Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder

eggboxy1

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by eggboxy1

  1. Clynite I'm glad you feel that way as it does seem your Solicitor hasn't done you any favours (and I'd certainly be inclined to have a word with the Law Society about your experience!) But hopefully you are beginning to see a little more light at the end of the tunnel and have started beginning to feel a little more at ease? The experience is not pleasant but you have to learn to, firstly, take the fear and "personal" side of it out of the equation (it's just a job to these people at the end of the day and they will use every tactic available to win) and secondly, you have to heed the pooled advice on these pages to realise it doesn't have to be all one way traffic and there are ways to fight back. When is your final CO hearing, by the way?
  2. shazzyball what have you actually explained to the Solicitors (lawyers)
  3. clynite I understand ganymede's point about costs, but you must go to court and explain to the Judge your circumstances and what's happened (and I'm of the opinion you may do a better job doing this yourself given your Solicitors track record!) You will most likely still get a CO but you can ask the Judge to attach a no OFS provision in the CO terms given what you have tried to do in repaying the debt and your wife's situation. The extra costs you may incur for this won't really make a difference and it will, at least, give you peace of mind if you succeed. If you don't defend then this definitely won't happen. And remember, the Creditor has to refuse your offer of repayment to obtain his CO. But understand, too, that the overwhelming reason creditors go for the CO is not to get an immediate repayment, it's more to gain priority over other creditors for any money that is up for grabs from you. CO's are excluded from Bankruptcy proceedings, too. But the problem for them after they have gone this far is that there is really nowhere for them go in putting pressure on you to pay as they know they won't get an OFS. That's why they then come back asking for the payments you previously offered and they refused! My OH has a "Restriction" on our house for over 8 months for £13000 and has refused to talk or pay anything to her creditors. What have they done after a few token requests for payment? - Zilch! As for the people you have mentioned telling you about OFS's ignore them they probably haven't looked into the reality of how obscure OFS's are and, as I said earlier, Debt help organisations don't really give a balanced view.
  4. clynite Its fair to say I'm speechless at your experience! But first of all, don't agree to any higher repayments or a CO without going in front of a Judge to put your case across. I know I haven't read your thread through yet but there does seem something very wrong about your Solicitors conduct in all this to let this happen? Hopefully, wiser eyes than mine can find something in their to redress the matter. I can only (at this stage) give you the crumb of comfort in the fact that OFS are rarely ever pursued (as I said above only 0.3% ever are) so I wouldn't be too concerned (I know its difficult at times but take heart from all the examples on CAG of people with CO's still living in their own homes!) The reason for the low rate is simply because the Judge has far more discretion over whether to grant an OFS over a CO where he has very little. So I can't, in a million years, see any Judge granting an OFS on the home of (with respect) a disabled pensioner for who isn't responsible for the debt! (A help on this is if you try Googling for examples where OFS have been applied for (let alone granted!) - let me now if you find any as I can't! Whereas there are hundreds of CO hearing examples) Can I ask where the OFS "advice" has been coming from? You will hear OFS being muted by creditors as a scare tactic as they want you to cough up more repayments and,it's my opinion, Debt Help organisations don't help much either when explaining the fact that creditors can go for an OFS after a CO but not balancing it with the fact of how difficult (and remote) that process is.
  5. clynite Have just located your thread but as its 200 posts long can you give a quick explanation how it got from 6k to £25k ??? But, yes I wouldn't be concerned given both the debt is only in your name and also you wife's unfortunate circumstances. As posted previously, only 0.3% of CO's ever progress to OFS which, in my opinion, is because creditors know they are so very difficult to obtain (plus, I believe they are expensive to do as well.)
  6. shazzyball Understand that if you sell up the debt won't disappear but it will become "unsecured" again and makes "enforcement" of the debt very difficult for the creditor. As for Solicitors, I'd start ringing them up now to get the feelers out on who you can use when the time comes.
