Ex problem

tsr2

My husband and his girlfriend bought the house we now live in back in the 80`s
With an endowment mortgage. They split up in the early 90`s and she moved away leaving a dear john letter saying she did not want the house and wished us all the best. the endowment on the mortgage is about to mature to pay off the mortgage which will leave a shortfall, but his ex has now come out of the woodwork saying she wants her half of the endowment. She has not lived in the house for the last 15 years and not paid the mortgage for 20 years as she lost her job, and I don’t think its fair she should be able to just turn up and claim half as she has not paid a penny towards the mortgage.
Can anyone advise us as to what we can do

kingstreet

Seek legal advice.

This;-

she moved away leaving a dear john letter saying she did not want the house

should not simply have been accepted as she remained liable for the mortgage. In addition, if your partner had died, she may have received the death benefit.

It can be undone, but it won't be easy.

Is the policy assigned as security for the mortgage? Will the insurer send the payout straight to the lender without a discharge from your partner and the ex?

tsr2

hi

no, and they both have to sign for the release for the payment she is still saying she is not interested in the house and just wants her half of the endowment payment

kingstreet

She's still liable for the mortgage, so there's no way she should be given anything without the whole picture being resolved.

In a recent court case, a man who had been absent for 15 years won a small percentage of the value of a property because the matter had not been legally resolved at the time.

Legal advice is absolutely essential as this cannot/should not be resolved without.

tsr2

Thankyou for your help, we will seek advice and i know its like how long is a piece of string? but have you any idea of costs that could be involved so we can start a slush fund now

Senior_Paper_Monitor

.... and right up to the final Supreme Court Hearing (Nov 11) was about to get considerably more than the eventual 10%.

I dread to think what this game cost.

The case is Kernott v Jones and a quick google will give you a weeks reading and sleepless nights.

I am advised that this does not necessarily set general precedent for future cases (unless they are a very close match of cicumstances) so a much larger loss is still possible.

I dread to think what this game cost !

..... and as others above say, get legal advice now.

kingstreet

Senior_Paper_Monitor wrote: »

.... and right up to the final Supreme Court Hearing (Nov 11) was about to get considerably more than the eventual 10%.

I dread to think what this game cost.

The case is Kernott v Jones and a quick google will give you a weeks reading and sleepless nights.

I am advised that this does not necessarily set general precedent for future cases (unless they are a very close match of cicumstances) so a much larger loss is still possible.

I dread to think what this game cost !

..... and as others above say, get legal advice now.

I'm glad you remembered the case. I tried several parameters for a search and still couldn't get anything approaching the right answer.

mic200202

Well, the proceeds of the policy and the equity(if the house was being sold) can only be made payable to them jointly,so for example a cheque can only be cashed into a joint a/c.The proceeds need to be agreed between them as to how to split up.If she is named on the property, ie on the mortgage and is not looking for half the equity,then you need to think very carefully about this.There is no automatic right of say 50% split in any jointly owned assets (unless the property was set up under a 'tenants in common' arrangement,which gives each a defined split).

If they agree between themselves to share the proceeds of the endowment and she agrees to waive entitlement to equity (ie by allowing the house to be transferred to his sole name) then thats fine.

Your problems could really come around if there are legal reps on both side who want to argue over both the policy and the equity.That's is ilkely to get messy.

A copy of that 'Dear John' letter might help matters.It sounds as though she wants a few £'s so I would see what the final value is likely to be and simply make her an offer (based on the conditions above mind)..She may just accept this rather than get involved in a protracted legal squabble.