Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

eggboxy1

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by eggboxy1

  1. Hi Sequenci I agree that prior to a CCJ being obtained it would be good practice to supply an I&E in order to avoid that being granted at any cost. After that, unless it's for the Court, it's just letting your creditor know what hand you have been dealt. And don't forget this creditor has, allegedly, tried to obtain this information under the false pretence that they have a legal right to it. And we are both in agreement that an OFS is very difficult to obtain. As I have previously argued, the creditors determination to seek a CO subsequently backs them into a corner because of this. Future threats etc in trying to obtain a higher repayment are diminished as they have nowhere to go. I know it's hard for someone worried about losing their home but they have to look at the facts of this and not be persuaded by the fear.
  2. Hi Sue The next time you are asked for the I&E ask him to state, legally, where you have to provide one. Your personal circumstances are nothing to do with them and only a Court could request them. They don't have to accept your £20-00 a month but the question, for them, is what is the benefit of proceeding with an OFS given the highly unlikely outcome that they would succeed or, given your circumstances, that they would even get paid. Remember an OFS is a business decision and would only proceed if they were sure they would be paid (or else what's the point?) Stand by your £20-00 as all you can afford at present and that if their client isn't happy with that they can take their chances with a DJ and your circumstances in Court. You can send them a copy of this too to let them know the current thinking of District Judges, http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:BHDpLDrWlEoJ:www.lawgazette.co.uk/in-practice/benchmarks/proportionate-orders-sale+trusts+of+land+and+appointment+of+trustees+act+1996+order+for+sale&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&source=www.google.co.uk Also the reason you didn't turn up much for OFS is that only 0.3% of CO's ever progress to an OFS. There is a very good reason for that!
  3. If the OFS is only being threatened then certainly don't get yourself worked up too much as it's almost certainly a bluff by this bunch just to get your attention. Have a read here to help put your mind at rest; [MOD EDIT: Commercial links are not allowed, sorry] - My bad! link sent by PM! And you need to understand that a Charging Order is extremely simple for a creditor to obtain, whereas, an Order for Sale is very difficult for them to obtain for consumer credit debts. You also need to take into account that if the debt is only in your name but your mortgage is in joint names; then the Charging Order can only be made against your "Beneficial Interest" (or your share of any equity) in the property. They can't take anything from your partner's share. Given you say the property is heavily mortgaged this is not going to be an attractive proposition to the creditor to go after an OFS as there may not be enough money to go after. That your daughter and granddaughter would be made homeless in the event of a sale is also a big problem for the creditor to overcome as a Judge is unlikely to want to do this. My advice is to forget trying to set aside the CCJ as it was sent to your registered address and it's going to cause you headaches being out of the country trying to sort. But you shouldn't, either, forward them an I&E (they have no legal right to demand one) as it gives them ammunition for the future. Do not, either pay any deposit as it gives them encouragement to come back for more. Simply offer them an amount you CAN afford per month and just and stick to your guns that it is all you can afford. It is extremely unlikely they will apply for any further enforcement to the Court (because of the nature and size of the debt). But if they are daft enough to do it then that is the time to provide your I&E to show the Judge. Their tactic is to unsettle you (which they have) as they know from experience it gets results in the form of a higher repayment. So you need to stay firm and read up on these boards about other people's experiences AFTER they have received a Charging Order. You can play them at their own game and not capitulate every time they make threatening noises!
  4. Can I politely just ask if an Order for Sale has actually been applied for or has it just been threatened?
  5. Yes but it's how they can be registered and against what that is the crucial differences! An "Equitable Charge" is against the property whilst a "Restriction" is only against the persons "Beneficial Interest" - so their is quite a difference. Also, the Solicitor from the Land Registry who I corresponded with over these issues went out of her way to explain that the LR does not contact the Restriction holder as is stated on the Inland Revenue website. That's up to the purchaser's Solicitor and provided it's done (via proof of a "Certificate") the new owner's registration cannot be prevented. As she further explained, "what happens after that is not a matter for the Land Registry". Another important fact which the Shergroup (a pretty hefty Debt Enforcement law firm) explain on their website and which is worth remembering is; "Another point that requires reiteration because even the money experts and advice experts seem to get it wrong – the use of charging orders does not secure the debt. What had previously been an ‘unsecured debt’ does not suddenly become a ‘secured debt’ because a charging order has been obtained. A charging order secures the judgement – not the underlying debt"
  6. I would agree with this option but I disagree about Equity being the main deciding factor. The size of the debt and if they have any chance of getting an OFS for the type of debt incurred will dictate whether an OFS is pursued. The current status of getting that for consumer debt is virtually zero and the reasons for this are reflected in this article written by a District Judge in June of this year; http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/in-practice/benchmarks/proportionate-orders-sale I would also cease any communication as talking to them only gives them the opinion they are worrying you enough to think they can manipulate you and get a larger repayment. Get your head around the fact that creditors pursue a CO to gain priority over other creditors as it also gives them priority over bankruptcy dealings. Pursuing a CO, also, often gains them a better repayment from the debtor through a "fear" factor and people trying to avoid the CO on their property! But the flip side for them is that the limitations of Restrictions are becoming more widely realised by debtors and, given the facts of how difficult an OFS is to pursue for a creditor, they (IMHO) lose any leverage in getting the debtor to pay up. Interestingly, Debt Enforcement companies now seem to be highlighting the power of Restrictions (or lack of) to creditors more and more on their "is it worth it" sections advice to creditors. Below is a sample from Lovetts Solicitors site regarding Restrictions; . Share in a house It is also possible to get such an order where the debtor only has a share in the property e.g. where he owns a house jointly with his wife. The charge will then be on his share of the property and not on the property itself and is much less secure. A restriction will be entered on the debtor's title to say that notice must be given to the creditor but if that is done a sale or charge of the property can be registered. It's up to the people selling, often a husband and wife, to pay you!
  7. This would definitely be your preferred route if a cash sale was available. You won't, then, have the hassle of possibly having to explain the LR/Restriction details to an "outside" party.
  8. Just to throw something into the mix "SDLT (Stamp Duty Land Tax) is exempted if it is effected in pursuance of a court order or an agreement between the parties in connection with divorce, nullity of marriage or judicial separation, or the dissolution of a civil partnership (Schedule 3 Finance Act 2003)."
  9. I understand but be careful as, whilst its extremely rare, it does open the door to the creditor being able to apply for an OFS if things don't go the way you had planned.
  10. Should be as the circumstances would still be the same in that the CO would still only be able to be registered against the debtor's "Beneficial Interest" in the joint property. Can I ask why you would want to make the CO voluntarily?
  11. But, if there are many reasons, can you not expand on a few specifically that might help us understand what you are trying to explain on this issue? Given, as Gaston stated, you sign up in the T&C's for the debt to be sold on it's a little difficult to follow how an account would become either illegible or uncollectable without understanding how those reasons come into play?
  12. Toymaker What would be the reasons you are stating an account would fall into the uncollectable/ineligible bracket and cannot be assigned without the debtor's consent? It was certainly my understanding the creditor only had to give notice to you (and proof of the transfer if required) and that was it? I'm not saying you're wrong but I'm struggling to see what type of account would fall into the uncollectable/ineligible you say requires the debtors consent?
  13. You need to contact the Land Registry, too, regarding how an Equitable Charge was registered given your circumstances. As ever keep us informed!
  14. shazzyball Don't contact your creditors until they contact you. If, or when, they do contact you again, asking for payment, I would suggest you simply tell them that, under your present financial circumstances and due to your other priority debts, you are currently unable to make payment. If your circumstances change in the future you will update them. Expect them to huff and puff again about "further Enforcement" but that is when you really need to just ignore them as, given your circumstances, it is all bluff. The key to that bluff is that they now want the payment you previously offered, and which they refused, as they know they aren't able to do anything else. My view on that would be tough they had their chance and that money is now going elsewhere to pay higher priority debts.
  15. shazzyball I'd stick with the "reality" of what will happen and ignore them. The facts you have presented mean they simply have nothing to aim for while you have your other priority debts being sorted.
  16. To add to what Ganymede has told you; the problem for your creditor now is they have pretty much no where else to go now regarding Enforcement of the debt. The fact you are paying off another creditor with a suspended Possession Order really means you can ignore this creditor completely (which should give you some pleasure if the have stiffed your OH's business?)
  17. He did and they probably are. But if you read shazzyball's case on this thread then you will see why I asked for clarification
  18. But only on a solely owned, or jointly owned/joint debt properties. Not on Jointly owned/sole debt properties which is what needed clarifying.
  19. Thanks Gaston! I was, however, asking what mercyblue was referring to as it's not clear from what mcarlisle originally posted if he is likely to have a "notice" or a "restriction". Which, as we both know, makes a difference to his options when he does sell. But if he does have a "Notice" he can still sell the house regardless of the "Notices" and doesn't need the creditors permission to sell. They may, however, put in an objection to the sale going ahead because their isn't enough equity for them to be paid off fully. But the onus is on them to do this and not for the seller to seek their permission. Its an important distinction because the creditors will be aware that many debtors in this position now simply walk away from the property and allow it to be repossessed as they have no financial incentive to stay. The creditor will then have to way up if the sale going ahead would bring him something rather than the, almost, certainty of nothing if the property is repossessed.
  20. Hi Toymaker What are the reasons why an OC would designate an account as being "uncollectable" ?
  21. Fair enough on the details , shazzy, but can you give any insight as to why they would do this given their only concern should be repayment but which, by their actions, they then limit your OH's ability to do that? I'm not trying to read anything sinister into your experience more understand why the creditor, apparently, has acted so stupidly?
  22. Is the house registered in your sole name and, if not, is the debt solely in your name? The answer to that will determine what you can do when you sell up. If you sell up and there isn't enough money to pay off the CO (providing they are not registered as Restrictions as you aren't obliged to pay those) then the debts just revert back to being unsecured again.
  23. They can ask for whatever they like but the reality (for them) is that there is nowhere for them to go now if you don't pay. I'm a little curious, though, why (and how) they prevented your OH from continuing trading? How did they manage this and why was it in their interests to do so? Sounds a really strange one as your OH earning money would enable him to better repay them? Common sense would also see a Court, providing you can provide definite proof of obstruction, is going to give short shrift to a creditor seeking any further enforcement on it's debt if they have prevented the debtor earning money to allow repayment to be made? And it's in your interests to provide a copy of your SPO (if you haven't already) that the Court has requested as, I would suggest, it will provide evidence that that lender has priority over this bunch (given it was for a secured loan). From what you have said I can't see this creditor going back to Court as it has the best it can get now in the CO. An OFS is a non starter (and is pointless anyway due to your Neg Equity) so I would just ignore them from now on and put it behind you.
  24. This point, unfortunately, seems lost on some DJ's as some creditors apply for and get it as Sparklyfairy will attest!
×
×
  • Create New...