Joint owners - relationship breakdown - what are my rights?

cherrybelle

Hi all,

I have a joint mortgage with my ex. It's an interest only mortgage, and he put down the deposit. I have paid for things such as furniture, home improvements, decking etc.
We haven't signed a declaration of trust in regards to deposit. Both our names are on mortgage, land registery etc.

The house is currently in negative equity.

We split back in 2009, I moved out but carried on paying mortgage for about a year before I stopped. He now pays the whole amount himself, as well as maintenance charges and household bills.

We both want my name taken off the mortgage but think the bank may not agree as his income is too low. (we don't know, just basing this on calculations). I am obviously worried that if we can't take my name off, I will also still be responsible for the property; ie if my ex stops paying, I will have to pay, even though I do not live at the property.
Also, if my name stays on the mortgage and the house goes up in value, I am entitled to a 50/50 split of any profit (after his deposit is deducted etc).

Now the tricky bit - I spoke to a solicitor that say that my ex is in a bit of a sticky situation since we did not sign a declaration of trust.
The solicitor also said that I am entitled to a 50/50 share of any profit. She said I am also legally entitled to live at the property - I was more or less forced to move out.
Now my ex's family are telling me that the best thing for us is to keep my name on the mortgage, but that there is NOTHING financially in it for me, now or in the future. From the research I have done, and from speaking to solicitors, this isn't true but I just want to be 100% sure.

Can anyone comment and/or clarify exactly where I stand in regards to the house I own. If my name has to stay on the mortgage in order for my ex to keep the house, surely I should be entitled to any profit? It is not like I didn't want to stay in the house - I was pretty much asked not to come back. Even though I didn't put down a deposit, the house is still a life investment of mine, and we actually NEEDED both names on it to get the mortgage in the first place. I don't understand how they are acting as if he owns it more than I do, just because he is living there.

This is what my ex's family just told me in an e-mail. Are they right, or is my solicitor right? (my ex's family claim they got this info from their solicitor)

''From our extensive research into the matter we understand the legal situation as: If a property is owned jointly by a non-married couple, for as long as both parties pay 50% of the mortgage each will have a right to a proportion of any increase in value during this period, after deduction of initial deposits, capital repayments and improvements. In your case the situation is different, as during the time that you have both paid the mortgage the property has fallen (not risen) in value. Therefore, to determine wether you are owed any money from the property the point upon which you stopped paying the mortgage is significant.
''

Please shed some light!

haras_nosirrah

If the property is in negative equity then if you come off the mortgage your ex's family would be well within their right to make you pay off half the negative equity and fees from the sale of the property. As your ex is paying interest only you are effectively renting from the bank.

If he cannot take on the mortgage alone and you can't find someone to replace you then legally you are both jointly and serverally liable for the loan. That means if he stops paying both your credit reports will be trashed and the bank will chase you. You are better off sorthing this out amicably between you to limit the costs to all involved.

opinions4u

Ultimately the solicitors are going to make hay while the sun shines - ideally you and your ex would be best thrashing out a palatable agreement and getting the legal people to draw up the documents to confirm things. Your biggest problem will be that you are still named on the mortgage. While that continues you are liable for the whole of the mortgage payment, as is your ex. The likelihood of getting off the mortgage while there is negative equity is slim, made slimmer still by his income being limited.

The solicitor also said that I am entitled to a 50/50 share of any profit

The house is currently in negative equity

I assume that your solicitor has also pointed out that at this point in time you are liable for a 50% contribution towards clearing the negative equity. Don't assume that house prices are going to rise in the next couple of years.

Solicitors, some negotiation, an attempt to find a compromise and meeting the demands of the mortgage lender. It's a difficult ride!

beecher2

You should pay half of the negative equity if you want your name off the mortgage. Thinking in terms of profit doesn't make any sense - there is no profit, only debt. If you are thinking of it as a life investment, you need to pay your half of the mortgage, and accept the two of you will be tied financially for a long time. Might make more sense to take the hit financially, sell up, half the negative equity (if the lender allows you to sell for less than the mortgage) and move on.

beecher2

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/1849427

This has been dragging on for nearly 2 years now and it seems that nothing has changed in that time.

cherrybelle

Yes exactly - it has been dragging on, it's doing my head in, and the only reason things are moving forward is because my ex's sister has decided to deal with it instead of my ex (who ignores it). I have been trying to get this thing moving for 2 years. No kidding. I have been unemployed and therefor struggling to do ANYTHING financially. I'm not that better off now, but choose to pay a solicitor to actually move this forward once and for all.

I am aware that the house is in negative equity and that if we sold it we'd end up in debt. Which is why I understand my name might have to stay on the mortgage for the time being.
I have considered many options, I even have gotten used to the idea of having to go bankrupt in the event of us having to sell the house.

I guess what I want to know is, if my name has to stay on the mortgage (to avoid selling the place), what are my rights? Because it sounds as if (according to my ex's family) that my name would have to stay, but only for the sake of keeping the house - all future profit would go to my ex. Surely that is not the case when we are joint owners - if my ex wouldn't be able to afford the mortgage then I'd have to pay it.
They have also asked me to sign a document stating that I am giving away my rights to the house and any future profit. I will obviously not sign that, and my solicitor has strongly advised me not to sign anything either.
Say for example we have made a profit on the house, how would that be shared?

Sorry if this is annoying for those of you that has replied to my previous post. I am just trying to broaden my research so I totally know the score.

CLAPTON

has your ex actually asked the mortgage company if he can take on the whole mortgage?

cherrybelle

opinions4u wrote: »

Every situation is different. Nobody on a message board can answer the questions with any degree of accuracy. It may be frustrating for you, but why do you think anybody other than your solicitor can help you with this?

Because that's what this forum is for! Asking for advise. I will ask all of the above next time I see my solicitor but since I received the email today I wanted to see if anyone here was able to shed some light in the meantime.

cherrybelle

CLAPTON wrote: »

has your ex actually asked the mortgage company if he can take on the whole mortgage?

Not as far as I know. I have called the mortgage company and have explained the situation to them, but they said that he needs to call himself if he wants to apply to have his name only on the loan.

CLAPTON

cherrybelle wrote: »

Not as far as I know. I have called the mortgage company and have explained the situation to them, but they said that he needs to call himself if he wants to apply to have his name only on the loan.

so that must be the first step

getmore4less

This is the way I see these cases and would use this as the argument to justify any proffit or loss.


You own a house joint but not 50:50.

When you bought(include costs to get total who paid them)
You own 1/2 the mortgage worth
EX owns 1/2 the mortgages worth + deposit

work out %ages from what ws put in.

Now you need an adjustment for the investements
either uplift in value(not cost) and rework the %
or easier is if you paid is an interest free loan to EX baedo nthe % owned at start.


Now moving forward you stopped paying which s a bit naughty.

What you should do is pretend it is a rental that you both own and rent out.

You get our % of the market rent and still pay your % of the mortgage.

So if your ex lives there he pay virtual rent and covers the mortgage.

So would you % of a market rent cover your % of the mortgage?

If it doesn't you need to top it up(if more he should be paying you).


If you want 50:50 then you should be responsible for bigger % of the mortgage.