Charging order

TomThumb2

I'd recommend seeing if you can find a lawyer who provides free initial consultation or speaking to citizens advice prior to speaking to the court. Also do some online research for prior cases, etc.

I'd still recommend sending the evidence to the LR and asking their in-house Legal to consider it at the same time.

And try to negotiate with the mortgage company, commercially they may be able to do something as the amountvof the charge is only £600.

Lastly, ask the Treasury Solicitor to confirm that the debt isn't with them, that could be useful evidence for later.

GDB2222

Rita1960 said:

Good evening all and many thanks for this incredible input and advice. I am remortgaging the property and this charge is in place, i cannot contact anyone from the company dorma therm international nor their now closed solicitors office , both went out of business over 10 years ago, its drove me insane trying.
i cannot afford the £1000 to the solicitor to scratch his head like i have been doing.  I have no paperwork regarding this matter and the court holds no records due to the age of the case (2008).

i have no documents regarding this to provide to the LR, its a dilemma for sure and from all of the good advice offered by you all i feel that i have no other option but to apply to the court to look into the matter and to see what can be done.

Sorry to dash your hopes, but you don’t have a chat with the judge, and then he goes off to look into the matter for you. 

You have to present a strong case to the court for the restriction to be removed. In theory, you could do that yourself, but in practice you would need a solicitor. It will cost thousands in fees, which you say you don’t have. 

Have you at least contacted the bona vacantia office, as previously suggested? 

Rita1960

I have last night sent a mail to the bona vacantia office outlining the situation etc 

GDB2222

TomThumb2 said:

GDB2222 said:

housebuyer143 said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

TomThumb2 said:

Land_Registry said:

silvercar said:

Paging @Land_Registry

Pretty sure the OP is already aware re what's required from a registration perspective for this one. Either the creditor discharges it or the OP goes back to court to get it dismissed and then applies to update the register as appropriate. Hopefully they are on the right track as a result

Is that 100% the Land Registry position that the only evidence they would accept is a court order and not evidence that the creditor isn't responding/can't be traced?

Whilst every application is treated on merit a discharge or order dismissing the charge is clear cut. If there is any doubt then it's for the court to assess and pass judgement and not ourselves in the vast majority of cases. 
Resolving such matters, without the participation of the actual creditor, is very much a legal issue rather than a registration one hence the options as stated

Can I check one point, please. A form K restriction requires that the creditor is notified of an impending transfer, and I presume that notification should be sent to the address given, even if it is known that the creditor is no longer there? 

Having done that, the property can then be transferred, and am I correct that the property will be transferred to the new legal owner without that restriction?

If the property is being sold and the charging order is protected by way of a form K restriction then provided it is complied with (read the restriction wording to understand what's needed) it can be overreached and automatically cancelled when the owner is registered
Charging orders (PG76) - GOV.UK - section 4 explains 

Thank you.

You say sold, but would the same apply if the property is being transferred at nil cost to the OP's husband/mother/child? I think the Land Registry concerns itself mostly with legal ownership rather than beneficial ownership? 

I assume that the restriction would not be reinstated if the property is subsequently transferred back to the OP? 

As I understand it, it needs to be sold with consideration so a nil transfer to get around the restriction wouldn't work. 

Whether the consideration needs to be market value or not I'm not too sure on.

For a contract, there needs to be valuable consideration, but it doesn’t have to be very much at all. 1p. Whether the Land Registry would look at it like that, I don’t know, but it might be a cheap way for the op to solve her problem. 

I believe it would have to be a genuine sale, but in the case here the OP is looking to remortgage rather than sell.

Yes, I fully understand that the op is looking to remortgage. I was just wondering whether there was a way round the restriction without spending thousands on a court application. 

Can I ask why you think that it would have to be a genuine sale, as you put it? 

housebuyer143

GDB2222 said:

TomThumb2 said:

GDB2222 said:

housebuyer143 said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

TomThumb2 said:

Land_Registry said:

silvercar said:

Paging @Land_Registry

Pretty sure the OP is already aware re what's required from a registration perspective for this one. Either the creditor discharges it or the OP goes back to court to get it dismissed and then applies to update the register as appropriate. Hopefully they are on the right track as a result

Is that 100% the Land Registry position that the only evidence they would accept is a court order and not evidence that the creditor isn't responding/can't be traced?