  7. shazzyball If selling up and renting reduces your outgoings substantially then it may be a wise move due to your near negative equity (and it certainly reduces creditors options to put any pressure on you) but don't lose heart about your situation if you would prefer to stay put. That is because you should now see that the CO route for creditors is more of a priority move on their debt than an actual move to regain immediate payment. They are now severely limited in what else they can do but wait for any type of payment. You can take advantage of that time to sort out what really is best option for the future. And I agree with what you say regarding the loan sharking rates these companies have been getting away with under the toothless and largely ineffective financial regulatory services in the UK. Not allowing CO's to be granted for debts under £25,000 (as this Government said it would do but then bottled it) would have been a huge help in this financial climate to people in debt struggling to keep a roof over their head. But don't underestimate the power of websites like CAG in empowering people to fight back against these people. And the terms of the Restriction on your house has now been clearly defined by the Land Registry as having 1) no legal weight to enforce payment and (2) a sale to a third party for money cannot prevent the LR details being changed. But you need to make sure your Solicitor understands this fact you will be paying him and he should be acting in YOUR interests and not that of the Restriction holder.
  8. GP That is correct, but do expect resistance from some Solicitors many of whom (it would seem) don't seem to understand the changes in the LR. They will try and tell you that you have to pay off the creditor with the Restriction or the sale can't proceed. That, as the LR have confirmed, is not necessary or required.
  9. GP See Post #11 of this thread and the response I received from the Land Registry Solicitor. It confirms that all is required to comply with the Restriction (and therefore change the LR details upon sale) is for the purchasers solicitor to notify the Restriction holder. But you are right in saying there is legal obligation to pay a creditor who has a Restriction placed.
  10. Also have a read here http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/in-practice/benchmarks/proportionate-orders-sale and also the link in there "Charging to the front of the Queue" It's a bit long but it explains why Charging Orders are sought by creditors in the first place (as first come first served!) It also highlights why the creditor is always going to struggle to get an OFS if the debt is under £25,000. Whilst it hasn't been passed as law, the author notes courts are reflecting "the way the wind is blowing" on the unfair proportionality of creditors collecting a debt under this figure, with an OFS, against the debtor losing their residential home.
  11. shazzyball Ganymede and Sequenci have laid out the reality of an Order For Sale being granted let alone attempted. The fact you are in near negative equity alone means they would be complete idiots to try in this financial climate as they'd waste an awful lot of money for, potentially, no return. And as only 0.3% of CO's ever progress to an OFS (have a read here http://www.shergroup.net/blog/?p=690) you can sleep easy that is not going to happen! The low percentage rate is simply because creditors know it's not going to happen in all but extreme cases (which yours isn't) As I have previously said on this thread, I feel that once the Creditor takes this route they lose any bargaining power regarding repayments as there is now nowhere for them to go and they lose their "fear factor" to gain repayments (I hope your OH had a degree of satisfaction when telling them the £100 offer is no longer available). I know everyone is different and you have to do what makes you feel ok; but my OH has refused point blank to talk her creditor since they gained a CO (Restriction) last year. They tried to phone and then wrote three times asking for payment or "further enforcement action will be sought through the Courts". She continued to ignore them and they haven't been in touch for over six months. We also aren't in negative equity and we don't have any children under 18 at home, either. So stay strong as your circumstances really defeat anything effective they can now do to you.
  12. shazzyball Cadbury1879 is bang on the money as a Restriction cannot be placed without a Final Charging Order hearing of which you, personally, have to be notified of by law as a joint owner to state any objections or unfairness etc a CO may have. Did you, personally, receive anything from the Court regarding this at this time? A simple phone call to the Land Registry asking how an "Equitable Charge" can have been placed (given your circumstances) may save you an awful lot of time. They will have to investigate the details passed on to them from the Court given you have proof everything was solely in your OH's name.
