangling have been added to the original debt. As always.

I did offfer to pay them cash , but they refused to provide a receipt, they would not even provide a giro slip to pa at the bank, which is why I'd rather a judge deal with it, the debt. Then the debt can be paid in a fair and provable way.

So you do agree to pay the debt, but you're arguing over how? You clearly don't need to pay by installments to avoid hardship, given that you're willing to pay cash, so I'm not surprised they refuse to extend you more credit. You don't need a "giro slip" to pay into their bank account over the counter - just their account number and sort code.
Why can't you just do a bank transfer? Or post a cheque?

Sorry, as this thread goes on, it's sounding more and more like you're trying to prove some point of principle than get the problem resolved.

Snilloct1957 - since the debt has long since gone to court, and the OP has still not paid the debt off, I can't see the ombudsman being terribly bothered.

indielad1010

Adrain C, again you are inviting me to state my personal opinions on charging orders, whether they are fair, or draconian or whther there should be arbitary limits. Now do you think that is for me or you to decide? Do you wish me to argue other matters that are not relevant to the post like Brexit, the death penalty ort he need for nuclear weapons for example?


Regarding your relevant points, I doubt the water board is going to accept my conveyancor's word to pay the debt after exchange of contracts.


Yes according to the national debtline I do have relevant points against a final charging order, again, my disability, and some of those include the age of the debt, and size of the debt. Though you might think it's wrong for me to contest it or they are not valid for you, again that is a for a judge to deicde.

bouicca21

Adrain C, again you are inviting me to state my personal opinions on charging orders, whether they are fair, or draconian or whther there should be arbitary limits.

Er, no, he didn't.

indielad1010

AdrianC wrote: »

Do you think you should be allowed to sell the house without paying the charge? If so, why?

Yes he did

AdrianC

indielad1010 wrote: »

again you are inviting me to state my personal opinions on charging orders, whether they are fair, or draconian or whther there should be arbitary limits.

No, I am not.

Now do you think that is for me or you to decide?

Umm, you are the one saying there should be arbitrary limits - and that your debt is below them.

Regarding your relevant points, I doubt the water board is going to accept my conveyancor's word to pay the debt after exchange of contracts.

Au contraire, I am quite sure they will be delighted to get this put to bed.

Yes according to the national debtline I do have relevant points against a final charging order, again, my disability, and some of those include the age of the debt, and size of the debt. Though you might think it's wrong for me to contest it or they are not valid for you, again that is a for a judge to deicde.

Indeed. But even if the judge does remove the charge, you will still owe the money - which you are not only willing to pay, but say that you've already tried to pay.

indielad1010

I have argued with the waterboard as they will simply not provide a tangible receipt. I work at home and HMRC will need to see it when I write downn my expensesi f I get audited. A cheque or bank transfer does not produce a receipt satisfactory to the taxman's requirements.Just because I was willing to pay previously doesn't mean hardship will not occur. I think I will just ask the land registry to remove the unilateral charge and see if that will prompt the water board to proceed to final stage then, There doesn't seem to be any constructive advice, but thanks for trying.

AdrianC

BTW, it hasn't been "the water board" since the privatisations of the 1980s, a third of a century ago.