• Subject of Restrictions vs Notice and charging orders.

    From Fredxx@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 11 18:02:52 2024
    A member of the family has obtained a charging order against an ex for a unrepaid loan.

    This has gone through the courts and resulted in a Final charging order.

    Their belief was that the interim and final charging orders would
    automatically be sent to the Land Registry but it seems this is not the
    case and it is up to the claimant to instigate the charge.

    After them making applications this has instigated the above question,
    where Land Registry say you cannot have both a notice and a restriction.

    The defendant in the court action is named under "Title Absolute" in the property register but this a leasehold from a Staircase purchase
    associated with a Housing Association who hold the Freehold.

    I must say I'm confused of this difference and and "Form K" was
    mentioned in an application for a restriction.

    My understanding was that a Notice entry has the ability of preventing a
    sale without a discharge certificate and the restriction is not what
    they need since this does not prevent a sale with the proceeds being squirrelled away. However it is the Application for a Restriction that
    has the From K wording preventing the sale without the appropriate
    certificate.

    Any help would be appreciated.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fredxx@21:1/5 to Simon Parker on Thu Jan 18 20:19:44 2024
    On 18/01/2024 18:20, Simon Parker wrote:
    On 11/01/2024 18:02, Fredxx wrote:
    A member of the family has obtained a charging order against an ex for
    a unrepaid loan.

    This has gone through the courts and resulted in a Final charging order.

    Their belief was that the interim and final charging orders would
    automatically be sent to the Land Registry but it seems this is not
    the case and it is up to the claimant to instigate the charge.

    After them making applications this has instigated the above question,
    where Land Registry say you cannot have both a notice and a restriction.

    The defendant in the court action is named under "Title Absolute" in
    the property register but this a leasehold from a Staircase purchase
    associated with a Housing Association who hold the Freehold.

    I must say I'm confused of this difference and and "Form K" was
    mentioned in an application for a restriction.

    My understanding was that a Notice entry has the ability of preventing
    a sale without a discharge certificate and the restriction is not what
    they need since this does not prevent a sale with the proceeds being
    squirrelled away. However it is the Application for a Restriction that
    has the From K wording preventing the sale without the appropriate
    certificate.

    Any help would be appreciated.

    As your post has gone a week without a response, I'll chime in with the little I have, but I'll warm you in advance that it isn't much. :-)

    I think there is some confusion of language and this is leading to misunderstandings.

    At the risk of repeating what you already know, as your family member
    has obtained a charging order, they need to register that with the Land Registry.

    There are two ways of registering the charge, either by way of a notice
    or a restriction, with each being used differently and neither being
    more effective than the other - each has pros and cons depending on the circumstances.  But it is the circumstances that dictate which of the
    two must be used, rather than anything else.

    Have you read the Land Registry's Practice guide 76: charging orders [1]?

    Key question: Is the property owned solely by the judgment debtor?  If
    so, see algorithm 1 [2] for whether you need a notice or a restriction.

    Conversely, if there are joint proprietors registered, see algorithm 2 [3].

    For details on the differences between the two see Practice guide 19: notices, restrictions and the protection of third-party interests in the register [4]. section 2 of which covers "Notices" and section 3 of which covers "Restrictions".

    Regards

    S.P.

    [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charging-orders/practice-guide-76-charging-orders

    [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/529498/Algorithm_1_-_Sole_proprietor_registered__June_2016_.pdf

    [3] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/529499/Algorithm_2_-_Joint_proprietors_registered__June_2016_.pdf

    [4] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-register/practice-guide-19-notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-register


    Many thanks for your post. I am aware of the paths and algorithms that
    Land Registry publish but my understanding over the matter is limited.

    I'm unsure over the significance that the freehold is owned by a housing association. The leasehold is owned by the ex-partner and there is no
    lender or other third party mentioned in this title register.

    As per Practice guide 76:
    From them being a sole proprietor then "Algorithm 1 – Sole proprietor registered" should be followed.

    Is the charging order made against the sole proprietor? : YES

    Is there an entry for example a restriction in the register that may
    indicate the property is held on trust for a third party (see section 3 Applications for entry of a notice)? :
    Not sure what this means, given this is a staircase purchase. My
    instinct says NO, meaning that "An agreed or unilateral notice
    may be entered."

