PRA restriction k TSB Credit Card - debtor has died

[natash76]

Hi there , before i call the Pra group and tell them that my mum has now died and what happens with her debt , i need advice.

 

They have also put a charge against the property under her name.

Its jointly owned by her and husband but debt is in her name,

 

so does mean that debt is now dead and it needs to be removed from the deeds now thats shes not alive ?

 

Im also thinking if that i should remove her name off the deed first ?

 

And then contact them after ?

Thanks

Nat

Edited April 24, 2018 by dx100uk
spacing

[BazzaS]

The debt isn’t gone.

It is a debt that needs to be paid from the proceeds of her estate by the executor(s) of her will (if any), or the administrator(s) of her estate if she died intestate.

 

How much (roughly!) is the charge for, and how much is the value of her share of the house / her estate.

[natash76]

She died intestate and the house now goes to her husband.

Its not his debt. 4,000 debt to a bank.

There is no value to 'her' estate, as she doesnt have one.

It went to her husband.

His estate is worth over 150 000

 

Incidentally, I sent her death cert to another debt company for MORE and they are not pursuing, so why are there anomolies here?

 

Oh and the debt is from 1996

Edited April 24, 2018 by dx100uk
merge/space

[BazzaS]

She died intestate and the house now goes to her husband. Its not his debt. 4,000 debt to a bank. There is no value to 'her' estate, as she doesnt have one. It went to her husband. His estate is worth over 150 000

 

Her estate does have a value, if she owned a share of the house...... as in

a charge against the property under her name. Its jointly owned by her and husband

 

 

Incidentally, I sent her death cert to another debt company for MORE and they are not pursuing, so why are there anomolies here?

 

Were they (wrongly) told she had no assets? Was the debt they were the creditor for a secured debt (so, was there a charging order for that one too?)

 

Oh and the debt is from 1996

 

Which one? the one that they aren't pursuing (which might explain it if it isn;t secured and is statute barred, or the one with the charging order (where it doesn't matter when it is from, given that they have the charging order!).

 

Who is / was acting as executor? (strictly speaking 'administrator' if there was no will), and has probate been granted?.

[natash76]

Its not a secured debt, is from TSB bank, a credit card

The mortgage was the one where if spouse died, it goes to the other spouse, I cant remember whats that called

we haven't got solicitor involved yet, but probbaly will.

No-one has told anyone, anything! I dont want to put my foot in it, if I dont have too.

 

Theres ONE charging order against the house from PRA

 

The other debt is just a debt that had nothing to do with the house.

 

I am asking if there is any way around this, so that her husband, (who has dementia) and doesnt have a clue what is going on, doesnt have to pay a debt that is not his. If there is anyway around this, I would like to know.

[sgtbush]

Tenants in common I think its called.

 

Nope its the other one, joint tenants.

[AndyOrch]

The debt has been secured by way of the Restriction K put in place....no need to do anything...let it remain for now until your Mothers Husband decides what to do about it.

 

You cant remove names from Land Registry whilst there is a live Mortgage (Joint and Several)

 

http://www.hip-consultant.co.uk/blog/how-to-secure-debt-against-property-123/

 

Andy

[BazzaS]

Tenants in common I think its called.

 

Nope its the other one, joint tenants.

 

The legal interest in the house is ALWAYS by joint tenancy, never tenancy in common.

The beneficial interest can be held by either.

 

Thus the legal interest will now be held exclusively by the husband, but the debt (held by charging order against the deceased’s beneficial interest) doesn’t just evaporate - the debt is still owed from the estate.

[BazzaS]

Its not a secured debt, is from TSB bank, a credit card

The mortgage was the one where if spouse died, it goes to the other spouse, I cant remember whats that called

we haven't got solicitor involved yet, but probbaly will.

No-one has told anyone, anything! I dont want to put my foot in it, if I dont have too.

 

Theres ONE charging order against the house from PRA

 

The other debt is just a debt that had nothing to do with the house.

 

I am asking if there is any way around this, so that her husband, (who has dementia) and doesnt have a clue what is going on, doesnt have to pay a debt that is not his. If there is anyway around this, I would like to know.

 

If the husband has dementia, much will depend on

a) if he retains capacity, and if not,

b) if a relevant power of attorney exists.

 

If not, (charging order, death intestate, dementia, no power of attorney), you are looking at the Court of Protection becoming involved, and needing professional advice.

The Court of Protection involvement won’t come cheap, and professional advice will cost, but that’ll pale into insignificance against the potential costs if someone “tries to give it a go on their own” and gets it wrong ....

 

Is there a relevant power of attorney? Is his dementia mild enough that he retains competence?

If there is no power of attorney but he remains competent to create one, get it done NOW (before he looses competence).

[natash76]

The legal interest in the house is ALWAYS by joint tenancy, never tenancy in common.

The beneficial interest can be held by either.

 

Thus the legal interest will now be held exclusively by the husband, but the debt (held by charging order against the deceased’s beneficial interest) doesn’t just evaporate - the debt is still owed from the estate.

 

This forum is run by debt collectors so I would expect these replies.

[dx100uk]

what a stupid comment to make.

[dx100uk]

go read post 7 and understand that

its a restriction K

you don't need to do anything at all

the restriction k cannot now harm things

[dx100uk]

retitled and moved to legal forum

[BazzaS]

The legal interest in the house is ALWAYS by joint tenancy, never tenancy in common.

The beneficial interest can be held by either.

 

Thus the legal interest will now be held exclusively by the husband, but the debt (held by charging order against the deceased’s beneficial interest) doesn’t just evaporate - the debt is still owed from the estate.

 

This forum is run by debt collectors so I would expect these replies.

 

regarding the legal interest always being held under joint tenancy, that was what I was taught. It was in a equity & trusts law textbook, and it seems at least one solicitors believe it.

http://www.longmores-solicitors.co.uk/site/blog/residential-conveyancing/coowners-joint-tenants-or-tenants-in-common 2nd paragraph

"The current law relating to joint ownership of property is deeply rooted in trust law.Whenever co-ownership of property occurs, a trust of land arises. A legal interest in land may only be held under a joint tenancy. As far as the beneficial interest is concerned, this may be held either under a joint tenancy or under a tenancy in common."

 

As for my view that the legal interest will now be held exclusively by the husband, that arises as a result of the joint tenancy of the legal interest passing solely to him by right of survivorship.

 

As for my view that the debt doesn't just evaporate, and is still owed from the estate, you may feel that I'm wrong, but I bet you'll find I'm right.

IF you decide to act as administrator and choose to deliberately ignore such a debt, you may become personally liable for it by breach of the administrator's fiduciary duty. So, if you are going to hold daft and unsupported views - take professional advice, and you'll be told that the debt still exists and is owed by the estate.

 

You've posted asking for advice. Being rude when the advice doesn't align with your delusional pre-formed views will just put people off helping you.

 

what a stupid comment to make.

is just one way of putting it.