Property in joint names?

FireWyrm

InMyDreams wrote: »

Gulp! Seriously, you think he hasn't contributed and you should end up with the whole house? And the children? And he would end up with nothing? No assets or anything. I hope you are paying into a seriously good pension for him to make up for all the lost years looking after your house and children while you climb a career ladder and accumulate assets in your own name, including the family home. I hope there aren't many women left who would be happy with this sort of arrangement! It's attitudes like this that devalue the role of stay-at-home parents of either sex and puts society off looking after their own children

No, its not. Its practicality. He cannot service the mortgage, at all, ever. They wont let him. I tried to have him placed on it but was warned by the underwriter that should we go to a formal check I would lose the application completely. He cannot provide for the children either on his own. I dont know what the rules are these days, but we had to keep my parents 'status' quiet when my mother walked out because there was a very real possibility of social services simply taking me into care.

As for 'climbing the ladder', I wish that were the case. As it is, I barely provide for us all with ever increasing demands on what little is left after all necessary bills are paid. So much so that I will have no choice but to opt out of this new compulsory pension thing because I cannot afford to take such a drastic paycut. That leaves me with absolutely nothing but whatever paltry state pension my years of tax contributions have bought. He didnt 'give up' a career in favor of mine, the truth was, I could always earn twice what he did and even if he was working, his wage would be nullified by care costs. If I could reverse the situation I would, and I wouldnt expect a clear run at the house either.

As for his pension, he has one, I dont as I cannot afford it. I have no claim to it either being his spouse or not.

Anyway, this is the Op's thread not mine.....

Mojisola

FireWyrm wrote: »

He cannot provide for the children either on his own.

This is getting off flossy's topic but it may help to show some of the problems resulting from one person owning the house.

You may be shocked at what his income from benefits and CM from you would be in the, hopefully, unlikely event of you splitting up.

FireWyrm

Mojisola wrote: »

This is getting off flossy's topic but it may help to show some of the problems resulting from one person owning the house.

You may be shocked at what his income from benefits and CM from you would be in the, hopefully, unlikely event of you splitting up.

Doubtless you are right in that last paragraph. A former childhood friend of mine has 4 children and has never held a job for more than a few weeks and yet I'm told her income exceeds mine by some distance.

As for the last part...splitting up...my grandmother is alledged to have said to my father on his wedding day..."Be sure this is the one dear because divorce isnt for the likes of us".

The only people who win in a divorce are the lawyers.

EKAndrew

FireWyrm wrote: »

There is quite possibly more to this than you know. There are many reasons why she might not want to be financially linked to her husband or he to her. It could be that she doesnt have sufficient credit rating to pass a mortgage evaluation. It's also equally possible she suspects issues in his finances and although he is obviously not struggling yet, you may forsee a situation where she could potentially become partially or completely liable for the mortgage.

In terms of a marriage, the asset isn't necessarily split 50/50 either. For instance, I have a mortgage. It is in my sole name because my husband has no credit rating at all. He doesnt work, or claim benefits, in fact, he doesnt contribute a single penny to the house. He does however look after our children and run the house on a day to day basis. Generally then, this might be considered to be a fairly normal traditional arrangement except that the roles are reversed. That's fine. Looking forward however, if we were to divorce, the children are usually awarded to the mother and not the father. If he were to leave, I would not expect him to have any claim on the house since he has never contributed financially and it would remain the dwelling place of his children and myself. Equally though, knowing that he has no assets nor means to provide, I would not expect any maintenance for the children either.

See, this is rarely a black and white scenario and there is likely to be more to this than you know.

