We are trying to prevent a situation arising where once the asset is sold, it is too late. You cannot get a charging order against something that does not exist. Although there are people for whom this might not be appropriate, there are also people who are paying off debts who have assets, and it might be appropriate to make sure that if they moved to sell those assets the debt would be recognised. That is all we are seeking to do. It is completely reasonable. Debtors come in all shapes and sizes and have a variety of assets. This is a recognition that such action may be appropriate. It is not about trying to hold something over someone’s head, to use the noble Lord’s terminology, but a recognition for the creditor that when someone is paying regularly, there may be circumstances in which it is appropriate to take that action. The judiciary would consider it appropriately. This is not about trying to sell someone’s family home and force them out—quite the opposite. It is a recognition that when they come to sell something, there is a debt to be realised within that.
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 14 December 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
687 c122GC 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:45:21 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365788
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365788
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365788