Is this morally right.

Dave_the_Ginger_Cat

BMW_Mike wrote: »

Hi,

Firstly - Do not consider not telling the truth to your lender, - If they find out you could well be for the high jump in a number of unpleasant ways, - Although Mortgage Providers methods of assessing applicants are somewhat crude and frustrating they are doing it for your own protection (and of course theirs).

I do hope this is a typo, and that you are not supporting a fraudulent application

BMW_Mike

Yea - sorry, typo double negative - Always tell the truth to your lender come what may. Absolutely against fraudulent applications.

sammyjammy

BMW_Mike wrote: »

Yea - sorry, typo double negative - Always tell the truth to your lender come what may. Absolutely against fraudulent applications.

Looks ok to me, you are saying do not consider lying but you said do not consider not telling the truth, same thing

wannahouse

kingstreet wrote: »

Quite frankly, that is tosh.

Lenders take both gross annual incomes and add them together. They then deduct any credit commitments, multiplying the result by an income multiple which is as high as 5x for some lenders.

The only times I could think of for not including a joint applicant are;-

- one applicant has adverse credit
- one applicant has credit commitments greater than their income.

As a person is significantly disadvantaged by not being party to the purchase and the ownership, this should only be a last resort.

why would the lloyds mortgage adviser lie to us?
we went in wanting to purchase in both name, both that top credit scores (999) but husband earns loads and i only earn just £7500 yr part time.
we have no adverse credit whasoever and have banked with lloyds for years.

they gave my husband a loan of 5x multiple in his name only, but if it was in both of our names, we would have been given a lower multiple....

i'm sure the lloyds employee is not recommending something illegal, and he has recommended the best way, for us to borrow the amount we need to buy the house. all i am relaying is what he told us, and has recommended for us to do.

when we remortgage after the fixed term, we will chuck more money on the mortgage to get the lvt down even more, and add me on the mortgage... as my husband just changed over to a company, after being self employed for years, we couldn't get a mortgage through anyone else, as we only had one months books for the company, but lloyds put it to underwriting for us in our case, and as my husband owns less than 30% of the company, they consider him as an `'employee" needing only one payslip as proof of income, as he has an excellent credit score, and interbank rating on his account.

no other mortgage providers could do anything like that for us, as we did approach some brokers, and the lloyds adviser said that they do do things quite differently that other banks...

anyway, it doesn't matter what you do or don't think, we are going about it as the adviser suggested, and in two years when we have 2 yrs history of company books, we can remortgage in both of our names as i will have a much higher income, and combined more than enough to remortgage, and i brought this up as it might help the OP in their situation.

at the end of the day, they were asking if they could just put it in one persons name, and in our case, that was how it has worked for us.

Goldiegirl

As long as you are happy not currently being a home owner, wanna house, then that is your affair.

However, it would have been completely unacceptable to me, and I would have applied elsewhere. As Kingstreet says, a lender takes the joint income into account and I wouldn't want to deal with an advisor who said otherwise. And I would want to be a joint homeowner, not just have my husband as home owner.

wannahouse

Goldiegirl wrote: »

As long as you are happy not currently being a home owner, wanna house, then that is your affair.

However, it would have been completely unacceptable to me, and I would have applied elsewhere. As Kingstreet says, a lender takes the joint income into account and I wouldn't want to deal with an advisor who said otherwise. And I would want to be a joint homeowner, not just have my husband as home owner.

i agree...having something in my name too is important to me, and it does bug me...not because i'm worried about being ripped off, as we have been married 17 years, and he is trustworthy, but all the same, i like "knowing' that its in my name too, as our other place is...
i don't really get why we had to do it this way, and i have asked the adviser why it matters if we add my piddly income atm onto it , but the most important thing is securing the property,- we don't want to mess that up...i think because of both being self employed and switching to a company at the time we made the application, it may have had something to do with it, as he owns 29% and i own 71% of the company, but he is drawing a wage and high dividends, and i am not at the moment, as i still on maternity leave for 2 mths...maybe it looks odd if he owns less of the company, but is earning all the money???
whatever..t the moment, we will be able to buy the place..if we tamper with the epindice, and do a mortgage application together, and it doesn't come up with enough money to lend us, we're stuffed..he did a calculation first and then suggested to go with just the one name ...
we will put it in both names after the two years..in the mean time, the adviser told me if it bothers me, get the solicitor to draw up a trust deed, or deed of trust, could 'nt hear exactly as the phone was breaking up, and that would give me some security of split of assets in worst case scenario...
what bothers me is not partner nicking off with assets, but in the case of if something happened to my husband, being left with 3 kids and no asset in my name...he has promised not to kark it in the next 2 years, and we'll remortgage together when the financial set up can be tailored to suit.