If a man had come out with this comment, I would expect absolute uproar on here.........yes, your roles are traditionally reversed, so in the same way, a courts decision would probably also be traditionally reversed. If you were to "kick him out" i would expect the kids to be going with him. Rightly or wrongly, he doesn't need your help - he would get a house and he would get child benefit and those 3 would have a roof over their head and they would be entitled to CM.

back to the OP - i dont think its that uncommon. I'm in that position and our flat is in my name only. We are looking to buy a house shortly, and no doubt that will also be in my name only. I'm the one with all the debt - even though she spends it!! I'm the one who pays all the bills and earns all the money. If we were to get a joint mortgage, I dont think it would allow us much more borrowing (she only earns £6k per year) and with her not so perfect credit rating, we cant run the risk of paying an inflated interest rate. There has to be trust between the couple. How long have they been living together? What does she contribute to the house? Does she pay any bills? Does she buy the food shopping? i'm pretty sure I have read somewhere, that although her name is not on the mortgage, if you can prove that you do make a contribution to the family home - she has a certain legal entitlement.

IF, and its a big IF - the only reason she is not on it is because he earns more money - then yes, i would also be concerned. What she should do, if he maintains this level of arrogance (and im basing this on the fact he earns loads more money) is when they have the child, she should charge him child care costs!!!!!

I think you need to speak to your daughter and find out if you know the full story. Do you know and have all the facts? Does she have loads of debt? Adverse credit history? I personally wouldnt want my parents knowing about all my financial information/history (because i have been very stupid!)

cats2012

I have a simple view in line with the OP - unless there is a really good reason I would expect equal names on house/mortgage etc.

We bought this year and deposit 100% came from me due to inheritance, but we're getting married in March and if I wasn't willing to buy the house very much WITH my OH I'd be questioning whether we should be!

flossy_splodge

Wow what a fabulous load of responses. Thank you all so much.
I have now directed my daughters attention to this thread so she can assess for herself.

LauraWxx wrote: »

Does she possibly have adverse credit and therefore they have used his name for the mortgage as it would only be him getting credit checked??

Personally, if it was me, i wouldnt buy a property with my bf without having my name on the deeds.

I suppose the other question is...is she going to be paying half of the mortgage, if not perhaps this is why??

Yes she does have adverse credit and that apparently why the mortgage has been applied for in his name only.

LauraWxx wrote: »

sorry just seen your note regarding the protection of her interests...which would suggest she is either putting in some of the deposit or contributing to the mortgage....I would def be looking to get my name on the deeds if I was her.

Apparently as per a poster further down this thread, if your name is not on the mortgage it cannot be on the deeds?
I have to say this is news to me.

Fire_Fox

flossy_splodge wrote: »

Wow what a fabulous load of responses. Thank you all so much.
I have now directed my daughters attention to this thread so she can assess for herself.

Yes she does have adverse credit and that apparently why the mortgage has been applied for in his name only.

Apparently as per a poster further down this thread, if your name is not on the mortgage it cannot be on the deeds?
I have to say this is news to me.

Then to be fair to the husband maybe he doesn't want his credit file linking to that of his wife, or to risk her debts being lodged against his/ their property.

"Marriage doesn't hurt, joint finances do.

Simply marrying or living with someone with a bad credit score shouldn't impact on your finances, as third-party data (ie, someone else's info) doesn't appear on your file. Though see below for how this could be changing.

Yet if you're 'financially linked' to someone on any product, it can have an impact. Even just a joint bills account for flat sharers can mean you are co-scored. If one partner has a poor history, keep your finances rigidly separate, and it should maintain access to good credit for the other.

In fact, there are only two common products that can infer financial linking: mortgages and joint bank accounts. As a note, there's no such thing as a 'joint' credit card. Technically, it's one person's account and the other just has access to it. It is technically possible that joint utility bills could be reported on credit files, though current practice is not to do so.

If you split up with someone you've joint finances with, once the accounts are separated or no longer active, always write to the credit reference agencies and ask for a notice of 'disassociation', to stop their credit history affecting yours in future."
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/loans/credit-rating-credit-score


Lenders generally do not permit names to be on the deeds but not on the mortgage, otherwise they could not access the full value of the property if they needed to repossess or would not be able to force a sale at all, yet only have one person to chase for the debt. A mortgage is a secured loan, having another owner means the lender's security has been signed away.

flossy_splodge

Fire_Fox wrote: »

