Ex on the mortgage

vickyb31

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

silvercar

50% of the equity would be a starting point.

You wouldn't pay out 50% of the mortgage as you have been living in the property - you aren't paying rent to her on her half of the property instead you are paying all the mortgage.

Mortgage liability goes with living in the property. Either you want to take on the mortgage liability and live in the property or you sell up and the future mortgage liability disappears.

vickyb31

..........................

justme111

I am sure rent on her half would be less than half of mortgage payments so the proposition is generous imo. Your opening post was confusing as to what was the exact issue you had. Now I see - no contact with one of the parties who is on the mortgage. Have you asked your lender what would be the procedure to follow? It can not be you are the only ones in this situation.

vickyb31

........................

rpc

silvercar wrote: »

Mortgage liability goes with living in the property.

The only people who have any liability for a mortgage are those who signed the mortgage contract. Liability is (almost?) always on a joint and several basis.

Moving into a property doesn't create a mortgage liability and leaving one doesn't remove it. The liability is nothing more or less than that stated in the mortgage contract.

OP has no mortgage liability, but nor can the ex be charged 50% of the mortgage payments so far (partner was and is liable for 100% of the mortgage, as is the ex).

TBagpuss

OK, she, and your partner, can agree on whatever they want.
As he (and you?) have been living in the property there is an argument that payment of 'her half' of the mortgage is equivalent to him/you paying rent for using her share of the house, and therefore it should not be taken off her share of the equity.

If you/he have made over payments on the mortgage then of course it would be reasonable for those to be credit back to him.

If she doesn't respond at all, then he can force a sale - assuming they were not married, this would be a ToLATA claim, if they were, then he would have to apply for a financial order using the case number for the divorce.

In a ToLATA claim any evidence that she said she wanted nothing to do with the house would be relevant, but you also need to be careful about what offers you make, as they can also part of what the court takes into account!

You say you had sent her a transfer - what was the payment shown in the transfer, and had she previously accepted that amount?

vickyb31

.................................

vickyb31

Sorry.... she hasn't received a financial transfer, she has been sent the Transfer of ....... something document....Transfer the house out of her name into ours. It is all above board via a solicitors, once they receive her signed document the whole transaction can go ahead. A waiting game! But yes, the documents supplied showed the amount offered being the amount she agreed to.

leespot

vickyb31 wrote: »

Sorry.... she hasn't received a financial transfer, she has been sent the Transfer of ....... something document....Transfer the house out of her name into ours. It is all above board via a solicitors, once they receive her signed document the whole transaction can go ahead. A waiting game! But yes, the documents supplied showed the amount offered being the amount she agreed to.

How much is she being offered? That might explain why she hasn't bothered replying?

silvercar

What I possibly didn't explain well, is that, we'd be happy to pay her 50% equity less half of the mortgage costs for the past 8 1/2 years.

I think she would dispute why she should have the mortgage costs deducted for the last 8 1/2 years. Effectively, you have been renting the other half of the property from her and she was responsible for half the mortgage payments. So broadly speaking one cancels the other out.