Charge on my property

[springydaffs]

The time has come to pay the charge put on my property as part of the divorce settlement ie got the house until youngest finished first degree. The time has come to sell and pay up.

Is the charge (35%) of the sale price? Or 35% of the equity?

If the former I'm fucked

[DelphiniumBlue]

It should specify in the Charge itself.

[springydaffs]

Where would I find details of the charge? Is it registered somewhere?

I'm sorry to say the paperwork (mountains of - very protracted divorce) is in the garage. Mouldy or eaten by mice by now..

[CotswoldStrife]

Land Registry, in that case.

[springydaffs]

I've looked on the site and can't make any sense of it. What do I click?

[Collaborate]

I agree with Familylawsolicitor - get the court order first. Will either be a straight forward 35% of equity, or 35% of gross proceeds of sale, or 35% of equity with you to get credit for any amount by which you've reduced the mortgage debt.

[Cabrinha]

Mine is 30% of net proceeds of sale (net as specifies less estate agent cost of selling)

This is not detailed on the title deed from LR - only the date and my name and the fact that I have a charge.

[springydaffs]

Thanks for info all. Still haven't braved the dreaded garage but your info has been helpful. Many thanks.

[HereIAm20]

It is usually a % of equity less any selling costs eg agents, solicitors and sometimes it is a % of the equity at the time of divorce (in which case order will state this) and if not stated equity at time of sale less selling costs.

[springydaffs]

Well I've found it and it's 35% of sale price.

Disaster, frankly.

[springydaffs]

I knew I had an extremely crap settlement (all that time ago) but this is another blow (all that time hence).

[Collaborate]

Presumably at the time of the divorce the mortgage was for 30% of the value of the property?

[hoddtastic]

can you revisit it? the settlement? how long ago was divorce?

[Cabrinha]

My situation was very much as Collaborate describes. We had a mortgage for 1/3 of the sale value - owned 2/3. So we agreed I would take my 1/3 of sale value 9 years later. He's paying off the mortgage on the other 1/3, he gets the benefit of that.

I don't see why there would be scope to revisit it - that's the point of a legally binding charge.

But definitely worth posting the exact wording - fingers crossed for you

[springydaffs]

It's difficult to post without being too identifying. I always post under the same name throughout the board.

He got a very good deal for a variety of reasons. The female judge made no secret she found dazzlingly charming (re abuser) him utterly adorable - what with his identifiable old school tie and all. He also had a health problem that would have progressed. As it was he left the planet before it could develop.

The divorce was about 10 or so years ago. The wording is:

'... the Respondent shall execute a legal charge over the property in favour of the Applicant for 35% of the selling price of the property.'

[springydaffs]

Conversely, about 5 years ago I contacted the Legal Services Commission for details of the charge. They wrote back to say they could find no charge on my property. Re:

'I have checked our records and can find no charges registered against your property by the Commission at this time.'

[SleepFreeZone]

So your ex husband has passed away? Who would be benefitting from this charge against the house? Is there any chance you could sit and wait for someone to force your have?

[SleepFreeZone]

*hand

[springydaffs]

I've already alerted the beneficiaries that it's in the offing.

[springydaffs]

Who is 'they' re 'they may come back in the future to pursue'

[Collaborate]

For those questioning why OP doesn't benefit from reducing the mortgage debt: She does!

The ex gets 35% of the sale price. She gets the other 65%. with that she must repay the mortgage. If the mortgage has been reduced since the order was made, she'd get the benefit of it. If she'd allowed arrears to accrue she'd be responsible for them.

Not a chance I'm afraid of getting the order set aside if he's now dead. The only way you'd be able to get it set aside would be if it was allocated to him because of need (so not being awarded his pre-existing half share), he dies almost straight after the order is made, it wasn't contemplated that he would die so soon, and you, without delay, apply to set aside the order. None of these factors appear to be present, when you'd need all of them to stand even a small chance.

You haven't said that he is dead, but in the even he's not an astronaut, the executors or administrators of his estate will be able to enforce the charge. If no one contacts you about it, the charge will remain until sold,a t which point you'd have to find out who has the power to remove the charge. IMO better sorted out now.

[Dogolphin]

Would it be your son who would inherit?