    I've also come across links like this:

    https://express-conveyancing.co.uk/what-is-a-registered-notice-or-a-restriction-against-a-property-what-it-can-mean-to-a-purchaser/

    Which says, "A Restriction is an entry which can be found on the
    Proprietorship Register on the title to a freehold property. Any entry
    on this register is confirmed and restricts the 'deposition' or sale of
    the property until the restriction is satisfied".

    It also says, "Restrictions on Dispositions by a Sole Proprietor – This
    type of restriction can only be placed on a property by an Order made by
    a court." In this case he has a court charging order in his favour.

    In my simple way if thinking, I thought notices are alerts, and
    restrictions are that, preventing sale without satisfaction of the
    restriction. A notice wouldn't then stop the transfer of the property to
    a member of her family for example.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fredxx@21:1/5 to Simon Parker on Fri Jan 19 02:04:35 2024
    On 19/01/2024 00:08, Simon Parker wrote:
    On 18/01/2024 20:19, Fredxx wrote:
    On 18/01/2024 18:20, Simon Parker wrote:
    On 11/01/2024 18:02, Fredxx wrote:
    A member of the family has obtained a charging order against an ex
    for a unrepaid loan.

    This has gone through the courts and resulted in a Final charging
    order.

    Their belief was that the interim and final charging orders would
    automatically be sent to the Land Registry but it seems this is not
    the case and it is up to the claimant to instigate the charge.

    After them making applications this has instigated the above
    question, where Land Registry say you cannot have both a notice and
    a restriction.

    The defendant in the court action is named under "Title Absolute" in
    the property register but this a leasehold from a Staircase purchase
    associated with a Housing Association who hold the Freehold.

    I must say I'm confused of this difference and and "Form K" was
    mentioned in an application for a restriction.

    My understanding was that a Notice entry has the ability of
    preventing a sale without a discharge certificate and the
    restriction is not what they need since this does not prevent a sale
    with the proceeds being squirrelled away. However it is the
    Application for a Restriction that has the From K wording preventing
    the sale without the appropriate certificate.

    Any help would be appreciated.

    As your post has gone a week without a response, I'll chime in with
    the little I have, but I'll warm you in advance that it isn't much. :-)

    I think there is some confusion of language and this is leading to
    misunderstandings.

    At the risk of repeating what you already know, as your family member
    has obtained a charging order, they need to register that with the
    Land Registry.

    There are two ways of registering the charge, either by way of a
    notice or a restriction, with each being used differently and neither
    being more effective than the other - each has pros and cons
    depending on the circumstances.  But it is the circumstances that
    dictate which of the two must be used, rather than anything else.

    Have you read the Land Registry's Practice guide 76: charging orders
    [1]?

    Key question: Is the property owned solely by the judgment debtor?
    If so, see algorithm 1 [2] for whether you need a notice or a
    restriction.

    Conversely, if there are joint proprietors registered, see algorithm
    2 [3].

    For details on the differences between the two see Practice guide 19:
    notices, restrictions and the protection of third-party interests in
    the register [4]. section 2 of which covers "Notices" and section 3
    of which covers "Restrictions".

    Regards

    S.P.

    [1]
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charging-orders/practice-guide-76-charging-orders

    [2]
    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/529498/Algorithm_1_-_Sole_proprietor_registered__June_2016_.pdf

    [3]
    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/529499/Algorithm_2_-_Joint_proprietors_registered__June_2016_.pdf

    [4]
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-register/practice-guide-19-notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-register


    Many thanks for your post. I am aware of the paths and algorithms that
    Land Registry publish but my understanding over the matter is limited.

    I'm unsure over the significance that the freehold is owned by a
    housing association. The leasehold is owned by the ex-partner and
    there is no lender or other third party mentioned in this title register.

    As per Practice guide 76:
     From them being a sole proprietor then "Algorithm 1 – Sole proprietor
    registered" should be followed.

    Is the charging order made against the sole proprietor? : YES

    Is there an entry for example a restriction in the register that may
    indicate the property is held on trust for a third party (see section
    3 Applications for entry of a notice)? :
    Not sure what this means, given this is a staircase purchase. My
    instinct says NO, meaning that "An agreed or unilateral notice
    may be entered."

    I've also come across links like this:

    https://express-conveyancing.co.uk/what-is-a-registered-notice-or-a-restriction-against-a-property-what-it-can-mean-to-a-purchaser/

    Which says, "A Restriction is an entry which can be found on the
    Proprietorship Register on the title to a freehold property. Any entry
    on this register is confirmed and restricts the 'deposition' or sale
    of the property until the restriction is satisfied".