If your name is not in the deeds you do not have the automatic right to remain in the house in the event if a split, your daughter could therefore be thrown out at very short notice. However you CAN have a legal claim on any assets if you can demonstrate you contributed financially or otherwise to the relationship, for example if you are raising children, also if you have set your career aside for the other partner. In the event of a divorce what the legal system deem fair is not always the same as what individuals deem fair.
This IS worrying! And yes she may well be putting her career on a back burner and in her case she is highly academically qualified, much more so than him but in a field where a career break could seriously jeopardise any chance of returning to her chosen field.
This is part of what worries me in terms of HER protection.
You can only be named on the deeds of a property if the lender agrees, they invariably also want that party to be named on the mortgage which means they need to pass credit checks. This seems to be the nub of the matter. They could not raise the same mortgage if she were to be included on the application as she has spent her time progressing her qualifications not her earning potential (as yet!!). IMO if your daughter intends to start a family she should take legal advice on the implications of living in a home she has no rights to. Really good point, thank you. She might also enquire about owning as 'tenants in common' with a split that is not 50/ 50 and about what happens if her husband is to suddenly die.

Two further excellent considerations. I'm sure she will now take these under advisement.

EKAndrew wrote: »

back to the OP - i dont think its that uncommon. I'm in that position and our flat is in my name only. We are looking to buy a house shortly, and no doubt that will also be in my name only. I'm the one with all the debt - even though she spends it!! I'm the one who pays all the bills and earns all the money. If we were to get a joint mortgage, I dont think it would allow us much more borrowing (she only earns £6k per year) and with her not so perfect credit rating, we cant run the risk of paying an inflated interest rate. Good point! There has to be trust between the couple. Quite so! How long have they been living together? Over 5 years and married 6 months.What does she contribute to the house? Does she pay any bills? Yes. Does she buy the food shopping? i'm pretty sure I have read somewhere, that although her name is not on the mortgage, if you can prove that you do make a contribution to the family home - she has a certain legal entitlement.
We've just been chatting on the phone and have calculated that she pays out virtually EXACTLY the same proportion of her income as her does on 'joint expenditure'.
IF, and its a big IF - the only reason she is not on it is because he earns more money - then yes, i would also be concerned. What she should do, if he maintains this level of arrogance (:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:) (and im basing this on the fact he earns loads more money) is when they have the child, she should charge him child care costs!!!!!Love it!

I think you need to speak to your daughter and find out if you know the full story. Do you know and have all the facts? Does she have loads of debt? Adverse credit history? I personally wouldnt want my parents knowing about all my financial information/history (because i have been very stupid!)

Good advice again and I now do.
I am very lucky in that my daughter is open with me and more importantly will listen! Her husband is not so used to accepting that women have a lot to offer in terms of experience and wisdom in such matters :rotfl:

cats2012 wrote: »

I have a simple view in line with the OP - unless there is a really good reason I would expect equal names on house/mortgage etc.
Fraid this is my bottom line too.

We bought this year and deposit 100% came from me due to inheritance, but we're getting married in March and if I wasn't willing to buy the house very much WITH my OH I'd be questioning whether we should be!

Thats the thing isn't it. I feel he would be horrified if she were the one with the dosh and she had reservations about sharing equally. She is horrified that there is anything to consider here but on reflection accepts that in her particular case it's easy for her to look for equal sharing as she has so much less.
Thank you all for the input it has helped a great deal. :T

embob74

I think it is difficult for people to disassociate emotion from financial transactions and in the case of mortgages that is exactly what you should do.
I can understand not wanting one party on the mortgage if that would adversely affect the chances of getting it or getting a good rate but my one piece of advice would be your daughter and her hubby need to discuss finances and what they both think is fair.
I have seen far too many threads about women who are no supported by their husbands while they are off work with a baby - it is best to discuss expectations prior to pregnancy.

Gonzo33

I haven't read through every response on here to your question. However it is now very common for persons not party to a mortgage to not be allowed on the Deeds of a property. Secondly if your daughter lodges a 'Home Rights' with Land Registry it would prevent her husband from gaining further lending, a re mortgage or selling the property without her being made aware of the situation.