HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

[foolishbear]

Hi,

Please can someone help as I cannot find clear information about this anywhere? I need a direction on this.

My husband got a CCJ against him, and the claimant (a bank) applied for a charging order against our jointly owned family home (his debt, not mine). The interim order was granted automatically, without a hearing. A part of the order was that the co-owner and all known creditors are given at least 21 days' notice of the final hearing.

The claimant did not give any notice to either myself, or our mortgage company (I checked with them). I only found out about the hearing 7 days beforehand, and prepared and posted the statement with my objections on the same day, with the proof of postage.

I came to the hearing, and the judge claimed he did not see my statement, and that in any case my interest was no affected. He allowed me to stay for the hearing but did not consider my objections. Apart from my joint ownership, there are our small children living in the property, and there are other creditors, in addition there is no equity in the property.

The claimant produced a written statement sayingn that they had sent the notices to all involved parties as required by the order (and I know for sure this is a lie as neither myself nor our mortgage provider were notified).

In addition, the judge told my husband that he should stop self-representing and get legal help, and that anyone in this country can get free help. Well, my husband does not qualify for any help whatsoever (white, middle-aged and not an asylum claimant).

Today, 2 weeks after the hearing, my husband finally received the copy of the judgement in writing dfrom the court. In the way it is worded, we cannot sell the property without a written consent from the claimant, and therefore my interests are clearly very much affected.

As none of my objections have been considered by the judge, can I apply to set aside this judgement, or what else can be done? It seems that the legal system is totally biased towards the banks who can always afford expensive legal representation!

[FlamingParrot]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

You may want to look at this thread with regards to restrictions, there's quite a lot of useful info on there: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=1839539

[busytrev]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

You may want to look at this thread with regards to restrictions, there's quite a lot of useful info on there: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=1839539

He could also get some good free advice from Legal Beagles… :ohwell:

I really see no reason to direct a new member to another forum,

[FlamingParrot]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

He could also get some good free advice from Legal Beagles… :ohwell:

I really see no reason to direct a new member to another forum,

I know where you are coming from, this is not the first time I post a link to that thread or another forum, however, I'm doing it with a specific purpose, in this case the MSE thread is very very long and it wouldn't be practical to copy and paste it all on here. But I'm not telling him to go get advice from MSE as such, just referring to a specific thread. Your other post didn't link to a specific post or thread on that forum that related to the same situation as the OP's and could help him, you just told him to go to that other forum. When I link to other sites, including official sites such as CAB, trustonline, the ICO, OFT, legislation, etc. I always link to a specific post, page or section of the site, relevant to the OP's issues. :amen:

[busytrev]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

I know where you are coming from, this is not the first time I post a link to that thread or another forum, however, I'm doing it with a specific purpose, in this case the MSE thread is very very long and it wouldn't be practical to copy and paste it all on here. But I'm not telling him to go get advice from MSE as such, just referring to a specific thread. Your other post didn't link to a specific post or thread on that forum that related to the same situation as the OP's and could help him, you just told him to go to that other forum. When I link to other sites, including official sites such as CAB, trustonline, the ICO, OFT, legislation, etc. I always link to a specific post, page or section of the site, relevant to the OP's issues. :amen:

I did reply to your post on the other thread but I think it got missed due to several people posting at the same time eace:

[foolishbear]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

Thanks, I read this before.
However the order itself is worded by the judge not as a restriction but as "no disposition without a written consent of the charge holder", and against the whole property, not just my husband's share, despite the judge teling me that only my husband interest is affected. The charge on land registry (interim one) was worded exactly like a charge over the whole property, requiring the written consent from the charge holder. I am reading on Land registry website that this is not the wording that should be used for a restriction. What can I do if the judge dismissed my interest in property and worded the charging order in this way??? There seems to be no help on this issue available anywhere - am I supposed to bend over and let the bank do whatever they like, even if I have nothing to do with this debt/charge??

[PlanB]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

I did reply to your post on the other thread but I think it got missed due to several people posting at the same time eace:

I think your post on the other thread included a link to a site which admits to taking commission from people it refers to DMPs and IVAs etc which is not what we're about on LB. We like to solve people's problems out of the goodness of our hearts with no commercial benefit to the site

[foolishbear]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

Please can anyone help?

[wales01man]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

Im not an expert but i can say what i know about charging orders from experience,we had an order against our property in my name only although the house was jointly owned as i understood it if the property was sold from the profits half of which were expectedto be mine the money owing would be paid but only from my half or a proportion if the equity was less than what was owed as happened it was reposeed with a shortfall and the bank got nothing,this may be correct in your case or not maybe a solicitor is needed

[FlamingParrot]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

As was noted on that thread, the key issue is finding a solicitor who knows how to play it when it comes to selling. Your average conveyancing firm probably wouldn't have a clue, I know of someone who had a restriction for £1,400 on their house sold last year, and had to pay it to be able to complete. It would be wise to make enquiries before appointing a firm of solicitors to handle the sale of the property. Some people say restrictions are not worth the paper they're written on, this isn't exactly true, you need to find someone who knows the ins and outs of them.

[foolishbear]

Re: HELP PLEASE! - Charging order against jointly owned property

I now talked to 7 different solicitor firms (property and peroperty litigation departments), and having a trouble finding one who understands the issue! Conveyancing guys refuse to deal with it, and the more specialist guys get puzzled and just pass this on to the next colleague in the firm. Does anyone know how I deal with this?

The issue is - there is nothing in the current restriction that refers to my right, and I do not understand at which point it gets protected at all! For instance, if we sell the property, and there is not enough equity in my husband's share, who is ensuring that my half of equity is not touched? The conveyancing guys say they would only want a written consent from the charge holder saying they will remove the restriction - and why would they if they are not getting their full amount? Effectively, my interest is then heavily affected, while it should have not been as I have nothing to do with this debt or this charge!