Mortgage with partner, name on deeds

johnsm

turnitround said:

Am I missing something?
You have a property with only 50k left on the mortgage so presumably this house is worth in excess of 100k?

You have 50k in cash and she has 100k in cash.

Why not use your 50k to pay off the existing mortgage then you should both have enough between you to be able to purchase the 200k property mortgage free.

Sorry, I was using easy figures as an example. But we don’t have enough to purchase mortgage free. My 50k contribution would be from the sale of the house so would still need 50k mortgage. 

user1977 said:

johnsm said:

Understandably she doesn’t want to be named on a mortgage she isn’t responsible for or doesn’t require. 

Not all that understandable really. What does she think will happen if you stop making payments? Wouldn't she prefer to be on the account, and at least then have some control over what happens?

She’d be happy to be a guarantor should I fail to make payments but she will have paid her 50% contribution so doesn’t want to be tied to a mortgage. 

Thanks for all the responses, really appreciated. 

saajan_12

johnsm said:

turnitround said:

Am I missing something?
You have a property with only 50k left on the mortgage so presumably this house is worth in excess of 100k?

You have 50k in cash and she has 100k in cash.

Why not use your 50k to pay off the existing mortgage then you should both have enough between you to be able to purchase the 200k property mortgage free.

Sorry, I was using easy figures as an example. But we don’t have enough to purchase mortgage free. My 50k contribution would be from the sale of the house so would still need 50k mortgage. 

user1977 said:

johnsm said:

Understandably she doesn’t want to be named on a mortgage she isn’t responsible for or doesn’t require. 

Not all that understandable really. What does she think will happen if you stop making payments? Wouldn't she prefer to be on the account, and at least then have some control over what happens?

She’d be happy to be a guarantor should I fail to make payments but she will have paid her 50% contribution so doesn’t want to be tied to a mortgage. 

Thanks for all the responses, really appreciated. 

Being a guarantor is worse for her than being the borrower on the mortgage.. she'd have all the obligation of paying without the control / visibility of being the principal borrower. 

Sounds like there's some misunderstanding of what it means to be 'tied to a mortgage'.. you'd both be jointly and severally liable to pay the whole amount - there's no shares just because two people are named. If you do pay the whole thing, then there's nothing for gf to pay. If you don't pay, then gf would be liable similar to being a guarantor, or ultimately the whole house would be repossessed (similar to having a joint owner / sole borrower mortgage). So if there's nothing negative in her credit history that would actually make it harder to get a mortgage, I don't see the point of the differentiation. 

IamWood

Perhaps your partner can deposit £ 50K and borrow £ 50K through a mortgage as well. Your partner can invest the rest.

I am in the process of remortgaging. I'll borrow a lot more than I need and invest the rest because the interest rate is so low at the moment.

getmore4less

There is a case on here with the borrower(s) not being owners.

The key with sole borrow joint ownership is the owners have all put up the property as security(effectively a mortgage)

Although not liable for the debt the property can still be repossessed to pay the debt if not paid.

Could use offset where the extra cash sits in offset account.