A guide to Charging Orders & Orders for Sale

[CBR600F]

Funny but not helpful.........

[vint1954]

CBR,

 

I have heard of this before, but there is conflicting advice.

 

I don't think it is as clear cut as creditors would have you beleive. It depends on the reason for the purchace of the proprety. See below:

 

A charging order can be made against a client’s ‘beneficial interest’ (her/his share) in a property, If a client owns only a part share of a property, then a charge can still be made but it will apply only to her/his part share.

If a charging order is made, the creditor becomes a party with an interest in the property and can apply for an order to sell the property so that the creditor’s interest can be realised. The court is required to have regard to the following matters:

• The intentions of the owners at the time of the original purchase — i.e., the purpose for which the property was bought;
  
• The purposes for which the property is held. For example, it may be that a court should not order the sale of an asset, which was bought for a specific purpose, until the need for it has ceased to exist. If this is a correct interpretation, then a family home should not be sold until all members of the family have ceased to need it;
  
• The welfare of any minor who occupies the property as her/his home;
  
• The interests of any secured creditor.
  

having read a little on this, it appears that a creditor can apply for a CO on a jointly owned property, but it is registered as a restriction. There is no obligation on any party to pay off the CO restriction as a matter of course, only to notify the creditor that the sale is going through. The creditor then would have to apply to the court for the debt to be paid to them. If your Solicitor was tardy in sending in the notification, then the sale would complete without them having time to act on the debt.

 

Explained here.

 

http://www1.landregistry.gov.uk/assets/library/documents/educ_fact_5_131205.pdf

 

But reading here, does support your initial post.

 

http://www.bllaw.co.uk/pdf/financeandrecoveries_0806_charging%20orders%20on%20property.pdf

[CBR600F]

Thanks,

actually it was Knackered in post 87 who posted the original comments.

[CBR600F]

If your Solicitor was tardy in sending in the notification, then the sale would complete without them having time to act on the debt.

LOL

[butts]

Can't understand why this is "hidden away" as it seems to me if the information is correct about the worthlessness of Charging Orders on jointly owned properties it should be headline news.

 

Does anyone know of an example where someone has disposed of a share in a property and been able to demonstrate the opinion of creditors powerlessness to prevent it.

[Undercover-Elsa]

Also, does the same apply when the spouse, whilst not having their name on the property, has a joint interest through living there for many years and paying the mortgage?

[CBR600F]

Can't understand why this is "hidden away" as it seems to me if the information is correct about the worthlessness of Charging Orders on jointly owned properties it should be headline news.

 

Does anyone know of an example where someone has disposed of a share in a property and been able to demonstrate the opinion of creditors powerlessness to prevent it.

 

Bump

[Mydogsawestie]

Hi CBR600F theres some info posted here from hatesdebt about this restriction thing, http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/241308-fighting-charging-order-mbna-11.html#post2835721

 

Hope it helps....MDAW

[Akamas]

I thought this might be of interest to all of you. It is a set of statistics for the amount of charging orders applied for and granted over recent years:

 

Table AP6

 

Charging orders, England and Wales

 

Period Charging orders, England and Wales

 

Applications Orders

 

Made - Granted

 

2000

16,014 - 9,689

 

2001

21,870 - 15,487

 

2002

30,781 - 21,408

 

2003

35,052 - 25,217

 

2004

45,516 - 33,235

 

2005

65,780 - 49,218

 

2006

92,933 - 67,090

 

2007

131,637 - 97,026

 

Source: Ministry of Justice (MoJ)

 

Notes:

 

1. Charging orders allow a creditor for an unsecured loan which is in default to tie that

loan to an asset owned by the debtor. In many cases this asset will be residential

property but orders can also be granted against land, commercial property or other assets.

However figures on charging orders split by type of asset are not available

 

2. Data for all years have been revised, and figures for 2007 are provisional.

 

CML Research

 

9/9/2008

Edited March 23, 2010 by Akamas
Formatting improved.

[CBR600F]

Obviously the figures have gone up!

 

And at a quick glance the percentage that have been granted has increased.

 

What we all really need to know is:-

 

1. How many of these are for joint properties.
   
2. How many sales have been forced on single properties.
   
3. How many sales have been forced on joint properties if any.
   

If someone out there can get the raw data I am quite happy to do the analysis and post it back here.

[Akamas]

Yes this is exactly the information I was looking for, along with more up to date stats on orders applied for and orders passed.

 

Seeing as how the lenders are now resorting to dirty tactics more regularly to secure unsecured debts, maybe we also need to start looking at more clever ways to block them. For example, what if you could prove that you owed money to people/businesses that would be willing to object to the order being passed? If you could get them to write to object? Do you think that it would be enough to sway the judgement against the lender applying for the order?

[CBR600F]

Well I've got my hearing on Wednesday 2pm (see other thread)

 

I am, I hope, at least going to be able to get an opinion from the judge as to whether it is fair that an unsecured CC debt with mega interest can be turned into a secured debt and in particular for the full amount.

 

Personally I find it insulting that for the last 26 years I have paid mega mega amounts of interest on CC's and to now find that the courts are more and more allowing these debts to be turned into secured debts, having probably added a third to it, whilst the debtor has been finacially struggling, intimidated, depressed,worthless, a failure and probably suicidal.

 

Yes I have thought about it - frequently.

 

However after my sister-in-laws boy friend hung himself at the end of January (nothing to do with debt) and I think because of this group I have realised that although I would be rid of the problem, the effects of my suicide on others far out weighs the indignity of CCJs and CO hearings....

 

So Wednesday approaches.....

