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

LJM

do you have any childrent to consider in this ? you didnt say in your first post

System

LJM wrote: »

do you have any childrent to consider in this ? you didnt say in your first post

No children as per first post

Flearoy wrote: »

We have no children.

zaksmum

What would you do if your ex fancied walking away too, and the house gets repossessed and sold at auction and you get chased up for the shortfall?

cabbage

a joint mortgage is known as a joint and several debt. If one doesn't pay the creditor can chase the other party for the whole of the debt.

while you are on the mortgage you are jointly and severally responsible for paying it. Informally, you may have an agreement with your ex but legally its a different matter. If she decides not to pay, they will come after you for the whole thing so there is more at stake.

Ask the lender if they are willing to transfer the mortgage into hers and possibly her father's name thereby releasing you. She would have to pay fees similar to a remortgage - its called a transfer of equity or she can wait and simply remortgage but I think waiting is the crux of the matter to you.

paddedjohn

I had a similar problem a few years ago after my divorce. Basically the answer is no, unless you can find someone else to go guarantor for your ex then the bank wont let you off the mortgage. They would much rather have two people to chase if things go pear shaped.

clearingout

I don't believe it's about having two people to chase, it's about seemingly responsible lending and the equations used to work out if a person(s) can afford the loan that they are taking out. Someone earning £25k, for example, shouldn't be able to take out a mortage of £150k but a couple earning £75k between them and who have no other debt, shouldn't struggle with a mortgage of £150k. The mortgage company will not logically put the mortgage into the sole name of the half earning £25k because it is likely they will get into trouble making the repayments. That's hassle for the mortgage company, hassle for the person and ultimately, when it ends up in court as a repossession, a judge isn't going to be amused with a mortgage company taking advantage of someone's financial vulnerablity as a result of their separation.

You take a mortgage on, you're doing it for 25 years or however long you negoiate. Like you, they can't take into account what might happen 18 years down the line. Things change - we all have to face up to our responsiblities as adults and deal with them. Sometimes this means we get the raw end of the deal. But that's what being an adult and facing your responsiblities is all about.

Valli

NAR wrote: »

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)

Not always - although my ex and I divorced in 2004, the year we separated, we were unable (due to non-permanent job contracts & redundancy) to reach a financial settlement - these two issues can be dealt with separately. Much as in the OPs case though, I paid the mortgage - but there had to be a lot of trust because my ex would have been liable had I failed to make payments.

Flearoy

Hi all

My posts haven't been really clear enough judging by some of your responses, which are appreciated all the same.

Just to clarify the situation. I am a joint mortage holder on my former marital home. There is about 10-15% equity in the property at present. My ex-wife to be has been paying the mortgage on her own since I moved out about 5 months ago and I now rent a property of my own. This agreement was satisfactory to both parties at the time. We are going through a divorce now. Fortunately there are no children involved.

My ex earns slightly more than me, and is able pay the mortgage, though she would not be able to get a mortgage of that size on her own income. Due to the size of the mortgage she would not be able to remortgage on her own, but with family backing, she would be able to do so, and thereby release me from the mortgage. Any equity in the house I have agreed should go to her, so I have nothing to gain from any sale of the house. I have walked away with virtually nothing from the house either, though I have about 19k of unsecured debt, a substantial part of which was for both our purposes. I am paying this off on my own without complaint.

I'm quite keen not to force the sale of the house to pay off the mortgage as I feel it would be a little spiteful to do so to get me off the mortgage. I fully understand that the mortgage company will hold me jointly responsible for any shortfall in the event of arrears or negative equity. If my ex wanted to 'walk away', as asked by one poster, I would be happy to live in the house and pay the mortgage myself, but this is not what she wants to happen. There is the possibility of her remortgaging with family backing, but she wants me to stay on the mortgage, though without me contributing to it, for the next 2.5 years until the fixed deal ends.

My concern, apart from the risk of house prices going into negative equity and me being responsible for any shortfall at the end of the deal, is would I be able to force the sale of the house at the end of the 2.5 year fixed deal is my ex was unwilling or unable to remortgage? I would be willing to consider accepting this proposal if I was sure that at the end of the deal I could legally force the sale, or for her to remortgage, to remove me from the mortgage and thereby end our financial association. I don't wish her any ill will, but I don't want my credit worthiness propping up her ability to get an outsize mortgage for ever, as I'd like to get a mortgage of my own one day.

In light of these circumstances, would it seem likely that a court would order me to remain on the mortgage indefinitely?

Not that it really matters, please don't judge. I didn't ask for a divorce and am still on excellent terms with my ex's family. I'm keen to help her as much as I can but I have my own future financial security to think about now.