kingstreet

wannahouse wrote: »

why would the lloyds mortgage adviser lie to us?
we went in wanting to purchase in both name, both that top credit scores (999) but husband earns loads and i only earn just £7500 yr part time.
we have no adverse credit whasoever and have banked with lloyds for years.

they gave my husband a loan of 5x multiple in his name only, but if it was in both of our names, we would have been given a lower multiple....

i'm sure the lloyds employee is not recommending something illegal, and he has recommended the best way, for us to borrow the amount we need to buy the house. all i am relaying is what he told us, and has recommended for us to do.

when we remortgage after the fixed term, we will chuck more money on the mortgage to get the lvt down even more, and add me on the mortgage... as my husband just changed over to a company, after being self employed for years, we couldn't get a mortgage through anyone else, as we only had one months books for the company, but lloyds put it to underwriting for us in our case, and as my husband owns less than 30% of the company, they consider him as an `'employee" needing only one payslip as proof of income, as he has an excellent credit score, and interbank rating on his account.

no other mortgage providers could do anything like that for us, as we did approach some brokers, and the lloyds adviser said that they do do things quite differently that other banks...

anyway, it doesn't matter what you do or don't think, we are going about it as the adviser suggested, and in two years when we have 2 yrs history of company books, we can remortgage in both of our names as i will have a much higher income, and combined more than enough to remortgage, and i brought this up as it might help the OP in their situation.

at the end of the day, they were asking if they could just put it in one persons name, and in our case, that was how it has worked for us.

I'm not suggesting they are lying. I'm suggesting you might get a different view from a different adviser in a different branch. I do not know of any lender which uses an "average" of the two incomes. They are added together, credit costs deducted, then multiplied out.

The bold section is obviously your prerogative. I'm explaining how the market as a whole does things, so that future readers of this thread will be aware there is often another option to what bank employees trot out as the only way something can be done. Often they don't know their own employer's criteria particularly well, never mind what happens out in the big wide world.

My comments were not intended to offend you.

wannahouse

kingstreet wrote: »

The bold section is obviously your prerogative. I'm explaining how the market as a whole does things, so that future readers of this thread will be aware there is often another option to what bank employees trot out as the only way something can be done. Often they don't know their own employer's criteria particularly well, never mind what happens out in the big wide world.

My comments were not intended to offend you.

thankyou..i didn't mean to come across as snottish..only a number of brokers (paid) that we looked to get a loan through, had never heard of being able to treat company director as employed, if they owned under 30% and told us it was hogwash and couldn't bedone, but lloyds DO treat you as an employee in those circumstances, hence us being able to get loan with one payslip from the accountants, despite having just switched to a company...
we wouldn't have changed setup if we realised it would mean jeopardising getting a mortgage, but every broker we went to said the same in the end..if lloyds will give you a mortgage, then go with that, as none of them had a solution for a company that has just started trading, even though we had 17 yrs of self employed books behind us...
my husband seems to think that the actual reason it was only put in his name ,is that he can be treated as an employee with one paysslip, yet because i own most of the company, i would need two years books as proof of income, which ofcourse i can't produce, having just started trading...i don't know why they couldn't use my tax return as self employed from last year though?
anyway, when the fixed term is up we'll have the two years books and can put it in both names....

i am grateful to lloyds though, as they gave us an oddball olution that no one else could in these circumstances.

kingstreet

I'm currently doing a mortgage for someone who is a director of a family business with 33% of the equity. He has director's remuneration and dividends and these are being taken into account by the lender. We are using SA302s to evidence that, as the accountant is not qualified.

To complicate matters, my case is a 90% newbuild, but I've placed it, got an AIP and it's ready to go tomorrow.

There are brokers, and there are brokers...

I don't know enough about you to tell you what is, or isn't possible but averaging the incomes of joint applicants isn't true. You may find they will average the income for someone self-employed, so they add together three years' net profit figures and average them, but that has nothing to do with the other applicant.

wannahouse

they would have only given us a multiple of 3.5 x combined income,applying together, it would have been £47,000 short of what they would give us on his income at a 5x multiple, if i earned closer to what he earned, 3.5 x combined would have been more than enough...