Whilst every application is treated on merit a discharge or order dismissing the charge is clear cut. If there is any doubt then it's for the court to assess and pass judgement and not ourselves in the vast majority of cases. 
Resolving such matters, without the participation of the actual creditor, is very much a legal issue rather than a registration one hence the options as stated

Can I check one point, please. A form K restriction requires that the creditor is notified of an impending transfer, and I presume that notification should be sent to the address given, even if it is known that the creditor is no longer there? 

Having done that, the property can then be transferred, and am I correct that the property will be transferred to the new legal owner without that restriction?

If the property is being sold and the charging order is protected by way of a form K restriction then provided it is complied with (read the restriction wording to understand what's needed) it can be overreached and automatically cancelled when the owner is registered
Charging orders (PG76) - GOV.UK - section 4 explains 

Thank you.

You say sold, but would the same apply if the property is being transferred at nil cost to the OP's husband/mother/child? I think the Land Registry concerns itself mostly with legal ownership rather than beneficial ownership? 

I assume that the restriction would not be reinstated if the property is subsequently transferred back to the OP? 

As I understand it, it needs to be sold with consideration so a nil transfer to get around the restriction wouldn't work. 

Whether the consideration needs to be market value or not I'm not too sure on.

For a contract, there needs to be valuable consideration, but it doesn’t have to be very much at all. 1p. Whether the Land Registry would look at it like that, I don’t know, but it might be a cheap way for the op to solve her problem. 

I believe it would have to be a genuine sale, but in the case here the OP is looking to remortgage rather than sell.

Yes, I fully understand that the op is looking to remortgage. I was just wondering whether there was a way round the restriction without spending thousands on a court application. 

Can I ask why you think that it would have to be a genuine sale, as you put it? 

Its not a loophole that would be allowed to exist - just transferring it to a family member and transferring it back. Not too mention stamp duty implications in doing this. 

I did a lot of reading on form Ks and I am sure I read it needed to be a genuine sale - as in at market price or a fair price. 

GDB2222

Rita1960 said:

I have last night sent a mail to the bona vacantia office outlining the situation etc 

That’s an excellent idea. If you do apply to the court, you will have to show that you have searched extensively for the creditor. 

TomThumb2

housebuyer143 said:

GDB2222 said:

TomThumb2 said:

GDB2222 said:

housebuyer143 said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

TomThumb2 said:

Land_Registry said:

silvercar said:

Paging @Land_Registry

Pretty sure the OP is already aware re what's required from a registration perspective for this one. Either the creditor discharges it or the OP goes back to court to get it dismissed and then applies to update the register as appropriate. Hopefully they are on the right track as a result

Is that 100% the Land Registry position that the only evidence they would accept is a court order and not evidence that the creditor isn't responding/can't be traced?

Whilst every application is treated on merit a discharge or order dismissing the charge is clear cut. If there is any doubt then it's for the court to assess and pass judgement and not ourselves in the vast majority of cases. 
Resolving such matters, without the participation of the actual creditor, is very much a legal issue rather than a registration one hence the options as stated

Can I check one point, please. A form K restriction requires that the creditor is notified of an impending transfer, and I presume that notification should be sent to the address given, even if it is known that the creditor is no longer there? 

Having done that, the property can then be transferred, and am I correct that the property will be transferred to the new legal owner without that restriction?

If the property is being sold and the charging order is protected by way of a form K restriction then provided it is complied with (read the restriction wording to understand what's needed) it can be overreached and automatically cancelled when the owner is registered
Charging orders (PG76) - GOV.UK - section 4 explains 

Thank you.

You say sold, but would the same apply if the property is being transferred at nil cost to the OP's husband/mother/child? I think the Land Registry concerns itself mostly with legal ownership rather than beneficial ownership? 

I assume that the restriction would not be reinstated if the property is subsequently transferred back to the OP? 

As I understand it, it needs to be sold with consideration so a nil transfer to get around the restriction wouldn't work. 

Whether the consideration needs to be market value or not I'm not too sure on.

For a contract, there needs to be valuable consideration, but it doesn’t have to be very much at all. 1p. Whether the Land Registry would look at it like that, I don’t know, but it might be a cheap way for the op to solve her problem. 

