Joint mortgage woes - Can i remove my half of the mortgage?

flea72

GeeJay86 wrote: »

Yeah, it's a fixed rate. If i were to take my name off both the deeds and mortgage (provided the mortgage company allow) and square up all bills, this would lead to the most convenient arrangement with the least financial loss to myself in terms of fees, am I correct? Yes

I understand entirely what you are saying with regard to walking away at financial loss etc. My principal is that they are attempting to save for an unnecessary luxury when there are other alternatives (see above), yet I'll be sacrificing my own personal space (at the moment they're 50/50 here and at hers, giving me lots of space) that I work hard for, and struggle to pay. why did you go into this arrangement? either you could afford to buy a house or you couldnt, there should be no struggle. As for space, the sooner they go on their world tour, the sooner you will have 'your' space and the liklihood of them wanting to return afterwards would be very low, so you could buy your bro out, or sell up then, with no recriminsations.

The rental offer was totally unreasonable (so as to maximise their saving) of £100 inc. bills, so naturally I told them where to go. £100 for one extra person in the house, doesnt sound too bad, i take it she'll be sharing his room, and therefore only using utilities anyway?

My other concern is the legal implications of if their relationship turned sour and she decided to claim an equitable interest/common law partners etc. So even before she would be to move in (had I have agreed to her paying 'rent') surely legal agreements would have to be drawn up beforehand?

No such thing as common law partner, she would have no claim on the house. You could draw up a tenancy agreement, but tbh it wouldnt work as it would always be you against your bro moneywise anyway

However my main query is, what are her plans for her flat? If shes renting it out and it covers her mortgage, then in all reality she could afford to pay more to help out with your bills. But really, why should she help pay 'your' bills. Yes, help towards your brothers as thats her partner and they want to save for a holiday, but she has no reason to give money for your financial gain iyswim

In this situation i would not expect expenses to be split equally 3 ways, which i presume is your feelings on the matter? Tbh, by accepting only money for utilities you could safeguard any reservations you have about her making a claim on the house, as she wouldnt be contributing towards the houses upkeep or mortgage payments

Flea

GeeJay86

Thanks for your reply Flea.

I understand entirely what you are saying, but my opinion is that nobody lives anywhere for free, or indeed the cost of bills alone. The savings for a holiday would be also going into my brothers' pocket.

My argument is i STRUGGLE to pay the mortgage and bills as it is, and indeed for my own space. Why should I have to sacrifice my space and the roof that i pay for over my head, to allow them to financially benefit from her renting our her own 'roof'.

With regard to her flat, it's being rented out for £650pcm.

I really cannot see that I stand nowhere legally, as 50% ownership of the property, as to who can and cannot live under my roof?

GeeJay86

flea72 wrote: »

Why did you go into this arrangement? either you could afford to buy a house or you couldnt, there should be no struggle. As for space, the sooner they go on their world tour, the sooner you will have 'your' space and the liklihood of them wanting to return afterwards would be very low, so you could buy your bro out, or sell up then, with no recriminsations.

The property was initially a purchase between him and his (now ex) girlfriend. They fell out and he asked me the favour of buying her out, thus getting onto the property ladder also. This would have saved him losing thousands in selling up. I knew it'd be difficult for me, but (at the time) I didn't want to see him suffer at the heels of his ex. Since the purchase the cost of gas and electric have increased and thus i have less to live on pcm. I do it, but it's not the most comfortable lifestyle.

I couldn't afford to buy him out on what I earn; he earns significantly more than myself.

lukekelly_2

I think you're going to find the "cost" of accepting this slight and putting up with her living in the house is going to be much much less than the cost of ending your involvement in this property. It sounds like a family argument that has, as family arguments often do, gotten multiplied into a conflict of an entirely different scale to the initial dispute.

GeeJay86

lukekelly wrote: »

I think you're going to find the "cost" of accepting this slight and putting up with her living in the house is going to be much much less than the cost of ending your involvement in this property. It sounds like a family argument that has, as family arguments often do, gotten multiplied into a conflict of an entirely different scale to the initial dispute.

Unfortunately I tend to have to agree with regard to the "cost". But realistically, WHY should I allow him to walk all over me for their little luxury and have to deal with the financial implications and inconvenience? WHY should I have to pay for someone else to live in MY house? Without a shadow of a doubt bills will increase as a result. Surely there's a law stating that we BOTH have to agree to tenancy?

I agree over the scale of it too. He asked, I said no, he carries on regardless. There are plenty of other feasible options for them to save for their luxury, which cause little to no upset for others.

jacobmarley_2

Geejay you might be in danger of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Ask for more rent from her or a three way split on the bills and keep your cool. Don't jeopardise your future financial independence or your relationship with your brother over this woman.

Your brother is in the 'love fog' and can't see past her at the moment. Chances are they'll probably split in a year - so don't fall out with your brother, try to bite your lip.

I think you should ask for more money and make it understood that at times you will need your own space. I agree with you, you didn't sign up to sharing your space with this woman.

When your brother goes travelling, maybe you can rent out his room to help with costs?

jacobmarley_2

In addition, is there a family member or close friend that you both respect who can be brought in to mediate between you and your brother? Keep the woman out of it and the 3 of you get together and put your points across?

This can help a lot in family feuds.

lukekelly_2

GeeJay86 wrote: »

Unfortunately I tend to have to agree with regard to the "cost". But realistically, WHY should I allow him to walk all over me for their little luxury and have to deal with the financial implications and inconvenience? WHY should I have to pay for someone else to live in MY house? Without a shadow of a doubt bills will increase as a result. Surely there's a law stating that we BOTH have to agree to tenancy?

You write "but realistically" but you really mean "but morally". The realistic stance, possibly sadly for you, is that you may have to live with them both with her contributing a small amount to the cost of running the house. If you can do so whilst getting on reasonably with them both it'd make all of your lives much more pleasant. It really does sound like your anger has built up to a point where you're going to cost yourself a huge amount of money, a huge amount of stress and what presumably has been a very important relationship with your brother over this. I know you feel like you've been badly treated here, but sometimes in life you just have to bear it.

On the more general point, I've seen plenty of less than amicable separations where it's taken years to transfer the house to one partner and where the worse thing that could possibly have happened is that one bitter ex could control who entered the house being lived in by other partner!