Natwest charging order

[andyathers]

Hello could anyone shed some light on this please.I recieved a CCJ last year for a loan with natwest.Northampton county court set the repayments very high.I applied for re determination in my local court.My local court reduced it to what we are paying via Payplan.

Natwest then wanted a charging order,they finally got it in july,i defended it as best i could with good argument but the judge made his mind up as I walked in.In fact he new there solicitor,that was evident by the way they spoke to each other.To add he spoke to me like a peice of dirt.

Anyway i have only just recieved the final charging order paperwork an dont really understand it.

 

1. the debt is for a loan so interest was added to the loan on appliction.

2. we havent missed a payment , but judge didnt care.

3.there solicitors have had over £700 in costs during the ccj and charging order.

 

i have added in copies of the 2 ccj's and charging order.Could anyone help please.

 

 

http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/g344/mattyathers/ChargingorderreNatwestAug2011blanked.jpg[/img]"]

 

 

[andyathers]

Hi Guys and Gals,anyone help re this,thanks

[Ganymede]

What do you want to know?

 

Is the CCJ valid and the agreement enforceable?

 

Did you defend or admit the initial claim?

[andyathers]

Hi ,I admitted the claim,so got CCJ.Have been paying this on time every time.Just dont understand why charging order was granted and what the charging order letter ( copy on the first thread) means.Are we going to lose our home.

 

Advice says if you keep up with a ccj they wont get a CO, but they got one.Advice says that forced sale is rare and that the creditor just wants security,but whats stopping them going for the house and whats stopping the same horrible judge grsnting them a sale.At wits end

[Ganymede]

As you admitted the debt then you cannot apply to have the CCJ set aside.

 

A CO was granted as the CCJ was redetermined to a "forthwith" judgment allowing the Claimant to apply for a CO.

 

Is the debt in joint or sole names? Is you home owned jointly or on your own?

 

It is now technically possible for the Claimant to apply for an Order for Sale of your house but very, very unlikely unless there is a lot of equity in your home.

 

An OFS won't be granted if you are in negative equity or have young children living at the property etc.

[andyathers]

Hi, thanks for reply.The ccj / co are in joint names as is the house.We do have small children an there is nowere near enough quity to cover the debt.

[Ganymede]

In that case the CO will be registered against your property as an "Equitable Charge".

 

This debt will now need to be repaid if/when you sell your home.

 

There is not much more the Claimant can do now they have the CO although like I said they can still technically try and force the sale of your house in reality it won't happen.

[Gaston Grimsdyke]

The judgment was varied to a forthwith judgment, so the only way to comply with it is to pay the entire judgment in full. Obviously you haven't done this, so they were enabled to get a charging order. As mentioned, it is highly unlikely they will go for an order for sale, but for your own peace of mind you might consider applying to vary the judgment back to one payable by instalments as the only reason they wanted a forthwith judgment in the first place was to get the charging order which they now have. Alternatively, you can contact them and see if you can come to an arrangement to pay by instalments outside of the judgment.

[andyathers]

Hi thanks for the replies,the 3rd scan I posted was for the revised sum which was the figure I could afford.Am i right in thinking that is now the figure i pay until the debt has gone or we sell our house.What options do we have,i dont really understand the situation.

I will tell it the way I think it is,could you correct me if ive got it wrong.

 

Natwest's solicitors sent us court papers wnating the full amount,we filled in the forms admitted the debt and enclosed our income etc.We got a reply / CCJ from northampton court for a vast monthly payment £600 +, we applied for it to be re-heard at our local court.This court reduced it to the figure we could afford( the payplan figure).

 

Then natwest went for an interim charging order,then eventually a final charging order.So from what I can understand we pay the CCJ and if we default on it they could go for a forced sale.

Could somebody just tell us in easy steps if i am right,or what we could do now.

[andyathers]

Any help, regards

[AndyOrch]

Hi thanks for the replies,the 3rd scan I posted was for the revised sum which was the figure I could afford.Am i right in thinking that is now the figure i pay until the debt has gone or we sell our house.What options do we have,i dont really understand the situation.

