Split From Partner - Mortgage Situation

swingaloo

corkyefes said:

DE_612183 said:

corkyefes said:

DE_612183 said:

How long did the family live in the house before he left?

What was the property value when bought and the mortgage?

What was the outstanding mortgage when he left and what is it now?

Regardless of personal issues - the ex contributed towards some of the equity in that property and he's quite within his rights to try and realise some of that - or your sister can try and compensate him for that.

If your sister is not divorced, then at some point a financial settlement will have to be reached, which as you say he will profit from.

If it's easier to think of it like this - the Ex has a stake in that property which is an asset which is invested in the property market - when that asset gets realised, he'd quite rightly expect some sort of growth / interest to be paid to him - you can't expect him to leave an asset for 10 years and the value not increase at all.

Thanks for your reply.

I would say he lived in the property for 4-5 years before he left.

House was purchased for £180k and i think there is about £120k left in the property.

Also the concern i have is if she sold the house and took her say £25k equity, would she loose her benefits as she only works a set amount of hours a week?

I understand the point about hes entilted to half when it sells, it just seems abit unfair when hes not contibuting to either the house or kids.

So at the moment about £30k is his stake in the property - and I guess that's the sort of settlement figure he would look to - of course your sister could say "I'll give you £10k and you don't have to pay any more CM" - depends what she can afford and what appetite is to fight.

The equity she takes would only affect her benefits if she then when into rented rather than buy - ( I think - not to sure - she would definitely be ok if you bought another property - perhaps look at some shared ownership if there are any around )

I know it seems unfair - and it's hard to look at another perspective - but from his point of view he's invested money in that property for the 5 years he was there - now he wants some of that back - of course if your sister does sell he'd have no excuse to to pay support ( and could even make up for the payments he's missed as he now have the funds to do so ).

Thank you for this, it really does help.

One last question. If she agreed a settlement with him, I assume that would need to be done by the solicitor.

Also he would still stay on the mortgage wont he? - As my sister enquried about taking him off the mortgage and they said he cant as she cannot afford it on her own (as they dont take benefits into consideration.

If she buys him out then she will need to re mortgage in her own name. If she cant do this then she cant buy him out. 

Exodi

comeandgo said:

corkyefes said:

comeandgo said:

Why do you need to own a property?  Why can’t you sell and then rent?

Just feel that renting is wasted money, when she already owns a property, to some extent.

But it’s ok for him to rent?

I was minded to not post on this thread as it's clear the OP is not interested in any opinions that don't align with theirs, but this was my thought also and virtually most of what has been said I find incredibly audacious.

You've responded to a perfect example of hypocrisy, but another example:

corkyefes said:

my point is that I am currently paying for a house, in terms of the full mortgage payment, all the bills etc and he is not contibuting towards the house

Yet he is also paying for a house, in terms of the the rent payment, all the bills etc and you are not contributing towards his house? Why should he contribute to yours in particular? You also expect maintenance on top of this?

Despite the expectation that he should be paying maintenance AND part of the mortgage on top of his rent and bills for the property he lives, it really rubs me up the wrong way to read things like:

corkyefes said:

However, when i do come to sell the house in say another 8 years, he is going to reap all the benefits of taking half the equity!

Is there anyway to stop this, or put something in place to prevent him getting just half of it, despite paying nothing?

corkyefes said:
I understand the point about hes entilted to half when it sells, it just seems abit unfair when hes not contibuting to either the house or kids.

It's just such an insult to refuse to sell the house and return his half of the equity back to him, thereby forcing him to stay on the mortgage, while simultaneously performing the mental gymnastics required to conclude that it is unfair that he should get half the equity when it (eventually) sells, because you are somehow forced into paying the mortgage in a situation entirely caused by yourself.

If he was given half the equity now, he could start building equity on a new property, but now he will be genuinely forced into renting for many years (he won't be able to buy a house while on the mortgage with you since will remain constantly liable should you decide to not pay the mortgage) while you kick back as an owner-occupier. You are both paying housing payments since your split, why would it be fair that you get to benefit from equity from housing payments while he doesn't?

I expect I'll receive a similar reply along the lines of "Be good if you kept your opinions to yourself!" but it's hard to sit by and read things like this.

ian1246

Sell the house, use the equity for a new property you can afford (including shared ownership) or otherwise to subsidise renting your own place. Once the equity falls below the limit, universal credit will kick in.

Put a claim in with CSA to ensure he pays his dues.

