Transfering ownership of a property

The opposite is the case. Judgement mortgages registered prior to 2009 cannot be enforced, those registered after the act can avail of s.31.
 
No, no, just judgement mortgages registered prior to 2009 on registered land where there are co-owners. Sorry, my previous reply was unclear- I was referring to WizardDr.s post and of course the article. It is just an anomaly that was cured by the 2009 act.
 
@vanilla - first we have S30 - and you seemingly disregard this.
All s31 is that it does not make s30 absolute.

So s31 is not a guaranteed result.
 
WizardDr said:
@vanilla - first we have S30 - and you seemingly disregard this.
All s31 is that it does not make s30 absolute.

So s31 is not a guaranteed result.
Click to expand...

I cannot understand your reasoning. S. 30 says that a judgement mortgage does not, in itself, when registered, sever a joint tenancy. However S.31 clearly goes on to give a judgement creditor power to apply for a partition and/or a sale of the property.

Earlier you said a joint tenancy protects against a judgement mortgage. It doesn't.
 
Read it yourself. Power to apply for a partition order.
So what are the circumstances? You are implying it is automatic.

I am saying it isn't and its far from that.

Otherwise where a judgment arose after 1/12/2009 - the judgment creditor would apply and the JT severed. I think that will only happen if there arranged matters to defeat the creditor.

But if a house as purchased bona fide - then a judgment arising later would not succeed.

Otherwise what you are saying is that S30 is merely bureaucracy and that s31 provides a solution.

I am saying it does not, and s31 is an excpetional situation.
 
A judgement mortgage never gave an automatic sale anyway. One always had to apply for a well charging order. That is given at the discretion of the court. Under s.31 you also have to apply to court, the order is given at the discretion of the court.

So where you said-more than once- on this thread that joint tenancy protects against a judgement mortgage, you were incorrect. Now you're backtracking and saying something else.
 
And a judge would not grant an application where there was a priority mortgage in negative equity as the seeker of the well charging order would get zero.

So many JMs just sit there for 12 years until they fall off.
 
Time said:
And a judge would not grant an application where there was a priority mortgage in negative equity as the seeker of the well charging order would get zero.

So many JMs just sit there for 12 years until they fall off.
Click to expand...

And if it were a family home, where there was no ability to pay...well the court has discretion there too. But the point is, there is no automatic protection just because there is a joint tenancy.
 
Transfer of land - joint built house.

Sorry if this has been answered - but can't find it

7 years ago, my (now husband) and i built a house on a site that my husband got transfered from his father. This transfer was all legally done at the time. The mortgage is in both our names.

I have been told that i should get the land transferred into my name too. What is the implication if the land is not transfered into my name ? - I thought as we are married that this was not an issue.

Thanks in advance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top