We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Ex won’t remortgage
Options
Comments
-
silvercar said:elsien said:silvercar said:If you have the right to remain in the home until your child leaves school, then it is just bloody minded of him not to comply. Does he realise that his credit rating will be effected if you fall behind with payments and he does nothing to help?
And where does the comment that you can’t be forced to sell if you have a child under 16 come from? If whoever wrote that could post the relevant legislation that would be helpful.
From the alternative point of view, if the ex is needing to claim means tested benefits and has partial ownership in a house that they’re not using, or need to buy or rent somewhere themselves and fail affordability checks because of being named on the mortgage, they find themselves in a difficult position It’s not always down to sheer bloody-mindedness, and sometimes the only realistic option is to sell up.Given that running two homes is more expensive than one, and presumably both parents want there to be sufficient money to bring up the children, it is sheer bloody mindedness to refuse a remortgage request that has no impact on the non resident parent other than leaving the ex with extra income, some of which will be spent on their child.
It is not always feasible to continue paying a mortgage on a house you don't live in. This does not mean you are being bloody minded; it can also mean you are not rich.
Is the ex not allowed to meet a new partner, have a family, have a house to live in with them? In your eyes he must continue to pay for a mortgage where he no longer lives?
The OP says "he wants to get the house repossessed so I and our child (9) are forced to leave". That's the sort of rhetoric often heard following separation; he would doubtless say something quite different. Them being forced to leave may be the corollary of not paying the mortgage on a house he no longer lives in, but it may not be the intention.Feb 2008, 20year lifetime tracker with "Sproggit and Sylvester"... 0.14% + base for 2 years, then 0.99% + base for life of mortgage...base was 5.5% in 2008...but not for long. Credit to my mortgage broker1 -
silvercar said:some lenders allow remortgages to be booked online, in which case they should be allowed from one persons online account, as you don’t share online access to accounts.silvercar said:Given that running two homes is more expensive than one, and presumably both parents want there to be sufficient money to bring up the children, it is sheer bloody mindedness to refuse a remortgage request that has no impact on the non resident parent other than leaving the ex with extra income, some of which will be spent on their child.
But there are three points to consider:- The first (as you identify) is that there are two sets of housing costs. In that sense, forcing a sale so the OP has to pay (possibly higher) rent instead of a mortgage would appear to be spiteful (and probably not in the ex's interests either, considering equity built through mortgage payments is likely to be shared in the future).
- The second is that there is possibly a chunk of equity tied up in the property. The ex can not access that equity for as long as the OP resides in the house. This could possibly enable the ex to buy a new property.
- The third is that while the ex is jointly and severally liable for this mortgage, they may struggle to get another mortgage.
enthusiasticsaver said:Unfortunately this is a common problem after marital breakdowns. Hard to believe he wants the house to be repossessed though effectively leaving you and his child homeless. Does he know that will ruin his chance of getting a mortgage anytime soon too? If it is joint you are between a rock and a hard place though as both signatures are needed to move to a new deal. Any chance of you taking it over yourself and effectively releasing him from it?
The ex may be better off by trashing his credit rating for a few years, getting some equity from the house and then buying in the near future, than the current default position of waiting for a decade before he sees a sniff of equity, all the while he is likely forced to rent.Know what you don't0 -
fewcloudy said:silvercar said:elsien said:silvercar said:If you have the right to remain in the home until your child leaves school, then it is just bloody minded of him not to comply. Does he realise that his credit rating will be effected if you fall behind with payments and he does nothing to help?
And where does the comment that you can’t be forced to sell if you have a child under 16 come from? If whoever wrote that could post the relevant legislation that would be helpful.
From the alternative point of view, if the ex is needing to claim means tested benefits and has partial ownership in a house that they’re not using, or need to buy or rent somewhere themselves and fail affordability checks because of being named on the mortgage, they find themselves in a difficult position It’s not always down to sheer bloody-mindedness, and sometimes the only realistic option is to sell up.Given that running two homes is more expensive than one, and presumably both parents want there to be sufficient money to bring up the children, it is sheer bloody mindedness to refuse a remortgage request that has no impact on the non resident parent other than leaving the ex with extra income, some of which will be spent on their child.
It is not always feasible to continue paying a mortgage on a house you don't live in. This does not mean you are being bloody minded; it can also mean you are not rich.
Is the ex not allowed to meet a new partner, have a family, have a house to live in with them? In your eyes he must continue to pay for a mortgage where he no longer lives?
The OP says "he wants to get the house repossessed so I and our child (9) are forced to leave". That's the sort of rhetoric often heard following separation; he would doubtless say something quite different. Them being forced to leave may be the corollary of not paying the mortgage on a house he no longer lives in, but it may not be the intention.
If the OP stopped making mortgage payments, and he didn't either - they'd both be in breach of their mortgage agreement, irrelevant of the financial agreement they decided among themselves.
Which is clearly not an issue to the OP's ex, given that he probably wants the house to be repossessed.Know what you don't0 -
It’s kind of understandable really, I wouldn’t like the idea of renting while having equity stuck in a house my ex is living in. Which also blocks me from being able to get another mortgage as well.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards