Talk

Advanced search

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Restriction on my deeds after divorce

(6 Posts)
BettyBloomfield Wed 22-Jun-11 07:41:02

Divorced over a year ago and house transferred to me under sealed consent order..^The Respondent do transfer to the Petitioner all his legal estate and beneficial interest with full title guarantee in the former matrimonial home^

I've only just managed to get the deeds transferred into my name as he has refused to sign the TR1 until now. (Sols and court involved to get here)

He has meanwhile gone bankrupt so the 50% of the equity that he was getting is now owed to the receiver. pay the Respondent a lump sum of £xxxxx or 50% of the equity of the property whichever is the lesser amount, once the mortgage has been discharged

No charge has been placed upon the house but the deed transfer does refer to the above court order.

*My sol has just sent me this regarding the deed transfer*- there is a restriction registered from when you held the property as tenants in common. (The tenancy may have been severed when divorce proceedings were commenced or you may have held the property in equal shares from when you first purchased) The transfer did not remove this. The Land Registry require evidence that the equitable interest has also passed to you. The consent order of course does not deal with this and mentions the security of the second charge. It may be that the restriction will need to stay in place until the lump sum has been paid by you to Mr AH or to his Receiver, the acknowledgement of that sum will be the equitable interest having been dealt with. We could then remove the restriction. Basically the Restriction will be left in place as an indication that this is a trust property and the trust has not come to an end. In the event of a sale, you need to appoint a new trustee to deal with the equitable interest (or Mr AH/Receiver could join in the transfer to acknowledge receipt of the sale monies) The restriction would automatically be discharged. So, although the second charge has not been registered, Mr AH still has a protection from this Restriction.

Can anyone interpret this for me? Am I correct in thinking that if I come to sell I'd need ex or receivers signature before I could move?

The charge was supposed to last until youngest is 16. I'm slightly concerned that the receiver will demand interest on this ? Can he do this even though the order doesn't allow this?

(Sorry it's long)

Collaborate Wed 22-Jun-11 09:04:06

Can't your solicitor explain?

FamilySolicitor Wed 22-Jun-11 14:09:29

Bankruptcy and its impact on court orders particularly the type of order you are referring to is a really complex area. You need to speak to your solicitor.

BettyBloomfield Wed 22-Jun-11 19:27:21

Collaborate - that was their explanation confused

I haven't found this sol helpful at any point during my relationship and we have severed the relationship.

Asking them to explain this paragraph would cost me £200 and they probably would introduce a new ambiguity with whatever they said

Collaborate Wed 22-Jun-11 23:41:47

As Familysolicitor posts, it's a complex area, so you'd expect it would cost. There's lots to take on board.

iheartdusty Fri 24-Jun-11 15:07:24

I can't add anything to the advice above, but here's a thought - sometimes the Official Receiver is willing to do a deal with the ex-spouse of the bankrupt, and s/he might agree to sell you DH's interest in the house at a knock-down price. If you could afford it, you might end up with 100% of the house and no charge. (I guess if you could afford to buy him out at full value, you would have done so in the divorce anyway).

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now