Can you remove yourself from a mortgage?

McTaggus · 16 May 2017 at 10:46AM

Hi There,

I wonder if you might all be able to help.... a slightly convoluted question, and one which I'm not sure I'm asking in the right forum so please do redirect me if so!

My husband has been divorced from his ex-wife for over 8 years, but remains named on the mortgage of the previous family home. He gave her full control of the equity of the house as part of their settlement, and is no longer named on the house deeds but remains obligated under the mortgage. The ex-wife and the children have moved out of the house to live elsewhere with her new partner, and is now currently letting the house. The rent more than covers the mortgage by a substantial sum and her affordability criteria for maintaining the mortgage under a sole name should be more than covered.

The question is whether it is possible to remove someone's name from a mortgage, and whether this is something that can be forced to happen - i.e. without agreement from the ex-wife. Please note, he is not seeking any kind of variation of payments (including continued payment towards the mortgage as a part of maintenance agreed), but simply a removal of his name from the mortgage. And before you ask, no, she wouldn't simply agree to removing his name from the mortgage..... tried that one already

Many thanks in advance of any help you might be able to lend!!!

McTaggus

:beer:

AnotherJoe · 16 May 2017 at 11:00AM

No you cannot. Otherwise you could just say "nah thanks Nationwide be seeing ya" and they'd be stuffed.
He'll have to threaten (and maybe initiate) legal action.
However ...... is he a party to the BTL agreement? Does the lender know its being let? If he didnt agree to it, then mentioning it might be necessary to inform the society, and cutting off that line of finance by informing the building society, unless they do agree to his removal, could be a ploy?

McTaggus · 16 May 2017 at 11:32AM

Thank you very much for the response, it's greatly appreciated and I think we both thought that would likely be the case without some form of legal action to force the situation. He is not, however, party to the BTL agreement, and no idea whether the lender knows its being let (or indeed if the mortgage terms allow for it to be let). I'll ask him to check whether the mortgage allows the property to be let as I guess that raises the concern that if it is being let without the mortgage provider being aware, then will that create some form of risk of liability / issue for him in the future....

Thank you again for your quick help and advice

AnotherJoe · 16 May 2017 at 12:02PM

If he has no idea whether the lender knows its let, then AFAICS the implication can only be that either than the ex didnt ask (so they dont know), or the ex did ask, and forged his signature (fraud), as you'd need all parties to the mortgage to agree.

So either way, ex would not seem to be in a good position.

MEM62 · 16 May 2017 at 12:02PM

Two ways to exit a mortgage, pay back the amount borrowed to the lender or someone else takes over your liability - in this case the Ex.

I suggest that your husband informs the lender that the house is being let. If his ex will not be reasonable he might also want to have a word with HMRC in respect of any income tax that is due on the rent that is being received. Purely to ensure that he has no liability, of course. :-)

aneary · 16 May 2017 at 12:10PM

I would have a chat rather than resort to threats children are involved and if daddy threatens mummy that won't go down too well.

Was there a legal financial settlement? What conditions were in it?

AnotherJoe · 16 May 2017 at 12:28PM

aneary wrote: »

I would have a chat rather than resort to threats children are involved and if daddy threatens mummy that won't go down too well.

I agree, start with a "friendly" chat, point out that since he doesn't wish to be involved with BTL he wants to be removed from the mortgage. Very nicely.

And also point out in the nicest way that if she doesn't agree to that he'll have to ask the lender what his legal position is regards this mortgage as he's equally involved, and presumably she wont want him letting the lender know the current position.

If he "goes nuclear" immediately by letting HMRC and lender know, he's got no leverage and potentially he's opening himself up to a situation whereby worst case mortgage could be withdrawn and him with liability for paying mortgage if she stops because not allowed to rent.

McTaggus · 16 May 2017 at 2:53PM

Thank you for all of your responses - it's been really helpful and we both really appreciate it!

We have no intention of hitting the nuclear button, as tempting as it sometimes feels!

Unfortunately, I don't think a "friendly" conversation is a real option either, quite simply because even saying things very, very nicely tends to result in us not then seeing the kids for a month and tirades of abuse and threats - and she won't see there's any benefit whatsoever with releasing hubby from the mortgage, and will happily maintain the status quo just out of spite.

Hubby is also fairly certain he had to sign something that gave her full control over the mortgage and that discussions and changes to the mortgage could occur without his written agreement..... if that's the case, it's possible that she has informed / gained consent to let without anyone having to tell him - who knows!

There is a financial settlement - plus a variation, both of which were resolved at FDR. She should aim to release him, but if it's not possible, then she should aim to release him by the time the youngest is 18. The house therefore being preserved for her and the children to live in (which they aren't). He has no charge over the property whatsoever.

I guess there's not much he can do about the situation without a) starting legal action or b) starting World War III (which would of course follow option a anyway) and I don't think we have enough emotional energy to deal with that yet again! :P

Again, thanks to you all for the responses - we feel a lot more informed, if not necessarily more empowered!!!

aneary · 16 May 2017 at 3:00PM

Pop into a local family solicitor (not a property one) with the final settlement.

Most will give you half and hour fee and be able to advise if there is anything that can be done.

Also it might be worth discussing access if the children are being used as a weapon

Once you have this information you can then discuss calmly with her the options, probably just your husband and not you as well.

McTaggus · 16 May 2017 at 3:55PM

No worries on the conversation front! I have no desire to get involved in their ex-marital affairs! :rotfl: Have only posted here today at hubby's personal request, as he knows that I have come here before to receive excellent advice from wonderful forumites like yourselves - which I do also try to give back to others when I can!

Thank you!! :beer:

kingstreet · 16 May 2017 at 5:06PM

Being a party only to a mortgage doesn't leave you exposed to the SDLT surcharge and I've seen plenty of cases where someone is left exposed to the mortgage liability and removed from the ownership.

Therefore, you may be able to relinquish your legal and beneficial ownership of the property while remaining liable for the mortgage and this will leave you without the SDLT surcharge liability.

You'll need the lender to agree and legal advice as, to be fair, you would have to be certifiable to accept liability for a mortgage where you derive no benefit of ownership.

It still happens though, in matrimonial cases.

Can you remove yourself from a mortgage?

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free