Can a charge be put on your house when going bankrupt?

Get expert opinion. This is the place for new questions to be posted.
13 posts Page 1 of 1
User avatar
paul820
Posts: 6
by paul820 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:47 pm
My Iva failed and I went bankrupt in 2011,I have now found out there is a charge on my house at the land registry,they are not prepared to remove it and say I’m still liable for the debts,can you advise?
User avatar
Foggy
Forum Expert
Posts: 25913
Contact
by Foggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:54 pm
How was the house dealt with by the OR in bankruptcy ?

Who are not prepared to remove the restriction? If this is the normal RX4 restriction placed by your former IP it is not a charge, as such, but a restriction and your former IP shoud be able to deal with it.
User avatar
paul820
Posts: 6
by paul820 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:21 pm
Foggy wrote:
How was the house dealt with by the OR in bankruptcy ?

Who are not prepared to remove the restriction? If this is the normal RX4 restriction placed by your former IP it is not a charge, as such, but a restriction and your former IP shoud be able to deal with it.

The OR had an interest for a period of time but then sent a letter saying they had no interest in it now,the company I had the iva with are saying they still have an interest and are not removing it,what’s a RX4 restriction?
User avatar
Foggy
Forum Expert
Posts: 25913
Contact
by Foggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:28 pm
paul820 wrote:
Foggy wrote:
How was the house dealt with by the OR in bankruptcy ?

Who are not prepared to remove the restriction? If this is the normal RX4 restriction placed by your former IP it is not a charge, as such, but a restriction and your former IP shoud be able to deal with it.

The OR had an interest for a period of time but then sent a letter saying they had no interest in it now,the company I had the iva with are saying they still have an interest and are not removing it,what’s a RX4 restriction?


RX4 restriction is basically a notice put on the deeds to advise someone has an interest in the property. I am pretty sure it should be removed on termination. Having gone bankrupt there should be no debts that need to be settled from sale proceeds, least of all the creditors involved in the IVA that was.

Which firm does your former IP belong to ? Ask him / her to explain specifically why he/ she still has an interest.
User avatar
Lisa Thomas
Industry Expert
Posts: 6642
Contact
by Lisa Thomas » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:29 pm
If the O.R put the restriction on and subsequently said they had no further interest in the property you need to approach the O.R and ask them to arrange to have the restriction removed.
User avatar
Foggy
Forum Expert
Posts: 25913
Contact
by Foggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:31 pm
Lisa Thomas wrote:
If the O.R put the restriction on and subsequently said they had no further interest in the property you need to approach the O.R and ask them to arrange to have the restriction removed.


I believe it was the former IP, in the IVA prior to BR. But, he wouldn't have an interest any longer as the debts in that IVA were, presumably, subsequently dealt with by the BR.
User avatar
paul820
Posts: 6
by paul820 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:36 pm
Foggy wrote:
paul820 wrote:
Foggy wrote:
How was the house dealt with by the OR in bankruptcy ?

Who are not prepared to remove the restriction? If this is the normal RX4 restriction placed by your former IP it is not a charge, as such, but a restriction and your former IP shoud be able to deal with it.

The OR had an interest for a period of time but then sent a letter saying they had no interest in it now,the company I had the iva with are saying they still have an interest and are not removing it,what’s a RX4 restriction?


RX4 restriction is basically a notice put on the deeds to advise someone has an interest in the property. I am pretty sure it should be removed on termination. Having gone bankrupt there should be no debts that need to be settled from sale proceeds, least of all the creditors involved in the IVA that was.

Which firm does your former IP belong to ? Ask him / her to explain specifically why he/ she still has an interest.

The company is Beesley and company,he said the debts are still owed and that’s why they still have an interest in the property
User avatar
paul820
Posts: 6
by paul820 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:40 pm
Foggy wrote:
Lisa Thomas wrote:
If the O.R put the restriction on and subsequently said they had no further interest in the property you need to approach the O.R and ask them to arrange to have the restriction removed.


I believe it was the former IP, in the IVA prior to BR. But, he wouldn't have an interest any longer as the debts in that IVA were, presumably, subsequently dealt with by the BR.

