Gifted deposit.. Help

hilladnama

There is nothing to say it is an investment.. 

allconnected

there are two separate issues here.


the evidential status of the payment, which was documented as a gift ‘for mortgage purposes’ and which the donor is very unlikely to be able to recover through the courts in the absence of contradictory evidence.

and

the actual status of the payment, which will also include any terms agreed between the parties which aren’t documented in writing. If both parties agreed this was paid as a loan,  but they were prepared to lie to the mortgage company about its status, then it’s a loan. Lying to the mortgage company doesn’t change this. The fact that the lender has shot themselves in the foot with regard to legal methods of recovering the loan doesn’t change that.

your answers are phrased carefully to cover what is documented in writing only. Only you and the donor know what you actually agreed at the time. If you know it was given as a loan, then act accordingly. If you’re sure it was a gift, the same. 

silvercar

allconnected said:

there are two separate issues here.


the evidential status of the payment, which was documented as a gift ‘for mortgage purposes’ and which the donor is very unlikely to be able to recover through the courts in the absence of contradictory evidence.

and

the actual status of the payment, which will also include any terms agreed between the parties which aren’t documented in writing. If both parties agreed this was paid as a loan,  but they were prepared to lie to the mortgage company about its status, then it’s a loan. Lying to the mortgage company doesn’t change this. The fact that the lender has shot themselves in the foot with regard to legal methods of recovering the loan doesn’t change that.

your answers are phrased carefully to cover what is documented in writing only. Only you and the donor know what you actually agreed at the time. If you know it was given as a loan, then act accordingly. If you’re sure it was a gift, the same. 

Even if it was a gift on paper, but a loan verbally (which is odd in itself, and take "odd" as a polite word for mortgage fraud), there would have been an understanding that the money is being used to fund a home purchase. As such the donor would be under no illusion that it can't be repaid other than on the sale of the property and that in itself would only be possible if the receiver no longer had need of the money.  Given the donor now wants the money back or to go on the deeds, what purpose would going on the deeds make? To force a sale to get their money or as a future on paper investment.

When someone makes a "gift" (and there really is no need for "", money can only have one status.) they are required by the lender to take independent legal advice that they understand that a gift isn't repayable. If the donor thinks that they were misled, they can pursue this with the solicitor who gave them the advice. If they didn't understand the advice, then their solicitor didn't explain the difference between a gift and a loan properly.

user1977

silvercar said:

allconnected said:

there are two separate issues here.


the evidential status of the payment, which was documented as a gift ‘for mortgage purposes’ and which the donor is very unlikely to be able to recover through the courts in the absence of contradictory evidence.

and

the actual status of the payment, which will also include any terms agreed between the parties which aren’t documented in writing. If both parties agreed this was paid as a loan,  but they were prepared to lie to the mortgage company about its status, then it’s a loan. Lying to the mortgage company doesn’t change this. The fact that the lender has shot themselves in the foot with regard to legal methods of recovering the loan doesn’t change that.

your answers are phrased carefully to cover what is documented in writing only. Only you and the donor know what you actually agreed at the time. If you know it was given as a loan, then act accordingly. If you’re sure it was a gift, the same. 

When someone makes a "gift" (and there really is no need for "", money can only have one status.) they are required by the lender to take independent legal advice that they understand that a gift isn't repayable.

Which lenders insist on this? I haven't encountered it professionally, and I don't recall it coming up in any previous threads here on the subject?

hilladnama

It was a gifted deposit given to me from my brother, there was no discussion of it being a loan or lying to the mortgage lender. I'm not trying to phrase my answers carefully, I'm trying to provide a snapshot for some guidance, your reply has actually caused me more stress. 

MattMattMattUK

hilladnama said:

It was a gifted deposit given to me from my brother, there was no discussion of it being a loan or lying to the mortgage lender. I'm not trying to phrase my answers carefully, I'm trying to provide a snapshot for some guidance, your reply has actually caused me more stress. 

There is pretty much zero chance a court would say you have to return this gifted money, unless it was found to be the proceeds of crime or a deliberate deprivation of assets.

