Can Three People Own a House - But Only One Needs a Mortgage

user1977

CSL0183 said:

user1977 said:

“Protected” in what sense? They can’t prevent the lender from repossessing. At most all they can do is document how the equity is split.

Why would a lender repossess? If the 3rd person on the mortgage was struggling with paying for the mortgage, the other 2 would force sale to recoup their funds. 

It takes a lot of defaults for a repossession order and even then then the house is force sold, the bank recoups what they are owe and any equity transferred back to the owners. 

I don't think that contradicts anything I've said, I was just pointing out that the co-owners cannot prevent the possibility of the lender repossessing. Whether they, if/when the time comes, are able to come up with other solutions is of course something which nobody can predict.

Hoenir

CSL0183 said:

Hoenir said:

CSL0183 said:

thundyuk said:

Just as the title says really, can three people be on the deeds for a house, but only one has a mortgage?

Say, in my case, the house is £450,000, two of us have £150,000 each, and the third doesn't. Can she get a mortgage for her share alone and it not be in our names (understandably the mortgage would be secured against the whole house not just her bit).

Thanks

Why can’t the 3rd person take out a mortgage for £150k with the £300k (or 2/3) deposit protected in the names of the other two?

If the above is not possible due to title deeds issues then the 3 of you take out a mortgage with the same £300k (or 2/3 percentage) protected. 

An easy question for a conveyancing solicitor to be fair. 

Conveyancing solicitor's aren't in the business of lending money and the regulation / law that this entails. 

Of course they can advise on how to protect the £300k deposit, that’s their job and their bread and butter. 

Reread what I posted. For clarity. Solicitors do not lend money.