  13. shazzyball Then you do need to sort out what has happened because as Ganymede says, after 2003 it isn't possible to register an Equitable Charge for a CO for a sole debt on joint property. And as you also weren't a signatory on the loan in 2006 (or any other time) then an error has been made somewhere? It's fishy, too, that the Equitable Charge was placed in 2008 when the loan was taken out in 2006? However, I note you say Hillsdens became involved in 2007? I'd have a closer look at this involvement if I were you as the "practices" of Debt Collection companies weren't as closely monitored by people pre recession and it may, possibly, shed some light on the matter?
  14. shazzyball Nobody is accusing your other half of anything, but you do need to request copies of ALL loan documents from Black Horse to verify 1) there wasn't a secured loan and b) they didn't carry your signature. They will then provide you with the required proof you need to remove the "Equitable Charge" from the Land Registry. Can I just ask when your OH defaulted on the Black horse Loan and also who your second mortgage was with?
  15. Hi Ganymede It is a strange one and I sincerely hope there is nothing fraudulent about it for shazzyball to have to deal with. Let's hope so!
  16. Hi Ganymede But the point is we don't know if it is regarding a Charging Order as shazzyball has said there is also a Restriction placed, too? The point I was making is you shouldn't automatically assume that an Equitable Charge is only for a Charging Order (or a Secured Loan for that matter) and it's certainly wrong to state it has nothing to do with a secured loan if you aren't certain of the circumstances of why it's there? That's why clarification is required. This is certainly NOT directed at shazzyball but, sadly, there are instances where people don't know that their other half has taken out a loan and added their name to it with a false signature. And there are also instances where people don't know they are signing for a secured loan either. I know, personally, people who have suffered both of the above instances. I'm sure shazzyball will be able to get to the bottom of why the Equitable Charge is showing (wrongly or rightly) and put it right as she is sure on the circumstances of the loan. But she needs to be aware of all possibilities for it's existence and not just some of them.
  17. shazzyball No problem, we are all in this together! So please report back what the LR says as it helps others who come up against the same problem.
  18. Hi Ganymede I never mind anybody correcting me if I'm wrong but on this I'm not. If you read what shazzyball has put regarding the loan from Blackhorse (on which the Equitable Charge has been made in 2008) she states it was only taken out in her Husbands name. Therefore an Equitable Charge wouldn't have been able to have been registered. However, an Equitable Charge can also be registered for secured loans see here SECTION 3 "Equitable Charges" http://www.diyconveyance.co.uk/mortgages-other-charges-registered-against-land.html So something is definitely amiss here and that is why I have suggested shazzyball needs to find out "Exactly" why this has happened?
  19. shazzyball If you are 100% sure the loan was not secured and also only in your Husband's name; then you need to contact the Land Registry and object on those grounds as it shouldn't have been registered. They will then have to inform you how (or why) it has happened and you can take it from there once you get the info. Also, you need to clarify if Hillsdens (who are a debt collection company) have bought the debt of Blackhorse or are only acting on their half. If Hillsdens say they own the debt they need to validate that fact by providing a letter of assignment from BH. Understand, though, that a creditor gaining a Charging Order has not gained definite security for it's debt! It has merely secured a Court Judgement of that debt. That is why it is still chasing as it hasn't got any real guarantee from the CO of getting any money back. That is why they are still trying to push for a payment off you. However, as I have said more than once on here; my feeling is that once a Creditor goes to these lengths he is a busted flush. Given the "Order for Sale" is a no go, and given you also say you are nearly in negative equity anyway, there is absolutely nothing they can do now? Don't underestimate how low these people will go to put the frighteners on you, however, to pay up and I know it's strange when it first starts to happen. But you can ignore their demands and threats as they carry no weight and once they understand they are being ignored you will see how little they can do now.
