Can an order to sell still be made by a debtor if ownershiphas changed??

[Tofros]

The OP states that the charge was registered in 2024, and the gift to partner took place in 2025. The partner will therefore take legal title subject to the pre-existing equitable charge because there are no proceeds of sale for the equitable charge to transfer onto, The question them becomes whether obtaining an order for sale is a remedy available to the creditor to recover the debt and that depends on the nature of the underlying debt and the amount.

The creditor is using the threat of obtaining an order to try to obtain settlement. If an order for sale is not a remedy available to them because for example, the debt was a consumer credit debt, it could potentially head off further action to respond by pointing that out to them (if true).

However, if the creditor proceeds to take action regardless then the court action will need to be actively defended.

[Frank1]

Under Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986:

Even if the debtor is not immediately bankrupt creditors can still take court action.

If the court finds the purpose of the transfer was to put the land beyond the reach of a creditor, the court can make an order to "unwind" the transfer and an order for the sale of the land.

[Donny462]

The answer is yes, they can get an order for sale against the new owner. However,citizens advice info indicates they can NOT get an order for sale if the original debt was covered by the Consumer Credit Act, or if the debt ( including court fees) is under £1,000. The citizens advice info is easy to understand, the info you need is towards the end.

citizens advice should be able to help you out in the first instance, so go and see them if you can.

Hi Tofros

Thank you for that information, it is much appreciated.

[Donny462]

The OP states that the charge was registered in 2024, and the gift to partner took place in 2025. The partner will therefore take legal title subject to the pre-existing equitable charge because there are no proceeds of sale for the equitable charge to transfer onto, The question them becomes whether obtaining an order for sale is a remedy available to the creditor to recover the debt and that depends on the nature of the underlying debt and the amount.

The creditor is using the threat of obtaining an order to try to obtain settlement. If an order for sale is not a remedy available to them because for example, the debt was a consumer credit debt, it could potentially head off further action to respond by pointing that out to them (if true).

However, if the creditor proceeds to take action regardless then the court action will need to be actively defended.

Thank you again for your further response Tofros , it is really appreciated.


I discovered my illness in the Summer of 2024, I applied to have the property transferred to my Partner in August 2024, shortly before I lost my Mum on 6th August that same year. Unfortunately, when I chased up what was happening with the change of ownership some months later, the Land Registry claimed they hadn't received that documentation, luckily, I had sent it via Royal Mail Special Delivery so I could prove that it was indeed sent at the beginning of August 2024 and was signed for as received, after the long delay of the Land Registry doing nothing as they claimed to have not received the documentation, and after my Partner's telephone conversation with Phil Harrison, (Chief Executive of the Land Registry), the Land Registry admitted to having received my documentation and the property was eventually registered with my Partner as proprietor on 30/03/2025 . The charge was registered on 11th October 2024, but I can prove it was applied for transfer of ownership long before then.

I hope the above clarifies matters.

[Donny462]

Hi atticus

I'm sorry but for some reason it won't quote your question for me to reply to it so I shall copy and paste it below.

You asked:-

The question here is whether this creditor in these circumstances can obtain an order for sale. Before leaping to any kind of conclusion, can you please post the full wording of any restriction entered on the title register.

At the moment, it seems that this shows an equitable charge, but we would need to see more. What was the date of (1) the transfer of ownership and (2) the 'equitable charge' entry and (c) the final charging order?

I have attached the land registry document as I have received it but blocked out the names as required by Legal Beagles, I hope this makes it a little clearer.

I should also add that this person also has put the charge on my home, as well as my buildings and land but he hasn't attempted to get my home as obviously the mortgage Company have first call on it

[Donny462]

In the guidance "How the court decides to grant an order for sale" under the title "Charging orders" Citizens Advice states that:

The court can order a sale if either:

the property and debt are in the debtors name only
the property has joint owners and the debt is in both names
the property is jointly owned but the debt is in one name only.
.
The form K restriction requires the buyer's or transferee's conveyancer to notify the debtor about the proposed sale/transfer of the property. Failure to do this may not prevent the sale/transfer going ahead

If this happens and ownership is transferred the debtor looses his security on the debt. He may decide to pursue the debtor again or sue his conveyancer for negligence

Thank you Frank1 for your response. The debt is in my name, the property is in my Partners name.

[Donny462]

Under Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986:

Even if the debtor is not immediately bankrupt creditors can still take court action.

If the court finds the purpose of the transfer was to put the land beyond the reach of a creditor, the court can make an order to "unwind" the transfer and an order for the sale of the land.

Hi Frank1 , the transfer was to put the property in my partners name due to the bad news I'd received about my health and I didn't want him to have to sell up in order to just pay inheritance tax, at the time I applied for the transfer, I didn't know that a final charging order was going to be granted.