I will tell it the way I think it is,could you correct me if ive got it wrong.

 

Natwest's solicitors sent us court papers wnating the full amount,we filled in the forms admitted the debt and enclosed our income etc.We got a reply / CCJ from northampton court for a vast monthly payment £600 +, we applied for it to be re-heard at our local court.This court reduced it to the figure we could afford( the payplan figure).

 

Then natwest went for an interim charging order,then eventually a final charging order.So from what I can understand we pay the CCJ and if we default on it they could go for a forced sale.

Could somebody just tell us in easy steps if i am right,or what we could do now.

 

 

Thats about the measure of it Andy but you should have defended the FCO as you was not in arrears with the installments or was you?

 

Regards

 

Andy

[andyathers]

Thanks Andy,no there was no arrears.I shoud have used the site a bit more,I will in future.Thanks for the reply

[Ganymede]

Ok I understand the situation as follows:

 

 

You admitted the debt so CCJ was issued.

 

Part of the original Order was that payments be made in instalments at a rate of £XXX.XX per month which you could not afford and so you requested a redetermination.

 

Redetermination granted on 27th October 2010 for payments to be made at the more affordable rate of £XX.XX per month.

 

The Claimant was not happy with the new amount and so applied to vary the judgment to "forthwith" (presumably with the intention of applying for a Charging Order).

 

The Court varied the Order to Forthwith on 2nd December 2010 with a term that no enforcement other than a Charging Order allowed so long as payments of £XX.XX are made.

 

Interim Charging Order granted on 7th April 2011.

 

Charging Order made final on 21st July 2011.

 

 

So unless you default on the Order dated 2nd December 2010 no Order For Sale can be applied for by the Claimant.

[AndyOrch]

Succinctly assessed Gany.

 

Andy

[the tinkerman]

Hi andyathers

 

More or less in the same situation as yourself payin CCJ by installments for last 10 years never ONCE missed a payment and Defended my FCO to the hilt, no assignment document ever sent, quoted the law of properties act 1925 s36 & 196, then re opening of the original judgement in relation to the extortionate APR as it is a twelve year window, DCA had no Consumer Credit Licence when they first bought the CCJ AND collected on it for two years without a Consumer Credit Licence even though the OFT states it is illegal to do so, finally quoted Section 86(1) The County Courts Act 1984:

 

Where the court has made an order for payment of any sum of money by instalments, execution on the order shall not be issued until after default in payment of some instalment according to the order.

 

This was further considered in the case of Mercantile Credit V Ellis in The Court of Appeal 1987. It was found that the wording of the Charging Orders Act states quite clearly that no further action could be taken without a default in payment.

 

 

My case was presented Concisely,firm and to the point, but ALL fell on deaf ears, Do not want to be the bearer of doom and gloom but Like allot of people who use this site and end up in court, it seems it doesn't matter what the Law states its what the Judge decides that matters and as I was promptly told in my case I could appeal against the decisions but at what cost to myself, and although you know the Law is right is it really worth appealing and more cost to yourself only to be told the same thing yet again. Like you stated andyathers on a loser before you walk in the dam place (not a truer word spoken)

 

Now I know where the saying The Law Is An Ass comes from!

 

Don’t get me wrong allot of very good information and knowledgeable people who give very good advice on this site and quote laws that should be upheld in a court of law but unfortunately as most of us know that is not always the case, I spent nearly a year collating all my evidence from this site good , concise,and what the Law States to be true, but like I said when it went to court it meant nothing, very disheartening and demoralizing

[the tinkerman]

More to the point how can we stop this from happening again and again and again?

[andyathers]

Thankyou for the advice.

[cymruambyth]

I know I was lucky, but I managed to get an instalment order in place days before the ICO was granted. Although only a few payments had been made, my DJ stated that following on from Mercantile Credit v Ellis an ICO would not be granted if payments up to date.

 

Conversely the DJ who sat in on my original case DID NOT KNOW THE LAW!!!!