Another OH with debts

RAS

ladybez.

The work sucker screams at me.

There are whole threads about these fee-charging companies and there antics. The OFT as put out a formal warning about them. They charge £200ish per acount, which is quite a lot in OH's case and achieve very little.

More sensibly, if HE reads up on the CCA thread and sends the letter to each creditor, the cost is £1 plus the price of a registered letter.

Even more importantly, if he scans his default notices (assuming he has them), and posts them up,they may be illegal as well.

Neither of these wipe out the debt, he will still be wrecking his credit rating long -term, and with the joint mortgage, yours by association, but the debts become unenforceable in the courts. That means he can pay or not pay or pay what he can afford and they can do nothing more than mark the default.

ladybez

Paul, OH was told that if the claim was sucessful then the lender/cc company would be charged!! which means they would only persue if they were confident of winning. Interestingly enough, he was also told that this course of action would not affect his credit rating and whilst fo0r someone with a very poor credit history this may be true OH's is not that bad. Yes payments have been persistantly late but only an odd one missed. Morally I find it hard to suport this kind of action in his case as he has spent the money and (just about) has the means to repay it. Also, knowing him, he won't do anything about it anyway!! and I'm not going to either!!

Dinah93

If he was told these things I would be EXTREMELY wary, as basically it sounds like a scam. I can not think of any way his credit rating wouldn't be affected, as the debt would still be there if they succeeded, just unenforcable.

RAS

ladybez wrote: »

Morally I find it hard to suport this kind of action in his case as he has spent the money and (just about) has the means to repay it. Also, knowing him, he won't do anything about it anyway!! and I'm not going to either!!

Irrespective of the morals this may long-term be the only way to prevent companies seeking CCJs and inevitably charging orders to swecure his debt on your jointly owned house.

As we all explain (except the company of course) this does not wipe out the debt, it merely makes it impossible for the creditors to obtain CCJs and charging orders.

f you knew which had legal documentation and which had not, he would have a better idea of which to prioritise in terms of debt payments.

angelicmary85

Hi Ladybez,

Is there any chance that he may sign the house over to you?

Then if the situation gets any worse then at least your children's home is secure. I know that if I was your OH, then I'd at least want my kids to have a home.

I'm not going to pretend to understand how you're feeling as I honestly have no idea but you seem like a very srong lady!!

ladybez

Thans for the replies, sorry am having a bit of a down day. During a previous "discussion" (argument in my eyes) he did say he would sighn it over for 1/2 the current market value which would be about 65K which he could then use to repay some of his debts. It seemed tantamount to me paying them for him, and although I would be able to raise that sort of money I am reluctant to do so. Just finding it hard to think straight at present

Paulgonnabedebtfree

Dare I say that now he realises that you are moving away from enabling him, he is now looking for a part of the legal system to do so.
My concern is that he is only dealing witrh symptoms rather than the core problem - whatever that might be.
Yes, I do dare say it because that's honestly how I see it.
You could say it's none of my business but if something is posted on an open forum, it is reasonable for a whole range of responses to be posted - including one like mine.
I hope you find resolution. Personally, I would feel very wobbly about releasing his share of the equity. Just my opinion. Maybe I have too many of them.

angelicmary85

ladybez wrote: »

Thans for the replies, sorry am having a bit of a down day. During a previous "discussion" (argument in my eyes) he did say he would sighn it over for 1/2 the current market value which would be about 65K which he could then use to repay some of his debts. It seemed tantamount to me paying them for him, and although I would be able to raise that sort of money I am reluctant to do so. Just finding it hard to think straight at present

Ladybez,

I meant can he not just give you the whole house instead of 'releasing equity'?

Would it not be safer for you to have the whole house in your name so no-one can touch as it would be soley in your name?

Not really sure if it would work but it might be worth considering

RAS

ladybez wrote: »

Thans for the replies, sorry am having a bit of a down day. During a previous "discussion" (argument in my eyes) he did say he would sighn it over for 1/2 the current market value which would be about 65K which he could then use to repay some of his debts. It seemed tantamount to me paying them for him, and although I would be able to raise that sort of money I am reluctant to do so. Just finding it hard to think straight at present

No. He has totally failed to provide for his children for years and has not even effectively contributed to the mortgage for ages. If this hit the divorce court no way would he would get that sort of settlement. it could be anything from 10-30% but no way 50%. And then probably when the youngest child reached maturity.

Dinah93

He's not entitled to half the house if you were to split up, yet while you are together his creditors can come after all of it, how messed up is that?!