Have you asked your brother why he is now threatening you using a solicitor, or are you no longer on speaking terms?

diystarter7

Hi again OP

A gift is a gift and when in writing it is 100% a gift.

Being nosey, why do they want the money back - was it really a loan but to help you get a mortgage at a better rate or a mortgae they wrote gift? 
you dont need to respond as this is the first time I've seen anything like this

Are the gifters your parents/step etc?

Again you dont need to say - good luck

Thnaks

silvercar

user1977 said:

silvercar said:

allconnected said:

there are two separate issues here.


the evidential status of the payment, which was documented as a gift ‘for mortgage purposes’ and which the donor is very unlikely to be able to recover through the courts in the absence of contradictory evidence.

and

the actual status of the payment, which will also include any terms agreed between the parties which aren’t documented in writing. If both parties agreed this was paid as a loan,  but they were prepared to lie to the mortgage company about its status, then it’s a loan. Lying to the mortgage company doesn’t change this. The fact that the lender has shot themselves in the foot with regard to legal methods of recovering the loan doesn’t change that.

your answers are phrased carefully to cover what is documented in writing only. Only you and the donor know what you actually agreed at the time. If you know it was given as a loan, then act accordingly. If you’re sure it was a gift, the same. 

When someone makes a "gift" (and there really is no need for "", money can only have one status.) they are required by the lender to take independent legal advice that they understand that a gift isn't repayable.

Which lenders insist on this? I haven't encountered it professionally, and I don't recall it coming up in any previous threads here on the subject?

Our solicitor said it was standard across all lenders. 

user1977

silvercar said:

user1977 said:

silvercar said:

allconnected said:

there are two separate issues here.


the evidential status of the payment, which was documented as a gift ‘for mortgage purposes’ and which the donor is very unlikely to be able to recover through the courts in the absence of contradictory evidence.

and

the actual status of the payment, which will also include any terms agreed between the parties which aren’t documented in writing. If both parties agreed this was paid as a loan,  but they were prepared to lie to the mortgage company about its status, then it’s a loan. Lying to the mortgage company doesn’t change this. The fact that the lender has shot themselves in the foot with regard to legal methods of recovering the loan doesn’t change that.

your answers are phrased carefully to cover what is documented in writing only. Only you and the donor know what you actually agreed at the time. If you know it was given as a loan, then act accordingly. If you’re sure it was a gift, the same. 

When someone makes a "gift" (and there really is no need for "", money can only have one status.) they are required by the lender to take independent legal advice that they understand that a gift isn't repayable.

Which lenders insist on this? I haven't encountered it professionally, and I don't recall it coming up in any previous threads here on the subject?

Our solicitor said it was standard across all lenders. 

They were wrong. Maybe the solicitor was trying to cover their own back, but I've never seen a lender requiring anything beyond a letter being signed by the gifter.

diystarter7

silvercar said:

user1977 said:

silvercar said:

allconnected said:

there are two separate issues here.


the evidential status of the payment, which was documented as a gift ‘for mortgage purposes’ and which the donor is very unlikely to be able to recover through the courts in the absence of contradictory evidence.

and

the actual status of the payment, which will also include any terms agreed between the parties which aren’t documented in writing. If both parties agreed this was paid as a loan,  but they were prepared to lie to the mortgage company about its status, then it’s a loan. Lying to the mortgage company doesn’t change this. The fact that the lender has shot themselves in the foot with regard to legal methods of recovering the loan doesn’t change that.

your answers are phrased carefully to cover what is documented in writing only. Only you and the donor know what you actually agreed at the time. If you know it was given as a loan, then act accordingly. If you’re sure it was a gift, the same. 

When someone makes a "gift" (and there really is no need for "", money can only have one status.) they are required by the lender to take independent legal advice that they understand that a gift isn't repayable.

Which lenders insist on this? I haven't encountered it professionally, and I don't recall it coming up in any previous threads here on the subject?

Our solicitor said it was standard across all lenders. 

Hi

Yes, solicitors often blurt that out to cover their own backs as it is sensible advice, EG,   = X gifts money to XX. Then XX finnds all of their benefits are stopped.  Just one simple example so I agree that good solocitirs do and should give that advice.

Thnaks