  20. cymruambyth I'm glad you managed to avert your CO and it should empower people in a similar position to your self. However, the CO's that I was talking about that are virtually impossible to stop is where the debtor simply cannot afford anything but a token repayment. Many DJ's now won't accept token repayments from debtor's and give impossible monthly amounts to be paid in the Installment Order. As soon as the first payment is defaulted the Creditor moves for a CO; it's these that are virtually impossible to stop. You were correct in successfully applying Mercantile v Ellis to your particular case and I note you state you had a DJ who knew the relevant Law in this area. Sadly, as many, many others will attest on CAG most DJ's have a fairly poor understanding of the CCA and its pot luck who you get.
  21. Hi shazzyball An Equitable Charge is usually an indication that a secured loan has been taken out (either more borrowing on the mortgage or a loan secured against your property) Also, while I'm no expert on this, I'm pretty certain a lender would require both parties signatures for a secured loan? Do you know if the Blackhorse loan your other half took out was a secured loan? As regards the information you are being asked for you do not have to supply anything. However, I would suggest you ask them for why they want the information to see what they are up to?
  22. cymruambyth I did say "virtually" impossible stop and I'm certainly not advocating people giving up attempting to try and stop a CO. I'm just reflecting the stats on how many people actually succeed (but great that you did and you should post up or link to how you succeeded stopping the CO to help others defending) Cadbury 1879, however, exposes the greed and mentality of these type of creditors; so don't feel obliged to pay anything to these people who obtain a CO. Once they take this route my opinion is that they limit their bargaining power on getting future repayments from you. They are not going to get an Order for Sale so what else are they going to do?
  23. Hi shazzyball, First of all stop worrying as all the creditor is doing is going through the motions of trying to gain some priority for his debt. But if, as you say, you are close to negative equity then they are chasing nothing anyway. It's virtually impossible to stop a Charging Order but, if the house is in joint names and the debt is not against you, the CO will only be made against your other halves "Beneficial Interest" in the Property. The Creditor cannot try to claim anything of your share if you are not part of the debt. Also, in the above circumstances, all that can be registered on the Land Registry Title Deeds is a "Restriction". All this means is that a Creditor has to be notified when you sell the house but please note: IT HAS NO LEGAL POWER TO FORCE YOU TO PAY THE CREDITOR. And whilst Charging Orders are virtually impossible to stop, a creditor gaining a "forced sale order" is virtually impossible to gain also. The Court have very little choice but to grant CO's but they have much wider powers to deny a "forced sale" (only 0.3% are ever granted which is why creditors don't waste money going after them) Like a lot of people (and there are a lot of people) you have been led to believe by the creditor that you will lose your home if you don't pay more. So understand the type of people you are dealing with, ok! That won't happen and the only way you ever will lose your home is if you, unfortunately, can't pay any secured loans against the property (ie the mortgage) Have a read on "Charging Orders the Myth" on the moneysavingexperts website as it explain a few things that will, hopefully, put your mind at rest.
  24. "Yep, the interest rates are so high for products like those because the payers subsidise the non-payers." That's understood when you pay 12.9% for "unsecured" instead of 5.9% "secured" but how can they justify 30%? "Unfortunate for those who own property because they have no choice but to pay if they get a charging order" That was the, perceived, opinion but, thankfully, the power of the Internet has shown people that doesn't have to be the case with CO's (despite a bitter few who are desperately trying to maintain the status quo) "Guess the lesson is always to take a secured loan over an unsecured one if possible." Secured loan - lose house Unsecured loan - don't lose house ............Mmmm tricky one?
  25. There are no points of view ascribed to you that I have expressed as yours; I asked "if" they were. I would imagine, however, that your protestations leave little doubt as to your true feelings on this matter to anyone reading this thread. And trying to claim privacy regarding those feelings on the matter after making the statement; "And, actually, what's the point when you will still owe the money afterwards anyway?" is a little like trying to shut the gate after the horse has bolted isn't it? Your claim, too, about "realism" coming from your knowledge of conveyancing smacks more of self interest, to me, rather than helpfulness. You just seem a little too concerned people might actually follow what they are legally able to do and succeed? Very strange?
×
×
  • Create New...