Does cohabiting partner HAVE to be on the mortgage?

Neverending_Story

Sorry for the repost... there might be someone here more able to help.

Quick question - I spoke to a building society earlier and I am not sure if there were some wires crossed somewhere.

I own my flat, my partner has moved in with me and we need more space. So, he has poor credit history and my salary is more than enough to cover the purchase price of the house. I want to buy the house and keep it in my name. H can pay for everything else as it works out about even. If he ever proposes that's a different matter...;-) I could afford it even if he wasn't about.

Anyway, The building society told me that if he is living here he has to be on the mortgage, whether he contributes to it or not. And they don't lend to poor credit. So no mortgage. I am confused... I don't want them to lend to him, it will be my house...

Should I try again and speak to a different advisor? Was she correct? Should I buy the house anyway and not tell them where he lives?

Constructive feedback please.

Thrugelmir

Do you meet the full affordability criteria in your own right? By criteria I am referring to the lenders not what you believe is affordable.

Lenders can set their terms. Maybe worth trying another or using a broker to assist you.

You'll need to declare the fact that another adult will be living there. Failure to do so will be regarded as fraud. As the mortgage application form has a very detailed and specific declaration that you'll be asked to sign.

Your partner will be asked to complete an Occupiers Consent Form in any event.

Explanatory Notes re Building Society/Bank "Consent" Forms

(Please read carefully before you sign the consent form)

Consent forms are required by lenders when an adult is to be in occupation of the mortgaged property, but that occupier is not a legal owner of the property.

The reason for the requirement is that it is now established law that such an occupier can acquire a legal interest in the property, despite his or her name not being on the deeds.

When a lender takes security over a property by way of a mortgage or charge, its ultimate sanction, if things go wrong, is to repossess the property and sell it on the open market with vacant possession. In 1981, in the case of Williams & Glyn's Bank -v- Boland, the Bank tried to repossess the property. Mrs Boland lived at the property, but her name was not on the deeds and she was not, therefore, a party to the Bank's mortgage. Mrs Boland applied to the Courts for relief against possession, on the basis that she had acquired an interest in the property and the Bank had no right to force her out. The Court decided in her favour, leaving the Bank with virtually no security. This sent the lending institutions into a panic and, in order to overcome the problem, the requirement for a non owning occupier to sign a consent form came about.
All lending institutions have slightly different consent forms but the effect of them is the same. By signing the form, the occupier

(a) acknowledges that the property is to be subject to the mortgage,

(b) consents to the creation of the mortgage, and

(c) agrees with the lender that any interest that the occupier might acquire in the property would come after, or rank behind, the interest of the lender.

If Mrs Boland had signed such a form, then she would not have been able, in 1981, to prevent the Bank either from obtaining possession of the property or from forcing her out
of occupation.

An occupier asked to sign a consent form has the right to seek independent legal advice before signing and, if there are any concerns or uncertainties, an occupier is advised to
seek such independent advice.

Neverending_Story

Aah ok.

Yes, I have used their online affordability calculators and they were willing to lend me more than we actually needed.

Hmm, that throws a spanner in the works then. I can live on my own or I can live with my partner in a too-small flat but I can't live with him in a house and pay the mortgage, although we can more than afford it. Crazy world.

Any suggestions for lenders? I have tried brokers and none of them seem to know. I just get told to try applying and see what happens which is clearly no good.

Thrugelmir

There'll be options. Someone ideally needs to run through your circumstances in detail. On an internet forum one can only generalise.

Mahsroh

Going back a while now (2008) but I did this with Halifax with no problem.

Myself and my then partner moved in together. I worked full time and she was a full time student. I did the mortgage application solely on my own but with the bank fully aware that she was moving in with me.

She was not named on the Mortgage or the house (land registry) and all Halifax insisted on was that she signed an agreement (not dissimilar from the consent form quoted above) which essentially said that if the home got repossessed because I didn't keep up repayments that she couldn't claim squatters rights. It was very simple and straightforward.

Neverending_Story

Thanks. I might go back to the brokers and pick their brains some more then. :-)

amnblog

A little baffled by this and why you are having a problem.

Both occupants do not have to be on the mortgage with most lenders, although spouses do with some.

Is the problem that your Partner is intending to put some cash into the purchase? That may cause a complication.

Otherwise, you have been speaking to some pretty poor brokers.

lauren_hb

amnblog wrote: »

A little baffled by this and why you are having a problem.

Both occupants do not have to be on the mortgage with most lenders, although spouses do with some.

Is the problem that your Partner is intending to put some cash into the purchase? That may cause a complication.

Otherwise, you have been speaking to some pretty poor brokers.

Can I ask, if the partner is intending to put cash towards the purchase, so contributing to the deposit, how exactly would these complications be dealt with?

Debtslayer

Neverending_Story wrote: »

Sorry for the repost... there might be someone here more able to help.

Quick question - I spoke to a building society earlier and I am not sure if there were some wires crossed somewhere.

I own my flat, my partner has moved in with me and we need more space. So, he has poor credit history and my salary is more than enough to cover the purchase price of the house. I want to buy the house and keep it in my name. H can pay for everything else as it works out about even. If he ever proposes that's a different matter...;-) I could afford it even if he wasn't about.

Anyway, The building society told me that if he is living here he has to be on the mortgage, whether he contributes to it or not. And they don't lend to poor credit. So no mortgage. I am confused... I don't want them to lend to him, it will be my house...

Should I try again and speak to a different advisor? Was she correct? Should I buy the house anyway and not tell them where he lives?

Constructive feedback please.

Hi
I would say you've had some pretty poor advice here. (Unless there's more information we don't know).
You can definitely buy on your own; but your partner would need to sign a form to say he has no rights of interest in the property.
Speak to a good mortgage broker; they will certainly be able to help you with this. And it needs to be an independent whole of market broker; not one through and estate agent

kingstreet

lauren_hb wrote: »

Can I ask, if the partner is intending to put cash towards the purchase, so contributing to the deposit, how exactly would these complications be dealt with?

Avoid lenders having an issue with that and the money would have to be treated as a gift for those who will accept.

silvercar

lauren_hb wrote: »

Can I ask, if the partner is intending to put cash towards the purchase, so contributing to the deposit, how exactly would these complications be dealt with?

Partner gifts money to trusted relative; trusted relative gifts money to you; you pay deposit; trusted relative completes a form that says the money is a gift without reservation.