I believe it would have to be a genuine sale, but in the case here the OP is looking to remortgage rather than sell.

Yes, I fully understand that the op is looking to remortgage. I was just wondering whether there was a way round the restriction without spending thousands on a court application. 

Can I ask why you think that it would have to be a genuine sale, as you put it? 

Its not a loophole that would be allowed to exist - just transferring it to a family member and transferring it back. Not too mention stamp duty implications in doing this. 

I did a lot of reading on form Ks and I am sure I read it needed to be a genuine sale - as in at market price or a fair price. 

Yes, I'd agree with this and can confirm this is what I meant by genuine sale. Tax implications are important point here as well.

Rita1960

I have on Wednesday contacted the treasury solicitor and provided them with as much information as I have and followed this up with a telephone conversation. Today I had a mail informing me that they are opening a case to review this situation and will obtain the court records of the debt and the company records of Dorma Therm -International and then inform me of their decision etc 

hopefully some form of outcome 

GDB2222

TomThumb2 said:

housebuyer143 said:

GDB2222 said:

TomThumb2 said:

GDB2222 said:

housebuyer143 said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

GDB2222 said:

Land_Registry said:

TomThumb2 said:

Land_Registry said:

silvercar said:

Paging @Land_Registry

Pretty sure the OP is already aware re what's required from a registration perspective for this one. Either the creditor discharges it or the OP goes back to court to get it dismissed and then applies to update the register as appropriate. Hopefully they are on the right track as a result

Is that 100% the Land Registry position that the only evidence they would accept is a court order and not evidence that the creditor isn't responding/can't be traced?

Whilst every application is treated on merit a discharge or order dismissing the charge is clear cut. If there is any doubt then it's for the court to assess and pass judgement and not ourselves in the vast majority of cases. 
Resolving such matters, without the participation of the actual creditor, is very much a legal issue rather than a registration one hence the options as stated

Can I check one point, please. A form K restriction requires that the creditor is notified of an impending transfer, and I presume that notification should be sent to the address given, even if it is known that the creditor is no longer there? 

Having done that, the property can then be transferred, and am I correct that the property will be transferred to the new legal owner without that restriction?

If the property is being sold and the charging order is protected by way of a form K restriction then provided it is complied with (read the restriction wording to understand what's needed) it can be overreached and automatically cancelled when the owner is registered
Charging orders (PG76) - GOV.UK - section 4 explains 

Thank you.

You say sold, but would the same apply if the property is being transferred at nil cost to the OP's husband/mother/child? I think the Land Registry concerns itself mostly with legal ownership rather than beneficial ownership? 

I assume that the restriction would not be reinstated if the property is subsequently transferred back to the OP? 

As I understand it, it needs to be sold with consideration so a nil transfer to get around the restriction wouldn't work. 

Whether the consideration needs to be market value or not I'm not too sure on.

For a contract, there needs to be valuable consideration, but it doesn’t have to be very much at all. 1p. Whether the Land Registry would look at it like that, I don’t know, but it might be a cheap way for the op to solve her problem. 

I believe it would have to be a genuine sale, but in the case here the OP is looking to remortgage rather than sell.

Yes, I fully understand that the op is looking to remortgage. I was just wondering whether there was a way round the restriction without spending thousands on a court application. 

Can I ask why you think that it would have to be a genuine sale, as you put it? 

Its not a loophole that would be allowed to exist - just transferring it to a family member and transferring it back. Not too mention stamp duty implications in doing this. 

I did a lot of reading on form Ks and I am sure I read it needed to be a genuine sale - as in at market price or a fair price. 

Yes, I'd agree with this and can confirm this is what I meant by genuine sale. Tax implications are important point here as well.

One advantage of transferring at an ultra low cost would have been that it would kept sdlt at nothing. However, if you guys are sure it cannot be done, that’s fine by me. 

TomThumb2

Rita1960 said:

I have on Wednesday contacted the treasury solicitor and provided them with as much information as I have and followed this up with a telephone conversation. Today I had a mail informing me that they are opening a case to review this situation and will obtain the court records of the debt and the company records of Dorma Therm -International and then inform me of their decision etc 

hopefully some form of outcome 

Thanks for the update - please keep us posted on how this goes. It will be interesting to see the outcome.