"Joint & Several" - What does this really mean

DCFC79

Apples2 wrote: »

The op is never going to accept that.....

Never in a million years, I await the day when he might accept it though.

JuicyJesus

pvt wrote: »

Hasbeenconsolidated,

One possibility to explore is for your daughter to approach the bank and offer to pay off half the loan if they will agree to split it and agree she then has no further liability. If she makes the point that she has no chance of being able to pay off all of the loan and it would therefore be better for her to default on all of it if they don't make some arrangement. For this to work the bank would have to be convinced that getting 50% of the money and chasing the other borrower for what they can get might be their best option - if it looks to them as if she's good for the whole amount they obviously wouldn't agree to this.

It can be done, but has to be agreed to by all three parties involved, including her !!!!less ex-partner. And for all three parties to agree, it obviously has to be mutually beneficial to ALL those parties.

Unlikely though, especially since having to pay any of the debt back at all is clearly not in the interest in the ex, so he'll never agree to it.

Clive_Woody

Could we get a Poll on this thread please, I think that would make it more dynamic?

pvt

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Unlikely though, especially since having to pay any of the debt back at all is clearly not in the interest in the ex, so he'll never agree to it.

There's two sides to every story. We don't know the ex's position, he may feel that he is only obligated to pay half the money, and won't pay any unless that is agreed up front. And banks will quite often agree to split a joint loan in this way because both parties are saying "I'll repay my half, but not if I still remain liable for the other half."

Clive_Woody

pvt wrote: »

T And banks will quite often agree to split a joint loan in this way because both parties are saying "I'll repay my half, but not if I still remain liable for the other half."

Do you have evidence of this happening 'quite often'? It seems an odd thing for a bank to increase it's risk by splitting the debt.

ChopperST

Clive_Woody wrote: »

Do you have evidence of this happening 'quite often'? It seems an odd thing for a bank to increase it's risk by splitting the debt.

Beat me to it.

Clive_Woody

ChopperST wrote: »

Beat me to it.

:dance:

I always like to see claims backed up with evidence, particularly when they contradict the general opinion on here.

:money:

magpiecottage

I am afraid that this young lady has dug herself into a hole.

Digging up mud to throw at the bank, debt advisers and posters on this thread is only going to make that hole deeper.

Thrugelmir

Clive_Woody wrote: »

Do you have evidence of this happening 'quite often'? It seems an odd thing for a bank to increase it's risk by splitting the debt.

Banks will negotiate lump sum settlements from individual parties if they consider it to be the way to obtain optimum recovery. As the debt is one factor. The other is the potential cost of ongoing debt recovery and administration.

So best course of action maybe to open dialogue with the bank with a view to a compromise, i.e. accept liability and move on.

jonesMUFCforever

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Banks will negotiate lump sum settlements from individual parties if they consider it to be the way to obtain optimum recovery. As the debt is one factor. The other is the potential cost of ongoing debt recovery and administration.

So best course of action maybe to open dialogue with the bank with a view to a compromise, i.e. accept liability and move on.

Sorry but with Joint and several liability they do not need to compromise - they can go after one or both - they don't care if one person has half the money or not.