Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

[vint1954]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

CAG has been around much longer than AAD, founded in 2006. Google would have indexed most of their posts in all those years. Today's CAG is not even a shadow of its former self, they used to post a lot of useful stuff on there. Sadly, most of the worthy contributors moved on, and quite a few are now on here CAG have seen fit to ban almost everyone who is known to be on here. I'm an ex-CAGger myself, banned for almost a year now!

A growing club FP

[vint1954]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

You can become tennants in comman rather than joit tennants in a property.

This is usually a 50-50 split and would need to be done by a solicitor. There would in all probability be an option to have an unequal split, however I susspect that the mortgage company would have something to say about this, so it would have to be a property without mortgage.

There are also firms that transfer equity in a property from one person to another, but you would have to pay a fair amount for the equity transferred to you. Again, I would imagine that if you have a joint mortgage, this would be impossible.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

I'm an ex-CAGger myself, banned for almost a year now!

and never looked back..... you have a free reign here to look after users, the interests of the forum and allow free speech.

CAG - well, ermmmm. Ok, time to move on eh!

[PlanB]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Lol, true, but everytime I google something on the subject, up they pop!

It's about quality not quantity. AAD is quality

[Seamus]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Then I suggest you stay away from CAG

Lol, true, but everytime I google something on the subject, up they pop!

S

[PlanB]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

. . . I fancy reading something uplifting for a change!?

Then I suggest you stay away from CAG

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Thanks for the heads up, I was counting Paul as AAD!

S

Indeed you should as well. We are one big team here

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Plan B did nothing spectacular

ermmmm yes you did - you are responsible for over 2.5m customers possibly being able to fight these scammers if they try and take action.

To me that is rather spectacular, so take the plaudits - I would

[Seamus]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

I think that should read "Great work Paul's firm and AAD!"

Plan B did nothing spectacular except send a s.78 request and keep a paper trail

The AAD Method works

Thanks for the heads up, I was counting Paul as AAD!

S

[PlanB]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Great work PlanB and AAD!

S

I think that should read "Great work Paul's firm and AAD!"

Plan B did nothing spectacular except send a s.78 request and keep a paper trail

The AAD Method works

[Seamus]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Great work PlanB and AAD!

S

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Is there a write up on PlanB's latest success on here, I fancy reading something uplifting for a change!?

S

--> Do you have a Store Card to Credit Card? - allaboutFORUMS

[Seamus]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Is there a write up on PlanB's latest success on here, I fancy reading something uplifting for a change!?

S

[Seamus]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Whilst this subject is very interesting for the purpose of the forum as a whole, particularly for those who already have a restriction on their property (hence the reason for this debate), from a personal point of view for yourself, it hardly seems worth the trouble. It's all a bit academic when you haven't even got a restriction yourself in the first place!

You'd be better served concentrating your efforts on avoiding a CCJ in the first place, as once they've got one, there are many ways in which they can be enforced and, even when they drop off your file, they never go SBd as such. The UE process followed here works in the vast majority of cases, where the account never goes near a court. Even if it reached the court stage, many claims can be successfully defended as Plan B could well tell you, being one of our latest winners.

In the unlikely event you reached the court stage AND the claim looked difficult to defend, there are still ways to avoid a CCJ such as a Tomlin order.

Frankly, unless you already own a property with a restriction, it's hardly worth the trouble of digging so deeply into how to avoid paying something you may never even get!

Absolutely, and most of the DCAs have gone very quiet for months with some of them actually admitting UE, but there are one or two that are a worry, including the biggest one, so I'm just trying to get knowledgeable on all the scenarios that might occur. But yes, the major thrust should go into the UE part and this site certainly knows its stuff on that subject.

S

[Seamus]

Re: Charging Orders & Tenants in Common

Of course this all presumes that once you've sold your home you will never buy or own another one ever again, because what is to stop the frustrated creditor applying for a CO (Restriction) on any subsequent property or asset you own The debt doesn't evaporate even if you are successful in wriggling out of the Restriction (and I genuinely hope some people can) it remains as the original CCJ.

Although it's rare for a Claimant to get an attachment of earnings against a Defendant due to non-payment of a CCJ, what would the DJ think if asked to order an attachment of earnings because the Defendant has been seen to avoid the original CO (Restriction) ordered by a court

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm a passionate supporter of not paying creditors whenever possible. At the same time I don't want to lull people into a false sense of security

I agree entirely, proof must be found before people can believe it 100% and I'm digging into it like Colombu at the moment!

As for buying another property, if it was me who successfully sold with a restriction, any further property purchases would be in my wife's name as she has a perfectly clean credit file, unlike me. I would make sure that I never owned anything that could have a charging order slapped on it.

S