    It also says, "Restrictions on Dispositions by a Sole Proprietor –
    This type of restriction can only be placed on a property by an Order
    made by a court." In this case he has a court charging order in his
    favour.

    In my simple way if thinking, I thought notices are alerts, and
    restrictions are that, preventing sale without satisfaction of the
    restriction. A notice wouldn't then stop the transfer of the property
    to a member of her family for example.

    Your use of the phrase "this is a staircase purchase" has raised a
    mental red flag for me.

    Is this a shared ownership property where the debtor owns a percentage
    of the property and the housing association you mention owns the rest?

    If so, what are the respective percentages?

    Or was it originally a shared ownership property but the debtor now owns
    100% without a mortgage charge registered against the property?

    If my understanding is incorrect, what is the involvement of the housing association in the property and what did you mean by "this is a
    staircase purchase"?

    The ex has title to 75% of the property and the housing association owns
    the rest?

    The percentage is defined by a Memorandum with an entry number in the
    title register that relates to the purchase of an additional share.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fredxx@21:1/5 to Simon Parker on Fri Jan 19 15:04:14 2024
    On 19/01/2024 10:08, Simon Parker wrote:
    On 19/01/2024 02:04, Fredxx wrote:
    On 19/01/2024 00:08, Simon Parker wrote:
    On 18/01/2024 20:19, Fredxx wrote:

    Many thanks for your post. I am aware of the paths and algorithms
    that Land Registry publish but my understanding over the matter is
    limited.

    I'm unsure over the significance that the freehold is owned by a
    housing association. The leasehold is owned by the ex-partner and
    there is no lender or other third party mentioned in this title
    register.

    As per Practice guide 76:
     From them being a sole proprietor then "Algorithm 1 – Sole
    proprietor registered" should be followed.

    Is the charging order made against the sole proprietor? : YES

    Is there an entry for example a restriction in the register that may
    indicate the property is held on trust for a third party (see
    section 3 Applications for entry of a notice)? :
    Not sure what this means, given this is a staircase purchase. My
    instinct says NO, meaning that "An agreed or unilateral notice
    may be entered."

    I've also come across links like this:

    https://express-conveyancing.co.uk/what-is-a-registered-notice-or-a-restriction-against-a-property-what-it-can-mean-to-a-purchaser/

    Which says, "A Restriction is an entry which can be found on the
    Proprietorship Register on the title to a freehold property. Any
    entry on this register is confirmed and restricts the 'deposition'
    or sale of the property until the restriction is satisfied".

    It also says, "Restrictions on Dispositions by a Sole Proprietor –
    This type of restriction can only be placed on a property by an
    Order made by a court." In this case he has a court charging order
    in his favour.

    In my simple way if thinking, I thought notices are alerts, and
    restrictions are that, preventing sale without satisfaction of the
    restriction. A notice wouldn't then stop the transfer of the
    property to a member of her family for example.

    Your use of the phrase "this is a staircase purchase" has raised a
    mental red flag for me.

    Is this a shared ownership property where the debtor owns a
    percentage of the property and the housing association you mention
    owns the rest?

    If so, what are the respective percentages?

    Or was it originally a shared ownership property but the debtor now
    owns 100% without a mortgage charge registered against the property?

    If my understanding is incorrect, what is the involvement of the
    housing association in the property and what did you mean by "this is
    a staircase purchase"?

    The ex has title to 75% of the property and the housing association
    owns the rest?

    The percentage is defined by a Memorandum with an entry number in the
    title register that relates to the purchase of an additional share.

    As I suspected.  That's not "sole proprietor ownership" then.  It is
    owned by "joint proprietors" as tenants in common with the debtor owning
    75% and the housing association the remaining 25%.

    That puts your relative firmly into Algorithm 2 territory.

    Thanks, the Property Register gives B: Proprietorship Register "Title
    absolute" to the ex, with a memorandum in the same section of the
    purchase of an additional share.

    As you say that doesn't imply Sole Proprietor.

    As the charging order is not made against all joint proprietors, the
    only option is to enter a Form K restriction as the charging order is
    made against the interest of only one of the joint proprietors.  A
    notice cannot be entered.

    Somewhat confusingly, you need to complete Form RX1 to enter a Form K restriction.

    Form RX1 is available here in both Word Format and as a PDF:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/enter-a-restriction-registration-rx1

    You are better applying through the Land Registry's portal or Business Gateway as the fee is halved.

    That's brill. Very much appreciate your post.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)