court action for removing ex off title deeds

meer53

prowla wrote: »

I don't think that the mortgage company will allow an existing mortgage in two names to be changed to remove one of them; they will, however allow a new mortgage to be taken out, if both parties agree.

It will be a brand new mortgage so it's not simply a case of both parties agreeing. It will be a new assessement on whichever party decides to take the mortgage on. They might not offer a mortgage, depends on whether the criteria can be met.

prowla

meer53 wrote: »

It will be a brand new mortgage so it's not simply a case of both parties agreeing. It will be a new assessement on whichever party decides to take the mortgage on. They might not offer a mortgage, depends on whether the criteria can be met.

The other party has to agree to the change.
And yes, the one taking it on must be assessed on their ability to pay, under the new guidelines/rules.

FBaby

There's less than 18 months left on our fixed term mortgage (has a huge redemption penalty), and then I will be able to take it on myself. He sees the situation as minimal risk which is why we went down that route.

So as I suspected above, you ARE in a position to pay the mortgage on your own, which OP clearly said she wasn't so totally different situations. You managed to get the bank to agree because you can afford it, the reason why he remains on the mortgage is to avoid the penalty and there is only 18 months left on your current mortgage deal.
The bank didn't agree to it on the basis that it would remain this way for many more years.

I paid him with my savings.

Just picking up on this, aren't your savings his until the you are officially divorced from a legal perspective?

Cinders:

FBaby wrote: »

So as I suspected above, you ARE in a position to pay the mortgage on your own, which OP clearly said she wasn't so totally different situations. You managed to get the bank to agree because you can afford it, the reason why he remains on the mortgage is to avoid the penalty and there is only 18 months left on your current mortgage deal.
The bank didn't agree to it on the basis that it would remain this way for many more years.

Just picking up on this, aren't your savings his until the you are officially divorced from a legal perspective?

We are divorced, why would you think we weren't?

The op asked if it was possible to take a name off deeds to a property even though their name would still be on the mortgage, and I simply said that it was possible and gave a very brief overview of my situation.

Hanky_Panky

Cinders: wrote: »

This isn't true. In the last month I have had my ex husbands name taken off the deeds of my house, but his name is still on the mortgage as I don't qualify for it on my own. My solicitors drew up the papers and I had to sign to say that I will make sure he is never chased for money from the mortgage company, and if that ever happened I would have to reimburse him, and I need to get his name off the mortgage as soon as it meet their criteria for taking it on by myself.

A solicitor can sort out the court consent order and the paperwork to get his name off the deeds and land registry. It is expensive, but totally worth it, good luck x

As a (former) lender I have seen this before and it was a complete nightmare. Husband was supposedly indemnified from making payments by ex-wife who subsequently couldn't pay so we chased both parties. Husband kept trotting out indemnified line but frankly we weren't interested and ultimately took them to court to pay. Both of them got a CCJ.

I appreciate from your subsequent posts you have a plan to re-mortgage once your early redemption penalty expires but for anyone contemplating this - don't !!

If you don't meet the criteria to buy out the other party the only sensible thing is to sell up and split the equity (or debt!) appropriately.

Cinders:

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

As a (former) lender I have seen this before and it was a complete nightmare. Husband was supposedly indemnified from making payments by ex-wife who subsequently couldn't pay so we chased both parties. Husband kept trotting out indemnified line but frankly we weren't interested and ultimately took them to court to pay. Both of them got a CCJ.

I appreciate from your subsequent posts you have a plan to re-mortgage once your early redemption penalty expires but for anyone contemplating this - don't !!

If you don't meet the criteria to buy out the other party the only sensible thing is to sell up and split the equity (or debt!) appropriately.

I think I missed something, why shouldn't I take the mortgage on in my name only when the fixed term expires? I have bought my ex out of the house, and once the fixed term is up, the mortgage will be in my name only. I have savings to cover for 6 months should a redundancy occur. My mortgage lenders were fine with the situation, and there's only 18 mns left until the fixed term ends.

Why would it make more financial sense to sell up, uproot the children from their home, and lose loads of money on moving costs? Had we done that surely the children, my ex, and I would have been much worse off for the sake of waiting for a little while to change the mortgage over?

FBaby

The op asked if it was possible to take a name off deeds to a property even though their name would still be on the mortgage, and I simply said that it was possible and gave a very brief overview of my situation.

But it is totally misleading since your situation is totally different to that of OP and if that those differences that meant you were able to do so when it wouldn't apply to them? Don't see how that is helping them.

FBaby

Why would it make more financial sense to sell up, uproot the children from their home, and lose loads of money on moving costs? Had we done that surely the children, my ex, and I would have been much worse off for the sake of waiting for a little while to change the mortgage over?

It made sense in your circumstances, not in the OPs, or anyone who can't afford their mortgage alone.

peachyprice

Cinders: wrote: »

This isn't true. In the last month I have had my ex husbands name taken off the deeds of my house, but his name is still on the mortgage as I don't qualify for it on my own. My solicitors drew up the papers and I had to sign to say that I will make sure he is never chased for money from the mortgage company, and if that ever happened I would have to reimburse him, and I need to get his name off the mortgage as soon as it meet their criteria for taking it on by myself.

A solicitor can sort out the court consent order and the paperwork to get his name off the deeds and land registry. It is expensive, but totally worth it, good luck x

It is true if you want to do it without the agreement of the other co-owner. OP wants to remove her ex without his consent, which she cannot do.

Hanky_Panky

Cinders: wrote: »

I think I missed something, why shouldn't I take the mortgage on in my name only when the fixed term expires? I have bought my ex out of the house, and once the fixed term is up, the mortgage will be in my name only. I have savings to cover for 6 months should a redundancy occur. My mortgage lenders were fine with the situation, and there's only 18 mns left until the fixed term ends.

Why would it make more financial sense to sell up, uproot the children from their home, and lose loads of money on moving costs? Had we done that surely the children, my ex, and I would have been much worse off for the sake of waiting for a little while to change the mortgage over?

As I mentioned your situation is slightly different - you seem to have only gone this route to wait for the redemption penalty to stop. Most people don't do that - they can't afford to take the mortgage on their own but equally want their ex-partners name removed from the deeds. A number of solicitors think it's ok to do that and indemnify the ex but the reality is if the mortgagee company won't remortgage in one name only the chances are the person left in the home can't afford it and will struggle with repayments - I have seen this situation many hundreds of times.