To those that have or are getting Charging Orders this should allay a lot of fears

[jimbo45]

Hi all

There seems to be a lot of fear over the Charging Order process that a lot of the more greedier DCA's seem to be rushing headlong into.

 

Read this snippet first

http://ezinearticles.com/?I-Have-a-Charging-Order---Can-I-Be-Forced-to-Sell-My-Home?&id=2756267

 

Many people are totally scared of these but the reality is that you almost CERTAINLY won't be forced to sell your home especially for fairly small amounts of debt (usually under 9,000 GBP).

 

Note also for Money loaned under a CCA then NO INTEREST can be charged on a CO or for money NOT subject to the various CCA's then the same is true for amounts of up to 5,000 GBP. Most people on these forums will find their debt is actually subject to the various CCA's so if you have been unable to pay a CCJ and you get a CO then interest stops STONE DEAD at that point.

 

You are in a decent bargaining position -- the creditor say bought your 5,000 GBP debt for around 20 GBP -- HORRENDOUS but true -- debts are usually sold on for about 2 - 5% of their value.

 

So offer a lowish full and Final settlement -- you can state that the DCA can wait say 30 years to get their money --inflation etc will have eaten away at the debt in this time or they can have some real money in the meantime.

 

These days a CO is really a fairly useless weapon -- it's a bit harder and more aggro to deal with an SD because a really NASTY DCA (are there any NICE one's ?) could actually go through with the Bankruptcy process.

 

Cheers

jimbo

[rebel11]

Hi Jimbo

 

I offered 10% from the onset, but all the calls, letters, my time, postage, reseach, the weather, the cost of cocoa, the offer will be below 5%.

[jimbo45]

Hi Jimbo

 

I offered 10% from the onset, but all the calls, letters, my time, postage, reseach, the weather, the price of cocoa beans, the offer will be below 5%.

 

Hi there

Please post back if they accept it.

What will probably happen they will reject it as too small. What you should then do is either sit on it for a few months and then offer again or try a slightly higher one.

 

They might come back with accepting say 40% but reject this as well -- you'll probably end up with an offer of around 17 - 20%. Depending on the size of the debt this could be a reasonable deal --- I really think that NOBODY WHO BUYS DEBTS SHOULD EVER GET THE FULL AMOUNT. It's a totally immoral and disgusting business -- really intrinsically EVIL whatever deity you follow (or none).

 

Note if you DO get a Full and FINAL make sure that IT IS FULL AND FINAL and that when paid the CO is removed from the Land Registry.

 

Cheers

jimbo

[OnMyWayOut]

Hi Jimbo,

 

Thanks for the information about COs. In my situation the final CO was obtained and soon after the debt was sold (NOA received from new owner) about three years ago. I've been hassled to increase my payment by the new owner, but I've received no formal notification from HMCS or the Land Registry confirming that the ownership of the CCJ and CO have been changed. CerberusAlert mentions in another thread that the debt purchaser has only 12 months to notify the court of change of ownership. I'm looking to see if the new owner has lost the security of the CO by not following procedures. I will look into the Full & Final option as well.

 

OMWO

[stripper]

Dont forget CO for a Joint ownership raises another problem for the DCA's(and the courts) to consider

[BradB]

Hi, I have my own thread on here re a charging order but something on here has just caught my eye. According to Lawsmiths solicitors Phoenix Recoveries bought the debt they are chasing off me on 6th August 2001 but the court papers I received state they were substituted as as the claimant on 10th December 2010 which is 9 years so where can I find information on the 12 months mentioned below.

Thanks

[Cadbury1879]

Interesting article, but inaccurate, most people with a charging order do not have a charge on there property.

They have a restriction, which Is all that can be applied on a jointly owned property, were only one owner is the debtor. There is no obligation to pay the debt if you sell the property.Ignorance by the conveyancer & the debtor usualy means that the debt is paid out of the proceeds of a sale, or people think they are trapped because they believe this to be so.

I hope to have sold my house soon, I have no intention of paying the creditor out of the proceeds despite a C/O.

Infact they can shove there illusion of security were the sun don't shine.

[alangee]

Hi Cadbury

 

Where can I find that information. All that I can see is that a restriction can stop the sale of a house.

 

Alan

[minmoo]

Hi alangee, this should give you the information.

 

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

[debt4get]

a restriction does not stop you selling your property nor does it mean you have to pay the parasites the money, your solicittor simply has to inform them 7 days after sale that the houe is sold and the new owners are.....you are now gone and is their money

[dadofholly]

Subbing

[RW Fugitive]

Hi alangee, this should give you the information.

 

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

 

I wish I'd of known this

 

Paid AmericanExpress £1k to sell mine grrrrrr

[smiffeee]

Hi... we have an Interim Charging Order on the property, which reading this and other threads is only a restriction as the property is owned jointly by my partner and her ex-husband, but the debt was only in his name. It was never made final as the creditor cancelled the court case the day before the hearing, probably because my partner had objected. How can we get the Interim Order removed? Land Registry say the creditor has to remove it. The creditor won't speak to us because we are not the debtor. I get from what Cadbury says that it doesn't stop us selling... would it affect us trying to re-mortgage, for example? We'd just like to get the Interim removed anyway... it's been on there since 2009 ! Any help very much appreciated.

