Secured loan against home.

Thrugelmir

Ap_hazard_42 wrote: »

Any advise other than loosing thousands in court would be helpful? Maybe there's a way out with the bank?

Repay the debt by means of a loan (mortgage).

Ap_hazard_42

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

Can I ask why you did not mention this at the beginning?
A whole page of replies that are wrong because we had NONE of the material facts.


The One answer I have for you - if the charge is legally put on the property then the only way to remove it is to pay the loan off - no iffs or buts.
How you do this should get its own thread!

I wrote the scenario as if he was alive because he was alive when he took the loan. It still may stand that he took the loan illegally.


Please read the info correctly put in front of you before you judge, then you can judge accurately. THE LOAN HAS ALREADY BEEN PAID. Our problem is how it should be paid back into the estate.


Please re-read! Just in case you suggest, I have already posted on the death forum!


Please have some sympathy, one of my family died!


"The executors of the estate have paid off the loan (the loan was secured against the house (left to wife)and a piece of land (left to one of executors), the bank would taken the land. If the spouse had defaulted on the loan). But the executors are telling the wife she has got to pay the loan back into the residue. But the loan was secured against two securities. The solicitor and executors are telling the wife that the paperwork involving the original mortgage deed has gone missing. The bank will not respond to their questions. "

Thrugelmir

Ap_hazard_42 wrote: »

"The executors of the estate have paid off the loan (the loan was secured against the house (left to wife)and a piece of land (left to one of executors), the bank would taken the land. If the spouse had defaulted on the loan). But the executors are telling the wife she has got to pay the loan back into the residue. But the loan was secured against two securities. The solicitor and executors are telling the wife that the paperwork involving the original mortgage deed has gone missing. The bank will not respond to their questions. "

Could you please clarify why does the loan have to be paid back into the estate?

Ap_hazard_42

antrobus wrote: »

That would be the one.

I could not for the life of me remember, but I was sure that back, back in the mists of time somewhere, there had been a case where a lender was denied a repo. And as a result, every sensible lender made spousal consent a condition of granting a mortgage.

I don't know whether the position was changed by the Land Registration Act 2002; I don't think so because "An interest belonging to a person in actual occupation" is listed in Schedule 1 of that act as an example of an "Unregistered interests which override first registration".

But I am not a lawyer. And do if this kind of thing really matters to someone, the best thing to do is speak to someone who is.

Thank you for your help. It is much appreciated.

Ap_hazard_42

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Could you please clarify why does the loan have to be paid back into the estate?

The thousands (loan amount) has to be paid back into the estate to the residuary beneficiaries. As the executors have already paid the loan off sometime ago via the husbands assets. They are then telling the wife she has to pay the money in from her share of the residue (this lessens her inheritance drastically).


The loan was originally secured against another property also, that was more likely to have been sold if the husband defaulted on the loan (when alive). The house wouldn't have been sold as it would have been easier for the bank to take the money from the other source.


I am assuming as the executors don't want to take any responsibility for the other half of the loan repayment into the estate. The wife will sadly have to pay. As taking the executors to court is too harrowing (after all she has been through) and too costly. Also the bank will not speak to the wife as she is not an executor.


This is why I wondered if the bank had any liability considering they never asked for the wife's signature on the original loan agreement. I'm just trying to help someone dear to me.


I would never trust anyone myself, if married all would be in both names. Debts and assets .

Mojisola

Ap_hazard_42 wrote: »

As the executors have already paid the loan off sometime ago via the husbands assets.

I am assuming as the executors don't want to take any responsibility for the other half of the loan repayment into the estate.

The wife will sadly have to pay.

The executors took the decision to use the other assets to pay off the loan. They are legally responsible for their actions.

If I was the wife, I would sit tight.

Residual beneficiaries only get what is left - in this case, after the loan has been paid.

Ap_hazard_42

Mojisola wrote: »

The executors took the decision to use the other assets to pay off the loan. They are legally responsible for their actions.

If I was the wife, I would sit tight.

Residual beneficiaries only get what is left - in this case, after the loan has been paid.

Thank you for your advice. The wife would like the loan to have been paid via the assets. Then whatever was left could simply be share out between the residue beneficiaries. BUT when we suggested this via our solicitor they quoted the


The provision of section 35 administration of estates act


Telling us that the wife had to pay the amount back.