You staying in the house & refusing a sale is locking his equity in the address and forcing him to remain financially tied to you until a sale is achieved, including his remaining financially liable for that joint debt & therefore unable to move forward with his own life.

Basically: you have housing options but your choosing the option which prohibits his own assets/freedom.

That's what he'll argue if it goes to court & i think you'll struggle to argue against it - especially if your not married.

Also, what exactly is your plan if he decides he doesn't want to pay rent & will move back in? He'd have as much right to be there as you...

DE_612183

corkyefes said:

DE_612183 said:

corkyefes said:

DE_612183 said:

How long did the family live in the house before he left?

What was the property value when bought and the mortgage?

What was the outstanding mortgage when he left and what is it now?

Regardless of personal issues - the ex contributed towards some of the equity in that property and he's quite within his rights to try and realise some of that - or your sister can try and compensate him for that.

If your sister is not divorced, then at some point a financial settlement will have to be reached, which as you say he will profit from.

If it's easier to think of it like this - the Ex has a stake in that property which is an asset which is invested in the property market - when that asset gets realised, he'd quite rightly expect some sort of growth / interest to be paid to him - you can't expect him to leave an asset for 10 years and the value not increase at all.

Thanks for your reply.

I would say he lived in the property for 4-5 years before he left.

House was purchased for £180k and i think there is about £120k left in the property.

Also the concern i have is if she sold the house and took her say £25k equity, would she loose her benefits as she only works a set amount of hours a week?

I understand the point about hes entilted to half when it sells, it just seems abit unfair when hes not contibuting to either the house or kids.

So at the moment about £30k is his stake in the property - and I guess that's the sort of settlement figure he would look to - of course your sister could say "I'll give you £10k and you don't have to pay any more CM" - depends what she can afford and what appetite is to fight.

The equity she takes would only affect her benefits if she then when into rented rather than buy - ( I think - not to sure - she would definitely be ok if you bought another property - perhaps look at some shared ownership if there are any around )

I know it seems unfair - and it's hard to look at another perspective - but from his point of view he's invested money in that property for the 5 years he was there - now he wants some of that back - of course if your sister does sell he'd have no excuse to to pay support ( and could even make up for the payments he's missed as he now have the funds to do so ).

Thank you for this, it really does help.

One last question. If she agreed a settlement with him, I assume that would need to be done by the solicitor.

Also he would still stay on the mortgage wont he? - As my sister enquried about taking him off the mortgage and they said he cant as she cannot afford it on her own (as they dont take benefits into consideration.

yes, you'd need a solicitor.

There are two elements here:

The Deeds of the property and mortgage itself - and they are interlinked.

You could get him removed from the deeds, but the mortgage company would have to agree - and if they don't think you're sister can afford it I'm not sure they would.

You'd have to ask them - at the end of the day the mortgage company just want to protect the money they have loaned - providing they have two people to chase if things go belly up they may be happy.

Of course would the ex still want to be potentially liable for the debt if your sister can't afford and starts missing mortgage payments - probably not.

Her best would probably be to sell and use her equity somewhere else, otherwise she losing on not getting anything from the ex and she's maintaining the investment ( the house ) for him.

Has she tried any other mortgage brokers?

If there is only £120k left which may be affordable - there are some specialists brokers that will point you in the direction of lenders that take those into account.

The other thing to bear in mind is what rate the mortgage is at now?

If it's a fixed when does it end and what rate is it fro - she may find herself paying more for the same property anyway and be forced to sell....

Exodi

DE_612183 said:
If it's a fixed when does it end and what rate is it fro - she may find herself paying more for the same property anyway and be forced to sell....

There has been accounts of aggrieved ex's refusing to agree to renew the mortgage when the fixed deal comes to an end, causing the mortgage to fall onto the standard mortgage rate - sending the monthly payment into the atmosphere.

The partner who refuses to leave is then faced with a situation of meeting the new sky-high mortgage payment, or defaulting (and you can expect the ex won't be making up the payment!), which eventually leads to the house being repossessed and sold... finally allowing the ex to get their equity out of the property.

Of course if there was a formal Mesher order this could have consequences, but if there was a court process involved, the ex would have an opportunity to thrash out this whole situation in the first place. I can't say I've seen many accounts of Mesher orders on this forum that went well (but I guess people don't post when things go well)... but a fair few cases where the children finally reach the relevant age and the ex then decides that they still don't quite fancy selling the house as they've now lived in it so long and they've become attached.

I'm personally a fan of as clean a break as possible (obviously considering that children are involved) - and forcing people to stay on mortgages for houses they don't live for potentially years or decades is not clean at all.