Security interest: Difference between revisions

Security interest (view source)

Revision as of 17:39, 17 January 2018

301 bytes added , 17 January 2018

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 Legal security interests can (and often do) revert to equitable security interests if they fail for formal or procedural reasons.
+===Types of legal security interest===
+*Properly [[perfect]]ed [[Mortgage]]s
+*[[Lien]]s in all their multifarious manifestations
+*[[Pledge]]s — though under English law a surprisingly rare beast.
 ==={{t|Collateral}}: A {{t|Trick for young players}}===
-“{{c|Collateral}}” can be represented by, but is ''not'' the same as, a {{security interest}}. A [[title transfer collateral arrangement]] where one party delivers collateral to another as credit support in the expectation that at a later time an [[equivalent]] thing will be returned, is ''not'' a legal security interest. It isn't a security interest at all, in fact. This is good, because there is none of this tedious mucking around with equity, formalities, registration and the fear and loathing of transactional lawyers that accompanies them. The worst that can do is issue veiled threats about the risk of [[recharacterisation]], but this is poor form and really rather passive aggressive behaviour, in this correspondent’s opinion.
+“{{t|Collateral}}” can be represented by, but is ''not'' the same as, a {{security interest}}.
+A [[title transfer collateral arrangement]] where one party delivers [[collateral]] to another as credit support in the hopeful expectation that, at a later time, it will get an [[equivalent]] thing back<ref>Such as is witnessed under a {{1994csa}} or a {{GMSLA}} for example.</ref>, is ''not'' a {{tag|legal security}} interest. It isn't a security interest at all, in fact. This is good, because there is none of this tedious mucking around with equity, formalities, registration and the fear and loathing of transactional lawyers that accompanies them. The worst that can do is issue veiled threats about the risk of [[recharacterisation]], but this is poor form and really rather passive aggressive behaviour, in this correspondent’s opinion.
 {{See also}}