 

Sorry all ended up an early morning ramble:)

[Akamas]

I always feel extremely saddened when I hear of suicides contemplated over debts, and I really do wish you all the best with your case!

 

I think we all have to think outside the box a little when it comes to dealing with these sleazebag lenders. An idea that I have been discussing recently with my friend (law student) is whether it might be possible to accept a voluntary charging order for a large sum to a friendly party BEFORE any hostile charging orders are approved. Charging orders work on a first come first served basis, so all the equity would be diverted to the friendly (first) charging order on the sale of the property! What do you all think of that idea? Wouldn't that trump the whole foolish process?

[CBR600F]

Thanks for your thoughts.

 

I also like the idea of a friendly CO. I wonder if it would be possible to tie this into a pensions (which are protected investments)?

[sequenci]

An idea that I have been discussing recently with my friend (law student) is whether it might be possible to accept a voluntary charging order for a large sum to a friendly party BEFORE any hostile charging orders are approved. Charging orders work on a first come first served basis, so all the equity would be diverted to the friendly (first) charging order on the sale of the property! What do you all think of that idea? Wouldn't that trump the whole foolish process?

 

That could easily be sidesteped.

 

If the creditor sees that a recent charge like that has been made they could petition to make you bankrupt instead, it may then be possible for the OR to arrange for the recent charge to be set aside if they can demonstrate it was added with a preferance.

[CBR600F]

If this is the case then the court should throw my CO out as it severely preferences HFC.

 

About 1/10th of the money I owe is to HFC whilst the rest is to about 9 others (depends if you count two CC with same bank as 1 or 2).

Edited March 23, 2010 by CBR600F

[sequenci]

If this is the case then the court should through my CO out as it severely preferences HFC.

 

About 1/10th of the money I owe is to HFC whilst the rest is to about 9 others (depends if you count two CC with same bank as 1 or 2).

 

I should have added, preference can only be claimed if the debtor has allowed the preference out of desire to do so, e.g. it's a friend, partner or family member.

 

I'm just thinking out loud with my hypothesis by the way, I'm at work at the moment so cannot research this more.

[Knackered]

Heres a link to my other attempt to get to the bottom of this question.

 

 

Debt Questions • View topic - Is this correct?

 

CBR600F I completely mirror your frame of mind, very similar story:(

 

I wonder, is this a worth while suggestion??...

 

Compose a note to the judge and creditor to the effect that you are very unsure that what is about to happen is actually legal and that you would like absolute proof that it is in fact legal and proper as per 'ALL' the appropriate law as it exists. If this proof cannot be provided, then you would like a condition/note attached to the charging order to the effect that should at some later date the legality of the charging order be proved to be flawed you will be compensated to the full extent of your time, cost emotional upset and have your asset restored to you.

 

 

I don't know about anyone else but, the one thing that I found difficult to get my head around is that, in this situation, the credit card or whatever is gone, finished and over. All that is left is a debt, an amount of money owed.

 

A charging order is nothing to do with the original debt/problem/correspondence/stress.

 

It is just a method of getting a debt paid, regardless of how the debt was incurred.

 

You have to put on a different hat when you try to understand the fairness of Charging Orders, they are a new problem, born out of, but nothing to do with all the crap of the original debt.

 

They are not a mechanism for 'transforming' unsecured debt into a secured debt.

 

It is no good saying "I would never have taken out that unsecured loan at that interest rate, if I had known it could later be secured anyway".

 

 

 

 

I understand all that now, but initially I thought it was all just another

disgusting kick in the nads from the banks etc and got all stressed and confused. Now I just want to know if I will be allowed a manageable timescale to clear my debts or whether they will bankrupt me, which I think they would were it not for the charging order option. I have a lot of debt, equity and ill health.

 

 

Also...

 

Here is my cunning plan/solution to a charging order leading to the sale of my house. I intend to sell the drive and front access plus the last ten feet of my back garden to three separate relatives.

 

Let the bankstards try and sell it then;)

[CBR600F]

Lol

[CBR600F]

Compose a note to the judge and creditor to the effect that you are very unsure that what is about to happen is actually legal and that you would like absolute proof that it is in fact legal and proper as per 'ALL' the appropriate law as it exists. If this proof cannot be provided, then you would like a condition/note attached to the charging order to the effect that should at some later date the legality of the charging order be proved to be flawed you will be compensated to the full extent of your time, cost emotional upset and have your asset restored to you.

 

Not sure whether this would help as surely if the Judgment is subsequently set aside then surely the claimant would have to pay costs and any actions that took place after judgment would also be undone.

 

Anyway something like this: -

 

Note to Judge re charging order for claim xxxxxx

 

In the event of the charging order being made final I would like the following condition attached to the judgment and charging order: -

 

If at some future date, the legality of the judgment or the placing of a charging order, is proved to be flawed that I will be fully compensated for my time, cost, emotional upset and have the charging order removed.

[Knackered]

Spot on, that's much better:-)

 

I think it's a perfectly sensible and reasonable request in view of the lack of clarity on charging orders.

 

If a particular debt collection solution seems to be outdated/flawed and in need of amending, registering your concern as above seems the best/only thing you can do:(.

 

I will be thinking of you tomorrow, I hope it goes well mate.

 

If you get to be in front of a judge, just imagine him/her oblivious of a massive black beard sticking out the back of their head at 45 degrees:D

 

Works every time:).

[sequenci]

You have to put on a different hat when you try to understand the fairness of Charging Orders, they are a new problem

 

introduced in the late 70's!

[Knackered]

You know what I meant:p

[sequenci]

You know what I meant:p

 

 

glad to see you acknowledged the spirit in which my post was made

[CBR600F]

Oh the mind boggles;-)