Charging Order? The myth

For the Attention of LRR...

Our mortgage was a together mortgage with NRAM which comprised of a secured element and an unsecured element. From what I have read, normally what happens is that when selling the house, the secured part is paid, and the unsecured part de-links at a higher interest rate and paid back separately.

NRAM are saying that they cannot de-link them because of a charge on the property...which there is NONE for the unsecured element.

There are 2 restrictions for 2 separate personal loans with NRAM which we think is confusing them.

Now on the Land Registry (Proprietorship Register) it states the following
(16.04.2007) The price stated to have been paid on 11 December 2006 was
£xxxx
"X" is the full cost of the mortgage including the unsecured element.

Does this entitle them to demand the unsecured element? Or is that just normal to list the full amount paid, including any unsecured element?

This is holding up the sale of the property... NRAM are being quite stubborn over this.

I guess that was a long winded way of asking the charge on there for the mortgage, does that only cover the secured amount?

Thanks in advance

Burnsy1978 wrote: »

Hi everyone,
I'm new to this site and would really appreciate some help on a matter concerning an interim charging order. In 2009 I was made redundant from my job during the recession. At the time of redundancy I was in the middle of a hire purchase agreement on my car. I kept payments up for as long as I could afford but sadly fell into arrears. As a result of this, I made the decision to give up the car and give it back to the finance company. I sent them a letter saying that I would give the car back as full and final payment as I had already paid more than 50% of the total amount payable, this is the law under the CCA 1974. I received a letter back saying that was fine and they were willing to accept this agreement. A few months down the line I received court papers saying the lender was making an application for a charging order on my home. As I have never been to court in my life before and didn't have a clue what the process was I went in to the hearing quite blind. As I had no idea how to defend myself the judge made judgement in their favour. Now as my house is jointly owned I have since read they wouldn't get a final charging order anyway. I haven't had credit since this incident and a few other debts which spiralled. Now my credit score has improved and is getting back to where it should be, this interim charging order has come back to haunt me after I applied for extra funds on my mortgage for home improvements. I have the land registry document which does state that the lender has a "restriction" on my property. Is there anyway I can get it removed?
Thanks in advance

Burnsy 1978

For the creditor to have obtained an interim charging order he will have to have, firstly, obtained a County Court Judgement (CCJ) against you for the debt claimed; it is this that is affecting your credit file not the interim charging order.

You should, however, have received papers from the Court advising you of the creditors court action, for the CCJ application, to enable you to defend the claim. Did you receive anything?

If you received the papers but ignored them it should be okay as long as you still have the letter stating they were accepting the car's return in full and final settlement? This is because you will be able to make an application to set aside the CCJ on the basis you didn't owe any money because of what the letter states?

Removing the CCJ is the only way to remove the Restriction (apart from settling the debt) so let me know what the situation is on the above and I can advise your next best action?

Thank you again for all your advice. The house sale completed yesterday. From sending that email to them on the Friday, to completition the following Thursday. It wouldn't have happened without you, so thank you so much.

I have read through the thread, and could not make sense of how this works

Anyway here is my situation and I hope someone is able to assist

My Mother past away in 1993 and my father passed away in May last year. Both owned a property which the mortgage is paid.

My mother owned a 2nd property at the peak of the recession in 1994 and with the interest charges going crazy, the house was repossessed and auctioned off. Especially as my mother past away the year before

My father agreed a payment plan to pay the shortfall on the mortgage on the second house and that was that.

Or atleast I thought

We got a call in 2008 requesting to settle the debt I explained my mother was deceased. So agreed to get my fathers part of the debt removed.

Anyway roll the clock forward my Father passes away and I am the executor on the will.

There are two orders in the document - see below

(28.02.2008) RESTRICTION: No disposition of the registered estate is to be registered without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration or his conveyancer that written notice of the disposition was given to Bank of Scotland at c/o HL Interactive Solicitors, 19-21
Spring Gardens, Manchester M2 1FB and of DX724000, Manchester 39 being
the person with the benefit of an interim charging order on the
beneficial interest of made by the Manchester County
Court on 6 February 2008

3 (06.05.2008) RESTRICTION: No disposition of the registered estate is to
be registered without a certificate signed by the applicant for
registration or his conveyancer that written notice of the disposition
was given to Bank of Scotland PLC at care of HL Interactive Solicitors,
76 King Street, Manchester M2 4NH and DX724000 Manchester 39
() being the person with the benefit of a final
charging order on the beneficial interest of XX made by the
Manchester County Court on 29 April 2008 Claim Number

What do these mean, and as my mother is deceased and it appears the charging order is only in my mums name

Would love to know how to move my probate issue here and what the liabilities are here.

Your advice would be greatly appreciated