Hi all, Please help.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Is there any reason why you can't get added as a joint tenant?

BigAunty

scunny. wrote: »

No we don't receive any HB but there have been a few people recently who have been put under pressure from our local council (can I name them?) to vacate their property if all rooms were not being used.
Being rather naive on this subject as it has never affected us I thought maybe they were right to do this.

Councils have always canvassed under occupied tenants, even before the HB changes, usually to try and bribe them out through grants to decorate their new properties or allowing them to have priority when choosing the next property.

Social housing landlords were proactive in contacting social housing tenants affected by the bedroom tax/spare room subsidy to let them know their options which included downsizing, exchanging, taking in a lodger and so forth. Many social housing tenants were affected by the HB reductions and this would have incentivised some, though it would have felt like 'pressure'.

Tenants can't be 'forced', they can be coaxed, cajoled, informed, encouraged. It is their right to stay in their current property and they can only shift of their own volition. It's partly this degree of protection that has led to endemic under occupation in the social housing sector and led to the HB changes!

BigAunty

carefullycautious wrote: »

I have heard of a lone older male having to vacate a large 4 bed property nearby some time ago not sure of how this was achieved though.

Pensioners are exempt also from being made to move ...

The only under occupiers I can think that have been 'made' to move out of social housing tenancies are usually adult children who can't succeed to the tenancy when the existing tenant dies. They sometimes kick off demanding the right to stay there as they were brought up in the property and have a false notion that they have inherited the tenancy.

Social housing tenancies only allow one succession and sometimes it takes place when one of the parents is widowed - their children do not then become tenants when the second parent passes, for example, though many think the property should stay in the family for every generation until eternity.

Many social housing landlords in this example expect the property to be returned back to the pool to be given to a needy family rather than a single occupier, some will offer a tenancy to the occupier elsewhere that is more appropriately sized (even though they aren't officially a tenant and housing law doesn't oblige them to).

Pensioners aren't 'exempt also from being made to move'. They are exempt from the bedroom tax/spare room subsidy so don't lose the 15-25% HB benefit reduction (which also doesn't affect social housing tenants who don't get HB also).

Tenants who face a shortfall in HB don't have to move either- they can pay the shortfall out of their existing benefits, get a job, get a lodger. The majority of social housing tenants affected by the HB reduction have stayed put - I believe only around 4% have moved properties (and usually into another social housing property, too).

scunny.

Thanks for all that Big Aunty.
Light up the Chalice - I can be added to the tenancy but would not be entitled to the discount that my Partner has and would only start from the day I signed.
Alternatively we could marry (after 24 years maybe we should) and then I would be entitled to it but I'm unsure then whether I would still get the mortgage as her debts become my debts or am wrong on this.
To those that are genuinely trying to help I thank you for your time.

[Deleted User]

scunny. wrote: »

Alternatively we could marry (after 24 years maybe we should) and then I would be entitled to it but I'm unsure then whether I would still get the mortgage as her debts become my debts or am wrong on this.
To those that are genuinely trying to help I thank you for your time.

Marriage does not give you responsibility for any debts in your partners name, if you're not on the credit agreement (whether that's a credit card, loan, mortgage) it's not your responsibility. The only way your partners negative financial history can have a negative impact on you is if you take out joint credit (thereby creating a financial link), if this happens then her name will be included on your credit report and make lenders more weary about your suitability for credit.

How much you earn is the most important factor here, if you earn a reasonable salary you should have no problem taking out a mortgage on that property if you marry your partner, you would have to claim her as a dependant (which would have an impact on affordability) but the amount you're looking to borrow is so low it should not be a problem. If you can provide the following information a good assessment of your chances can be provided by the knowledgable people of this forum:

1. How much do you earn?
2. How much does your partner owe?

http://www.experian.com/ask-experian/20060322-marriage-doesnt-merge-your-new-spouses-bad-credit-with-your-good-history.html

As an aside regardless of the mortgage, you should address your partners debt problems. Debt problems never go away, but with the right amount of effort and understanding they can be dealt with and you can set yourself on the path to a bright financial future. There are some really impressive stories on this forum who people have come back from crazy debt problems, I'm sure you can manage it too! Check out the Debt Free Wannabe section (click here).

scunny.

Sorry for the delay in replying.
1, my annual pay is around 22k
2, my partner owes 3k

We have agreed twice in principle to pay a one off payment to clear the debts but the companies would not agree to put them on file as fully settled. They said they were unable to do that as it is only partial settlement although they would be happy for the balance to then be zero.
Where do we stand on this?
They were both happy to accept around 50% of the debt.

TBagpuss

If you are added to the joint tenancy then you will not be entitled to a discount but I don't think your partner loses her entitlement - have you checked that?

If you are married or otherwise financially linked you do not become responsible for her debts but you will become linked in terms of the details held by credit reference agencies so you may find that you are less able to get a mortgage.

You cannot normally get a mortgage unless your name is on the deeds of the property so the house would have to be put in joint names, not your partner's sole name, if you do buy. Have the council said that the house cannot be in joint names, or only that it cannot be in your sole name?

*usually* the deeds and mortgage need to be the same but it is possible that you *might* be able to get a mortgage in our sole name, secured against a property in our joint names, if your partner signs documentation deferring her interest to that of the lender. You and she would need to have separate legal advice about this so it would cost a bit extra in legal costs, and your lender would have to agree.

If they won't, then your best bet may be to get your name added to the tenancy now, and save or borrow to clear your partner's debts, with a view to making a joint application for a mortgage in another couple of years. Is there a reason why you partner can't look for a job to try to help save or pay towards her debts?

As PPs have said, you cannot be forced out of the house, it being under occupied will only be an issue if you start to claim HB when you will be hit by the 'bedroom tax'.

Are you allowed under the terms of your tenancy to take in a lodger? That might be a way to boost your income a little to raise money to pay off your partner's debts sooner rather than later.