6 charging orders on my house totalling over 46k - but want to sell

[skyrider]

I have 6 charging orders on my house totalling over 46k,

my house is the subject of a suspended repossession order

if we don't sell it we will give the keys back

(and I doubt given the state of the property market it will even cover the mortgage if the lender gets to sell it)

those with the COs will not get a bean.

 

We have a cash buyer and are hoping to exchange before Christmas but my share of equity in the house is something short of being able to meet the 46k

 

does anyone know how this works

because all the charges have to be cleared before the sale completes

but if there isn't enough money to pay my charges off the sale might not go ahead!

 

My solicitor seems to know little about this so I'm looking for some help on it

 

- any ideas appreciated?

[sequenci]

Hi there. Sorry to hear about your predicament but there are a few things to consider. If any of the charge holders refuse the sale (possibly likely) you can request an order for sale from the court so long as you can show that selling the house is the reasonable thing to do and that you are getting the best price. Maybe you can let the charge holders know that if they do oppose the sale a repossession or you simply handing the keys back may be even more detrimental to them!

 

Some extra info too:

 

You may be able to sell your house with permission from your lender. You will need their agreement as they can stop a sale going through if the sale price will not cover the outstanding mortgage. You will need to persuade them that you have obtained the best possible price for the property. Point out that if the house was sold by your lender they would be likely to get a much lower price as the property would be empty and could fall into disrepair.

 

The FSA Mortgage: Conduct of Business Rules say that a lender must "deal fairly" with anyone in arrears. It also says the lender must "give consideration to the customer being allowed to remain in possession to effect a sale". This means that if you cannot afford to stay in the house, the lender must look seriously at allowing you to sell the house yourself whilst you are still living there.

 

If your lender refuses to let you sell the house it is possible to apply to the county court for an order for sale under the Trusts of Land & Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. The court can order a sale on whatever terms it thinks reasonable, even if your lender objects.

 

 

In the Halifax v Barratt case the court let the borrowers sell the house for the "best possible price" even though the Halifax refused permission for the sale.

 

The borrowers were also allowed to take the sale costs out of the sale proceeds before the money went to the lender.

• Talk to the lender about selling your home yourself.
  
• You may have to prove to your lender that sale is the last resort and the sale is in everyone's financial interest.
  
• Provide your lender with full information about your financial circumstances.
  
• You will need evidence from several independent estate agents that you have found the best sale price for your home.
  
• The lender may ask you to sign an extra agreement saying how you will repay the shortfall debt.
  
• Consider handing the keys in and making an arrangement to clear the shortfall once the house is sold by your lender. This is only an option if you do not want a new mortgage in the near future as your details will be on the Mortgage Possessions Register for six years.

[skyrider]

Hi Sequnci thanks for the prompt response,

if we sell in the open market at the current contract price there will be a significant surplus above what the lender is owed,

we can demonsrate in todays market we have squeezed the best price for the property,

 

the problem comes with any shortfall to the Charging Order holders it looks like it might be £5 - £10k depending on costs,

yes I believe we can argue with charge holders

but it will slow things down and if we don't get the sale through the 1st mortgage holder will seek and probably get reposession

 

- I'd really like to know if the law provides for this scenario

- any thoughts appreciated