[Tofros]

Your partner may have acquired an equitable interest prior to the equitable charge if the gift was effective at the date the paperwork was completed and sent. that interest may take priority over the charge.

It may be possible to get the charge removed. I don’t know what the process to do that would be.

in the meantime, you do not say how the debt arose. Was it a consumer credit debt? If so, it may be worth letting the creditor know that you know they are not entitled to the remedy of an order for sale in the meantime while you work out / consider trying to get the charge removed.

[Frank1]

What was the date you originally received the court claim?

[atticus]

It may just be that the creditor is not able to take steps to force a sale of the property without first taking other action of the kind Frank1 has described. But having looked at the Land Registry Documents, I do not understand why only an equitable charge was registered. It is odd that the date of the transfer of the legal title was after both interim and final charging orders.

What is the approximate amount of the judgement debt? If it is sufficient, the creditor might make you bankrupt so that a trustee in bankruptcy can undo your transfer, which is a clear transaction at an undervalue.

[Frank1]

This topic is covered at length in the article

"Orders for sale" by Shelter England.

[Donny462]

Your partner may have acquired an equitable interest prior to the equitable charge if the gift was effective at the date the paperwork was completed and sent. that interest may take priority over the charge.

It may be possible to get the charge removed. I don’t know what the process to do that would be.

in the meantime, you do not say how the debt arose. Was it a consumer credit debt? If so, it may be worth letting the creditor know that you know they are not entitled to the remedy of an order for sale in the meantime while you work out / consider trying to get the charge removed.

Hi Tofros

Thank you for your reply, we shall definitely look into getting the charge removed.

The debt arose as this person was taken on to act as our 'expert witness' in our case against the Coal Authority for the subsidence of our home. Right from the beginning we told him that we didn't have the money to pay his fees and he told us repeatedly that under the Coal Mining Subsidence Act , the Coal Authority had to pay the costs of the claimants expert. We checked up on the Coal Mining Subsidence Act, and it did indeed state that they were obligated to pay the costs of the claimants expert witness. However, what he didn't tell us was that he had been blacklisted by the CA as someone who they would.t allow to act an an expert witness for any claimant due to the fact of how he'd had previous dealings with them. He was totally dishonest with us, had he told us this fact, we would never have even entertained him.

As a result of the Coal Authority refusing to pay his bills, he then came after me! He went for adjudication, as the work he did for us was as part of an arbitration, he should have not been allowed to go through adjudication, however, he got it by producing a contract which he'd supposedly given to me, which within it states if there are any financial issues then he has the right to go to adjudication. I never received a contract from him, nor did I ever sign anything, but the adjudicator still found in his favour and awarded him a Summary Judgement which he then went to Court with and of course won as the adjudicator had already given him a Summary Judgement. At Court, the judge should never have been sitting, she was in her own words, "In absolute agony with sciatica and looking forward to getting home! ", she had to keep standing up to relieve her pain! She wasn't interested in any of my evidence and just granted him the order and refused me the right to appeal!

Since he has has taken this action against me, I have found online that he did it to someone else, this person clearly had more money than myself and they took it to the High Court to get the claim struck out. There were 3 high Court judges sitting, Lord Justice's Moses, Rix and Buxton and they all ruled against him! They ruled that the Summary Judgement should never have been given by the adjudicator and he lost to the tune of £84000.00!

[Donny462]

It may just be that the creditor is not able to take steps to force a sale of the property without first taking other action of the kind Frank1 has described. But having looked at the Land Registry Documents, I do not understand why only an equitable charge was registered. It is odd that the date of the transfer of the legal title was after both interim and final charging orders.

What is the approximate amount of the judgement debt? If it is sufficient, the creditor might make you bankrupt so that a trustee in bankruptcy can undo your transfer, which is a clear transaction at an undervalue.

Hi atticus

Thank you for your reply. This sort of thing is all new to me, you state that you do not understand why only an equitable charge was registered, why don't you understand this please? What, in your opinion is usually done please? In her ruling the judge accepted that there was no money to be had from me as the mortgage Company have first charge on the house and they would also have first call on my land. He would achieve nothing by making me bankrupt as he would still receive nothing once the mortgage Company have taken what they are owed.

I would like to thank all of you for trying to help me with this matter, he is waiting for an answer from me and I just don't know how to answer him.

[atticus]

What is the question to which "he" is waiting for your answer?

[Donny462]

What is the question to which "he" is waiting for your answer?

Hi atticus

Apologies that it has taken me so long to reply but I have only get out of hospital today.

Please see the attached letter from the other party that he is wanting my reply to. I have no money to pay what he is claiming, he knew this when he took on the work and assured me that his costs would be met by the Coal Authority, he knew that the Coal Authority would not pay his costs as he is blacklisted by them for previous dealings with him. I have blocked out any details that might identify the parties involved.

Thank you in advance for any advice that you can give me.