Can I go on the deeds but not on the mortgage?

legseleven192000

Hello

My partner and myself are trying to get a mortgage to help a relative buy a house. HSBC have confirmed the mortgage as indirect security on the house so that we dont have to pay 2nd home stamp duty, and dont have to go down the joint mortgage, sole proprietor route. This is due to us having a house mortgaged already that is too high to allow this joint/sole type of mortgage to be accepted.

HSBC absolutely swear it is possible for us to go on the mortgage and not on the deeds. So obviously we went ahead with it. At the point this week our solicitor has gone to register the deeds with Land Registry, they say that everyone on the deeds has to go on the mortgage, so our relative has to go on the mortgage. This is not possible due to her age, and us being able to get the mortgage with her on it. So we are at a stalemate between HSBC saying it is acceptable, and Land Registry saying its not.

Can anyone shed some light on whether all parties on the deeds have to go on the mortgage?

"everyone who is a legal owner has to feature on the charge (mortgage)" wording from land registry. So how can a huge bank be wrong?

thanks
J

kingstreet

legseleven192000 wrote: »

HSBC absolutely swear it is possible for us to go on the mortgage and not on the deeds.

I think we can safely assume HSBC knows how its own legal charge operates and it is indeed, the only UK lender which offers a 'sole borrower, joint proprietor,' or more owners than borrowers legal charge.

legseleven192000

Thanks, thats what I think too. However direct wording from a Land registry letter in response to the solicitor stating:
The charge can not be registered on the title as a legal charge. The name of the borrower(s) must agree with that of all of the registered proprioter(s)

We want to register the relative as a sole proprioter and not us on the deeds, so we are just an indirect charge through HSBC. But they wont have it.

kingstreet

Unfortunately, no-one on here can give you anything you can produce to the Land Registry which is going to change their minds.

Only your solicitor, who presumably has also acted for HSBC can explain to the LR that HSBC is the only UK lender which has a legal charge which can accommodate this.

Either that or someone from HSBC needs to explain to the LR what it is willing to accept where other lenders won't.

TrickyDicky101

OP do you mean your relative would be on the title registry (as proprietor) but would not be on the mortgage? I don't see how HSBC would have any legal charge in which case.

If I have misunderstood then fair enough!

kingstreet

TrickyDicky101 wrote: »

OP do you mean your relative would be on the title registry (as proprietor) but would not be on the mortgage? I don't see how HSBC would have any legal charge in which case.

If I have misunderstood then fair enough!

No. You are understanding correctly.

As counter-intuitive as it sounds, HSBC's legal charge can cope with someone named on the ownership who is not party to the mortgage.

TrickyDicky101

kingstreet wrote: »

No. You are understanding correctly.

As counter-intuitive as it sounds, HSBC's legal charge can cope with someone named on the ownership who is not party to the mortgage.

But if nobody on the ownership is named on the mortgage where's the security for HSBC?

legseleven192000

Hi Thats right yes. This is what im trying to do roughly. But also trying not to go on the registry ourselves (named) due to the 2nd home stamp duty charge if we do. Hense the sole proprietor.
Option 2 we go on the registry and just pay the stamp, but land registry are saying neither of these can apply as she is not on the mortgage. They must be wrong, I cant figure it out!

Mortgage_Adviser

TrickyDicky101 wrote: »

But if nobody on the ownership is named on the mortgage where's the security for HSBC?

OP will be on both mortgage and deeds

TrickyDicky101

Mortgage_Adviser wrote: »

OP will be on both mortgage and deeds

That isn't the case as outlined by OP or KS.

Boy am I confused - I need to go and have a stiff drink :beer:

kingstreet

TrickyDicky101 wrote: »

But if nobody on the ownership is named on the mortgage where's the security for HSBC?

I know it's difficult to believe, I found it exactly the same when I found out about it. It appears to make no sense whatsoever...

I spoke to a solicitor I know well and he told me he'd done one and if he ever got another he would double his fee, or refuse to act, as it was a right PITA.

Nothwithstanding the above, it is correct. HSBC has a legal charge which can accept someone being party to the ownership of the property who is not named on the mortgage and it is the only lender to be able to do so.