Mortgage in a sole name after split but deeds still in joint?

exhab

Hey, just wanted some advice please, as I can't get a straight answer from land registry, solicitors/conveyancers or even through search engines.

I split up with my ex nearly a year ago and left a house we owned together. When I left, we went to the mortgage lenders and advised them of the split and got the mortgage transferred into the ex's name only. Signed all the paperwork that the bank wanted me to and the ex and bank told me to expect conveyance forms in the following weeks to sign.

This never happened and according to Land Registry, I'm still on the deeds as a joint owner but according to the bank the mortgage payments are just in the ex's name.

According to solicitors this shouldn't happen as it should all go through at once. What I want to know is: Are there any legal or financial issues that could affect me, by still being named on the deeds alone?

Thrugelmir

I am surprised that you are not named on the mortgage. Given you are on the title deeds.

Speak to the solicitors that handled the the conveyance. If you are not satisfied with their response. Raise a complaint through another solicitor.

exhab

When we took out the mortgage, I was named on both that and the deeds. That was quite painless as we had good solicitors for buying.

Following the break up, the bank removed me from the mortgage, signed all the paperwork, but the ex/bank never followed through with conveyancing/solicitor to change the deeds in to just the ex's name, so according to land registry (checked today) I'm still on the deeds.

Thrugelmir

The solicitor should have handled the change. Not the bank. That's what they were employed to do.

Goldiegirl

In my experience, the solicitor completes the transfer of the deeds and then informs the lender, who then changes the mortgage.

It would seem the onus here is on the solicitor, because the lender wouldn't have changed the mortgage without confirmation from the solicitor that the names on the property had been amended.

Looks to me as if the solicitor didn't get the title of the property amended when he should have done

manowar

This actually happened to me years ago. I was a joint owner on the deeds and the mortgage with an ex. I left him, he removed me from the mortgage. Years later, when it came for him to sell the house, it was found that I was still on the deeds so I found myself a part-owner of the equity and not liable for any mortgage. It was an enviable position to be in as I was contacted by the solicitor handling the sale - he couldn't sell without my permission! (he'd told them where I was) and I was asked where I wanted my cheque sent to. I received a nice FAT cheque which was my 50% of the house on its sale.

The amusing thing was, had he ever defaulted on the mortgage they would not have been able to come to me for the money. I was not on the mortgage, the mortgage company had taken me off, yet I was on the deeds.

I say you are in a position exactly like me back then! no one can chase you for money, when the house it sold they legally have to give you half.

Not such a bad situation to be in is it. Rarely happens I imagine!

holly_hobby

I was just going to say, that as the situ stands you have all the benefits of property ownership, but none of the assocaited financial responsibilities - poor situ for your ex-partner and the lender, but not for you.

The apple cart would be a bit upturned though if your ex wants to remortgage (ie re finance/change lender when title will be searched), as without you being party to the new mge (as joint owner) he's scuppered changing mge lender.

Holly

exhab

Thanks manowar/holly! That is my exact position and glad to hear that I can't be chased financially at least!

So if the house is sold they legally have to give me half of the profits? I thought they'd scratch my name off the deeds first then sell.

Anyway thanks for the help. You'd think solicitors or land registry could have told me this. Makes me feel a lot better that others have gone through it and not been stung.

Land_Registry

exhab wrote: »

Thanks manowar/holly! That is my exact position and glad to hear that I can't be chased financially at least!

So if the house is sold they legally have to give me half of the profits? I thought they'd scratch my name off the deeds first then sell.

Anyway thanks for the help. You'd think solicitors or land registry could have told me this. Makes me feel a lot better that others have gone through it and not been stung.

I am sorry that you have not got a straight answer from us but Land Registry can really only advise on what the land register shows, what that means and how to apply for any changes to be made to it. Any dealings with the lender, solicitor or ex are financial, legal and personal and therefore not within our remit and we cannot provide legal advice.

Your original post refers to your bank and ex telling you that conveyancing forms would be sent to you. This probably should have happened but that is the bank/ex's responsibility. Land Registry would only be made aware as and when the application to register the Transfer (of equity) was lodged. Any paperwork completed by the lender would be for their own purposes alone.

I would strongly encourage you to seek legal advice as to what your current legal position is with regards any responsibilities which might arise from still being registered as the legal owner.

Whilst they may not be able to give you a definitive answer to every scenario they should be able to give you some indication as to likely outcomes depending on circumstances, especially with regards the scenario posted by others here applying to your own circumstances.

It would be interesting to read what advice your solicitors/conveyancers gave you?

The other posts are quite correct that as and when the property is sold or re-mortgaged then you would need to be a signatory to the Transfer, mortgage etc which may provide you with some unexpected leverage but might also be an unnecessary burden?

For example if you were to fall into debt your creditor might seek to secure that debt in some way against the property and whilst this may not affect you directly it may be an unnecessary complication for or your ex.

If you ultimately decide to resolve the situation now and Transfer the title from joint to sole names then take a look at our online FAQ - the lender may still insist on using a solicitor/conveyancer.

manowar

exhab wrote: »

Thanks manowar/holly! That is my exact position and glad to hear that I can't be chased financially at least!

So if the house is sold they legally have to give me half of the profits? I thought they'd scratch my name off the deeds first then sell.

Anyway thanks for the help. You'd think solicitors or land registry could have told me this. Makes me feel a lot better that others have gone through it and not been stung.

I found out all the legal in's and out's when I was in this situation, and I can tell you 100% you have nothing to worry about and your ex everything. You legally own half the equity in that house and he can do nothing about that. Your removal from the deeds should have occurred at the point of transferring the mortgage into his name only. It didn't and you have come out a winner without you even knowing it (but you do now! as I have told you and I think you have already worked it out for yourself, which is why you came here for confirmation)

He can not remortgage without your consent as you are a part-owner on the deeds. Refuse if he asks. He then has the choice to either sell or keep the house and keep paying the mortgage (which increases your portion of the equity if prices continue to rise ) If he wants to sell, you need to give permission to sell and on sale you will get 50% of equity in the house, there is absolutely NOTHING this guy can do about it, other than sue the Solicitor that failed to do his job properly. As I said, I was in this exact position, he took me off the mortgage behind my back thinking that was it, when I left him. It wasn't as I could only be removed from deeds with my permission, I didn't give it! So I was removed from mortgage and left on the deeds. I got many thousands (many) when that house was sold and there was nothing he could do only shout at solicitors and nothing came of that I can assure you (they cannily cover up their messes as I am sure you are aware)

You are secure, no money owed by you, house cannot be remortgaged without your permission and cannot be sold without your permission, upon sale 50% of equity after legal costs are yours!

Depends on how you feel about the ex - you could do the right thing and refuse the equity or you could do the right thing and take it. I took it and was well happy! His fault he messed up, he cheated, I left, he tried to stiff me and I came out the winner, he was a fool.

You are secure! any more help, PM me

manowar

exhab wrote: »

Thanks manowar/holly! That is my exact position and glad to hear that I can't be chased financially at least!

So if the house is sold they legally have to give me half of the profits? I thought they'd scratch my name off the deeds first then sell.

Anyway thanks for the help. You'd think solicitors or land registry could have told me this. Makes me feel a lot better that others have gone through it and not been stung.

Just to confirm THEY CANNOT SCRATCH YOUR NAME OFF THE DEEDS, period.