Everything that was in the Iva went to the bankruptcy,I didn’t even know it was on there until I wanted to Remortgage and they have showed me a copy it the land registry
User avatar
Lisa Thomas
Industry Expert
Posts: 6642
Contact
by Lisa Thomas » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:52 pm
Are you sure everything went from the IVA into the Bankruptcy as often assets in the IVA are held on trust for the IVA creditors?
User avatar
paul820
Posts: 6
by paul820 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:02 pm
Lisa Thomas wrote:
Are you sure everything went from the IVA into the Bankruptcy as often assets in the IVA are held on trust for the IVA creditors?

I didn’t know the property had anything to do with it as there was no equity in it,everything else was in the bankruptcy,so if this has been held in trust what does it mean for future dealings with the property?how long can they keep this on the land registry for and can they get any money from me?this is a big worry now
User avatar
Lisa Thomas
Industry Expert
Posts: 6642
Contact
by Lisa Thomas » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:22 am
If Beesly are telling you the IVA assets are held on trust and that is why the restriction is still on there you should revert back to them.

I can recommend a specialist insolvency solicitor, which you might need to help you with this but your starting point is Beesly if the restriction is theirs - whose name is it in? Your ex Supervisor/firm or the Official Receiver/Trustee?.
User avatar
paul820
Posts: 6
by paul820 » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:26 am
Lisa Thomas wrote:
If Beesly are telling you the IVA assets are held on trust and that is why the restriction is still on there you should revert back to them.

I can recommend a specialist insolvency solicitor, which you might need to help you with this but your starting point is Beesly if the restriction is theirs - whose name is it in? Your ex Supervisor/firm or the Official Receiver/Trustee?.

It’s in Beesley and company,I spoke to someone there and they seem to be saying the creditors are still owed the money,but these creditors were in my bankruptcy and no longer exist as far as I’m concerned,that was the whole point of going bankrupt,thank you and I might well need to get legal advice soon,
User avatar
Foggy
Forum Expert
Posts: 25913
Contact
by Foggy » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:47 am
paul820 wrote:
Lisa Thomas wrote:
If Beesly are telling you the IVA assets are held on trust and that is why the restriction is still on there you should revert back to them.

I can recommend a specialist insolvency solicitor, which you might need to help you with this but your starting point is Beesly if the restriction is theirs - whose name is it in? Your ex Supervisor/firm or the Official Receiver/Trustee?.

It’s in Beesley and company,I spoke to someone there and they seem to be saying the creditors are still owed the money,but these creditors were in my bankruptcy and no longer exist as far as I’m concerned,that was the whole point of going bankrupt,thank you and I might well need to get legal advice soon,


I would have a quick chat with a solicitor, experienced in insolvency. My arguement would be that the assets could only be held in trust if there is someone to benefit from that trust. As the debts were all discharged in BR there is no trust beneficiary, therefore the trust is extinct. I believe that you can submit an application, direct to Land Registry, on those grounds and they will liase with Beesley who would have to support their claim or let it be removed.

From LR:

To withdraw a restriction H M Land Registry would normally expect to receive a completed form RX4 by the person or company that has the benefit of the said restriction. If the beneficiary is unable to provide this RX4 then this form should be completed by whomever has inherited the benefit of the restriction and appropriate evidence of devolution of title lodged as part of the application. This evidence should show a clear link between the beneficiary named on the title register and the applicant that has completed form RX4.

If restriction is not withdrawn, then an application would need to be made for its cancellation. Cancellation is the term used in rule 97 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 to refer to an application to cancel a restriction that is no longer required.

Any person may apply to cancel a restriction. The application must be made in form RX3 and no fee is payable.

We will cancel the restriction if we are satisfied that the restriction is no longer required. The application must be accompanied by evidence to show that this is the case. If anyone is referred to in the restriction and if an address for service is listed for that person, we will usually notify them of the application and give them an opportunity to object to the application before canceling the restriction.


Practice Guide 19 provides further information on notices, restrictions and the protection of third party interests in the register.

13 posts Page 1 of 1
Return to “Ask IVA Forum and Industry experts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 70 guests