Land Registry check that P2P Platform has a charge

There are in fact a few times where SS have not got the procedural matters right.

No. Nor is there any implicit proof that all borrowers really exist.

One way that insider fraud has happened in the credit world is employees creating fake customers and sending them money in a wide range of ways. Insider fraud can be troublesome and it is always possible that it might be noticed by external checks before internal ones, if there is a method available to carry out those checks. The Land Registry checks are one potential avenue to do that.

Besides that, mistakes happen and it's always possible that someday a check will catch a glitch of some sort.

None of this requires any belief that a platform is fraudulent, just acceptance of the possibility that a platform could be defrauded or the victim of other criminal acts or just could make mistakes sometimes.

Maybe a little to worry about. Is it right that a second charge holder can force the sale of the asset (but only getting anything left after the first charge holder is paid in full)? This could mean a lengthy delay and even a loss to SS lenders. Administrators/Liquidators/Receivers charge eye watering fees.

Depends on whether its an interim or final charging order. locutus - was there any wording that you saw that would imply it was one or the other ?

This CAB page provides a load of background on charging orders : www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/action-your-creditor-can-take/charging-orders/

Thanks locutus

The 2nd charge is listed as "UNILATERAL NOTICE in respect of an interim charging order"  so there is a chance it will be settled before it becomes a final charging order.   The beneficiary of the charging order is listed as a firm of planning consultants, indeed the very firm I've employed to assist me and they seem a competent and professional outfit to me. Payment for my project is split into 3 stage payments, a small upfront deposit, 67% on submission of the planning application (or appeal) balance on the result of planning (or appeal) being declared which struck me as very reasonable.

Even if it becomes final, they would still need a court order to force a sale, but I think it fair to assume that as the beneficiary is a professional services company they will expect payment, and will work their way through the legal steps to achieve it.

From my stides over three decades ago I understood that all Land in England and Wales was required to be registered if it changed hands subsequent to the enactment of the Land Registration Act 1925.  Now of course there may be exceptions that didn't comply, or instances where there has been a change of tenure that were not registerable, but I would imagine that if anyone was seeking to put up land as security the first thing any lender would do is insist that it be registered.  There used to be a separate Land Charges Registry to allow registration of charges on unregistered land but I believe that has been incorporated as a department within the Land Registry. 

By area quite a lot of land is still unregistered but generally that is owned by the Crown or institutions such as the Church of England, however I would imagine in at least those two cases I doubt they are trying to raise funds from P2P institutions using that land as security.