[coledog]

Subbing

[wittsend]

also subbing

[smiffeee]

Hmmm... there is another current thread titled 'Charging Order' where the advice completely contradicts that given on this thread by Cadbury and Debt4get (see the following sample quote). Soooo... I'm quite confused now. I have read the restriction wording and it would appear to me, as a layman, that THIS thread is correct i.e. we just need to advise the creditor that a sale has taken place. I will post a link (well, a reference to it as it seems I can't post links till my post count is above 20) on the other thread to the article posted here by minmoo which does say clearly "This restriction was, and remains, practically useless"

 

in reality .......it means the same thing as a charging order ..................since

 

if your husband (attempts to) sells the house- at some point his sols will ask for the deeds or details of the deeds........at which point the land registry will alert YOUR creditor of an impending sale

 

the buyers sols will also see that there is a restriction

 

the buyers sols will NOT advise their client to go ahead with the purchase until they have proof that the restriction has been settled fully

 

therefore the same objective is acheived since your husband will not be able to complete the sale until the debt has been repaid

 

if you are a joint owner- then it is YOUR SHARE of the equity in the property that is charged. but it still effectively prevents a sale until the debt is cleared

 

i know of no solicitor who would advise a purchaser to complete a transaction without the charge or restriction being satisfied or removed

[alangee]

smiffee, is this the thread you mentioned?

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?292433-Charging-Order%281-Viewing%29-nbsp

 

Alan

[smiffeee]

Hi Alan... yes that's the one (thanks for posting the link)

 

smiffee, is this the thread you mentioned?

consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?292433-Charging-Order%281-Viewing%29-nbsp

 

Alan

[Basil Fawlty]

If you are a joint owner with all the debt in only one person's name, have a google of ''tenants in common''. The great thing about being tenants in common is that the share of the property can be as you specify, for example from as little as 1% for one partner and 99% to the other (or whatever percentages you wish). This is specified in a Deed of Trust. Now, if you have the debts and only own a very small percentage of the property, 1% or 5% for example, you're laughing because the CO would only apply to that percentage not your partners. And of course, as mentioned above, there is the ''restriction'' problem for them too. Double whammy!!

 

BF

[Cadbury1879]

"Hi there,

 

Thanks for the prompt to update this thread. I did indeed sell my house, complete with the restriction - and the proceeds of the sale are in my bank account.

 

It does work!"QUOTE

from thread charging orders/Restrictions on this Forum

last year.

[debt4get]

i totally agree it is quite possible to do

link here

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

[Cadbury1879]

Indeed, just google charging orders restrictions and it's all laid out, incliuding charging orders the myth.

IMHO dd,s comments are not correct.

The LR do not notify creditors of anything,

why would they any one can apply for the title deeds to a property for any reason extentions,boundary disputes etc.

The point that no solicitor would agree to agreeing the transaction is also incorrect, I know at least one.

 

You can definetly complete a sale, without paying of the creditor.Having said that, it is not straight forward and without risk. Most conveyancers/solicitors are not clued up and basically want a easy life,so are a little retiscent to go down this line.

Once they are confident, that it's lawfull and causes very little extra work there fine.

The purchasers solicitor/ conveyancers is the same, but this restriction can result in loss of the sale,if the purchaser becomes a bit nervous.

Taking this route is not for every circumstance, you may be better to pay the restriction and it's done or ask the creditor for a f&f before you sell. On the understanding that this amount to pay from the proceeds. Each case is different.

[smiffeee]

Thanks for the input everyone. An update on my understanding though, which supports dd's post on the other thread a little, as I didn't realise that even though it is possible to complete a sale, the Restriction still remains on the title at Land Registry. (I thought this thread was implying that the CO/Restriction disappeared when the restriction conditions were complied with and the new owners were registered). Having now spoken to a conveyancer who seems knowledgeable about these things, they agree it would hinder a sale as most purchasers would want the restriction removed before completion.

 

I guess it's best to start my own thread, perhaps on Legal subforum, about getting the Interim Charging Order removed re my earlier post quoted below?

 

Hi... we have an Interim Charging Order on the property, which reading this and other threads is only a restriction as the property is owned jointly by my partner and her ex-husband, but the debt was only in his name. It was never made final as the creditor cancelled the court case the day before the hearing, probably because my partner had objected. How can we get the Interim Order removed? Land Registry say the creditor has to remove it. The creditor won't speak to us because we are not the debtor. I get from what Cadbury says that it doesn't stop us selling... would it affect us trying to re-mortgage, for example? We'd just like to get the Interim removed anyway... it's been on there since 2009 ! Any help very much appreciated.

[eggboxy1]

Just to update anyone reading this thread;

 

I corresponded with a Solicitor from the Land Registry and she sent me this reply regarding whether a Restriction can prevent the sale of a property;Received today from LR Solicitor;

 

LAND REGISTRY RESPONSE

 

"The provision of the Certificate mentioned in the Form K restriction means that the registrar is not prevented from proceeding with the application to register a disposition (for example, a transfer or charge) and the registration can proceed.

 

The certificate does not affect the restriction entry. A restriction in Form K may be removed from the register in the following circumstances.

 

Automatic cancellation

 

When a transfer of property is registered (following receipt of the required certificate) the restriction may or may not be automatically cancelled, depending on the circumstances of the transfer. If, for example, the application is to register a transfer by two or more proprietors to a third party for value, the trust interests will be overreached and the form K restriction will usually be cancelled"

 

I know DD gives a lot of good advice but on this occasion he is not correct.

 

The Solicitor even went as far to explain that the Inland Revenue website information which states that the Land Registry contacts the Creditor when a sale is going through is also incorrect.

 

All that is required under a Form K Restriction is for the buyers solicitors to notify the Creditor that a transfer has been made. Form K does not even have time limit for this to happen, either, now.

 

A Restriction only has the power to "flag" that a sale has occurred, there is no legal obligation to pay a Creditor when you make a sale (which is explained on the same Inland Revenue website dealing with Charging Orders).

 

Do not, therefore, follow the advice of Solicitors who advise there is a legal obligation to pay the Restriction holder or that it can prevent a sale.

[debt4get]

thanks for the clarification it certainly vindicates what i have been saying...