Cheers

Lee

findingmyownway

Flearoy wrote: »

Hi all

Just to clarify the situation. I am a joint mortage holder on my former marital home. There is about 10-15% equity in the property at present. My ex-wife to be has been paying the mortgage on her own since I moved out about 5 months ago and I now rent a property of my own. This agreement was satisfactory to both parties at the time. We are going through a divorce now. Fortunately there are no children involved.

My ex earns slightly more than me, and is able pay the mortgage, though she would not be able to get a mortgage of that size on her own income. Due to the size of the mortgage she would not be able to remortgage on her own, but with family backing, she would be able to do so, and thereby release me from the mortgage. Any equity in the house I have agreed should go to her, so I have nothing to gain from any sale of the house. I have walked away with virtually nothing from the house either, though I have about 19k of unsecured debt, a substantial part of which was for both our purposes. I am paying this off on my own without complaint.

I'm quite keen not to force the sale of the house to pay off the mortgage as I feel it would be a little spiteful to do so to get me off the mortgage. I fully understand that the mortgage company will hold me jointly responsible for any shortfall in the event of arrears or negative equity. If my ex wanted to 'walk away', as asked by one poster, I would be happy to live in the house and pay the mortgage myself, but this is not what she wants to happen. There is the possibility of her remortgaging with family backing, but she wants me to stay on the mortgage, though without me contributing to it, for the next 2.5 years until the fixed deal ends.

My concern, apart from the risk of house prices going into negative equity and me being responsible for any shortfall at the end of the deal, is would I be able to force the sale of the house at the end of the 2.5 year fixed deal is my ex was unwilling or unable to remortgage? I would be willing to consider accepting this proposal if I was sure that at the end of the deal I could legally force the sale, or for her to remortgage, to remove me from the mortgage and thereby end our financial association. I don't wish her any ill will, but I don't want my credit worthiness propping up her ability to get an outsize mortgage for ever, as I'd like to get a mortgage of my own one day.

No-one is here to judge Lee, apologies if thats the way it has come accross.

I'm still a bit confused though... if your wife wants to keep the house, and is (naturally!) happy to keep the current equity for herself, why isn't she happy with remortaging with her Dad and releasing you from it?

A lot can happen in 2.5 years... you might want to buy yourself a new place before then. If you're seriously signing away any interest in the profit/loss now, then that should be formalised by you 'selling' your share. Otherwise your available credit from the bank is eaten up with no benefit to you, and the risk of being chased for arrears, negative equity etc.

I'd tell your wife to stop being so flaming greedy... she can have the 10% equity now by releasing you from the mortgage OR you stay on the mortgage and are eligible for half the equity in 2.5 years (or half the negative equity obviously)

I think the short answer to your question would be 'no', you couldn't force her to sell the house, now or in the future. As joint mortgage holders it has to be a joint decision (or a court's).

Flearoy

findingmyownway wrote: »

No-one is here to judge Lee, apologies if thats the way it has come accross.

I'm still a bit confused though... if your wife wants to keep the house, and is (naturally!) happy to keep the current equity for herself, why isn't she happy with remortaging with her Dad and releasing you from it?

A lot can happen in 2.5 years... you might want to buy yourself a new place before then. If you're seriously signing away any interest in the profit/loss now, then that should be formalised by you 'selling' your share. Otherwise your available credit from the bank is eaten up with no benefit to you, and the risk of being chased for arrears, negative equity etc.

I'd tell your wife to stop being so flaming greedy... she can have the 10% equity now by releasing you from the mortgage OR you stay on the mortgage and are eligible for half the equity in 2.5 years (or half the negative equity obviously)

I think the short answer to your question would be 'no', you couldn't force her to sell the house, now or in the future. As joint mortgage holders it has to be a joint decision (or a court's).

Thanks for this findingmyownway, this is a really good post and is much appreciated. The reason for my ex's reluctance to remortgage now is that with our mortgage deal, to remortgage before the end of the deal will incur a fee of 1% of the balance for every year left to go. At present, with 2.5 years to go that would be either £4500 or £3000 if they round to 3 or 2 years respectively! As my ex put additional money into the renovations on the property that she got from an inheritance, I feel it proper that she be entitled to more than 50% of the equity, hence my lack of interest in the equity. With property prices as they are, there wouldn't be much from the equity left for me. That said, if values rise again (ha!) it would seem fair for me to start getting a look in on the equity, of course on a 'pro rata' basis to take into account who paid what towards the mortgage.

Sorry for being a bit defensive, I really appreciate the advice. I think your suggestions are right!

As it happens, I'm going to see a solicitor tomorrow to discuss the situation. It's expensive after the first half hour free consultation, but I feel it a worthwhile investment.

Thanks again!