Divorce - can I be forced to remain on the mortgage?

Flearoy

Hi

I separated from my wife earlier this year and moved out of the marital home into rented accommodation. We have a mortgage on the old property, about 90% LTV. My name is still on the mortgage, even though I have not contributed to the mortgage for the 6 months or so since we split. Prior to that it was 50-50. I don't want any of the equity. I'm not in a position to get another mortgage myself, having no deposit, and substantial unsecured debt. BUT I don't want to have to remain on the mortgage for the property long term as I don't want to be liable for any shortfall should the house go into negative equity in the future. My ex would like me to remain on the mortgage for the next 2.5 years, which is the time at which the fixed deal ends, so if she remortgages then, no redemption fees would be payable. We have no children. My question is can I be forced to remain on the mortgage? As its stands, my ex cannot afford to remortgage on her own, but I understand that she could remortgage with the backing of her father as guarantor or similar. I'd be happy to agree to to say, staying on the mortgage for another 12 months, but I'd want a definite time by which she'd have to get me off the deeds or have to sell the house if she can't remortgage. Has anyone any experience of this sort of thing? Cheers

findingmyownway

I assume this is a joint mortgage?

Unless you and your wife agree to sell the house (eg, sell your share to her father) then yes you will remain on the mortgage. You can't just walk away from a property when it suits unless someone is willing to buy your share...

DUTR

You will have to seek direction from a solicitor, as if for instance secured loans were taken out on the property then you could be liable, on the converse you would be entitled to any equity in the proprty at present.

moromir

Flearoy wrote: »

My ex would like me to remain on the mortgage for the next 2.5 years, which is the time at which the fixed deal ends, so if she remortgages then, no redemption fees would be payable.

Flearoy wrote: »

I'd be happy to agree to to say, staying on the mortgage for another 12 months, but I'd want a definite time by which she'd have to get me off the deeds or have to sell the house if she can't remortgage.

It sounds like she's suggested a definite time to have you off the mortgage by, and it does seem like a sensible suggestion to wait so that neither of you incur unnecessary fees, unless you were hoping to buy a another property sooner than that?

The real issue here seems to be that she'd like you to stay on for 2.5 years and you're only happy to stay on for 1 year not that she isn't able to suggest a fixed time proposal.

paddy's_mum

Would you be wiser to seek legal advice on this, assuming that at some time in the forseeable future, a divorce will be needed and financial matters are dealt with at that time.

Aytoun27

paddy's_mum wrote: »

Would you be wiser to seek legal advice on this, assuming that at some time in the forseeable future, a divorce will be needed and financial matters are dealt with at that time.

This is good advice, but you might also want to talk to your mortgage lender, as they can veto any arrangement they are not happy with. When my sister and her husband divorced they agreed that his name should be taken off the mortgage. He had moved out of the property two years previously and she had been paying the mortgage ever since. However, the Halifax refused to take his name off on the grounds that her sole income was not, according to their criteria, enough to meet the mortgage payments she had been making for two years!

The legal advice was that their was very little they could do about it. It was a commerical decision by the Halifax and it would be a long and expensive process to challenge it in court. So his name stayed on the mortgage until it was paid off a few years later by my sister.

NAR

You state you are separated but not divorced. When you get divorced there will be a division of the financial assets of the marriage. I would assume it will be at this stage you will have your name removed from the mortgage, as part of the court order.

SS Paddy's mum, didn't see your post before I finished mine (was side-tracked while posting)

Bettie

My solicitor did the paperwork for me but basically it was a transfer of the beneficial interest in the house to myself from my ex partner with me being responsible for mortgage and him being released from any debt that may be incurred in the future. This was done solely because I could not get a mortgage on my own wages. As he never wanted another mortgage it has stayed that way for 17 years with no problems. Also had the endowment done the same way. Next year I have finished the mortgage and then I can take his name off the deeds without the building society having to give their permission.
PS
If you have unsecured debt and don't pay they can still chase your ex for it because you have a house. My document stood up in court but I was told it possibly wouldn't have for the first 7 years.

Flearoy

findingmyownway wrote: »

I assume this is a joint mortgage?

Unless you and your wife agree to sell the house (eg, sell your share to her father) then yes you will remain on the mortgage. You can't just walk away from a property when it suits unless someone is willing to buy your share...

Yes, this is a joint mortgage, and I've just returned the divorce petition my ex served on me to the courts

I think you misunderstand. I'm not 'walking away from the property when it suits', I've been effectively ejected from the home for which I have paid half the mortgage over the years. I'm not interested in getting any of the equity in the property, but I would, quite reasonably, not want to be tied into a mortgage on a property I don't live in for the next 2 and a half years. After that point I would of course be liable for any shortfall should negative equity be an issue. So perhaps my question should be, can I force the sale of the house if my ex is not willing or able to remortgage to get my name off the property, either at the end of the fixed deal or before the deal ends?

LittleMrsThrifty

Flearoy wrote: »

Yes, this is a joint mortgage, and I've just returned the divorce petition my ex served on me to the courts

I think you misunderstand. I'm not 'walking away from the property when it suits', I've been effectively ejected from the home for which I have paid half the mortgage over the years. I'm not interested in getting any of the equity in the property, but I would, quite reasonably, not want to be tied into a mortgage on a property I don't live in for the next 2 and a half years. After that point I would of course be liable for any shortfall should negative equity be an issue. So perhaps my question should be, can I force the sale of the house if my ex is not willing or able to remortgage to get my name off the property, either at the end of the fixed deal or before the deal ends?

I don't think you can force it without a court order which would form part of the divorce. Are you undergoing divorce proceedings? Do you have any children?

Providing there is no court restraining order if the house is legally yours you should be free to go back and live there any time you choose - this might encourage up your ex to consider selling the house or buying it off you etc

clearingout

have you considered mediation? it's far less expensive than using the courts to try and negoiate a settlement and would therefore be of benefit to you both. You do need to consider your ex's financial position vs. your own position and how any children of the marriage are going to be housed. She can't expect to live in a house she can't afford at your expense but that works the other way and yes, you can be forced to stay on the mortgage.

My ex and I had two properties - the family home we could no longer afford so it was sold and the profit went to me. The second property had less equity in it so was to go to him, but he couldn't get me off the mortgage so he had to indemify my being on it, if that makes sense (in other words, he would deal with issues of negative equity or non-payment from the date of the court order). Thankfully, he sold it because I didn't want any financial involvement with him into the future, but I could have been like that for years!