So if he and the ex were only paying interest only and he has only been paying interest only since she left. Does that not mean when they sell, they will probably owe about 17k if the current house evaluation is correct at around 125k? Minus deposit they might come out slightly ahead I guess?
Ex-partner is wanting to sell the house.
- Thread starter Droolinggimp
- Start date
So if he and the ex were only paying interest only and he has only been paying interest only since she left. Does that not mean when they sell, they will probably owe about 17k if the current house evaluation is correct at around 125k? Minus deposit they might come out slightly ahead I guess?
He was paying equity with his ex I believe only moved to interest only on his own.
OP. It could make sense for you to just sell up. I presume there would then be housing support available if you’re on a low income (which I don’t think there is as a homeowner)
OP. It could make sense for you to just sell up. I presume there would then be housing support available if you’re on a low income (which I don’t think there is as a homeowner)
It would have much simpler to have sorted this when you finally split. Since then you, wrongly in my book, changed to a interest only mortgage when you should have sold the house back when you split. You have been the one, reguardless of what mortgage, that have been getting lodging out of the house for 10-12 years and to me that is worth something especially if she is still registered on it. I suspect that going rate for a rental is more than the money you are paying on the interest only mortgage?
Does she know that you changed the mortgage to interest only, if so when? Did she know that you changed to an interest only mortgage still using her particulars to get it? I think you have both trying to 'play' each other, you with changing the mortgage and her by letting you pay what she thinks is the full mortgage for 10 or so years.
Things are going to get complicated for you as I suspect that you have taken advantage of this woman for over a decade.
//Just to add, That's why I think she thinks there is equity in the house as she, wrongly, has thought that you have been paying the whole amount, primary+interest. I don't think you are telling the full story, and that is your right, but I would go and see a solicitor as this is going to get messy fast!
Does she know that you changed the mortgage to interest only, if so when? Did she know that you changed to an interest only mortgage still using her particulars to get it? I think you have both trying to 'play' each other, you with changing the mortgage and her by letting you pay what she thinks is the full mortgage for 10 or so years.
Things are going to get complicated for you as I suspect that you have taken advantage of this woman for over a decade.
//Just to add, That's why I think she thinks there is equity in the house as she, wrongly, has thought that you have been paying the whole amount, primary+interest. I don't think you are telling the full story, and that is your right, but I would go and see a solicitor as this is going to get messy fast!
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 14,064
- Location
- France, Alsace
All seems a bit random to me...
What % was the downpayment you both made when you bought it?
I can't understand a 15yr period of zero increase in value...
How long was she paying with you, when it was a repayment mortgage? Technically, that's what she's been paying. Since it's been interest only, it's basically just renting from the bank.
You really need to sell. The bank have said that you cannot afford it (they won't take the risk anyway, which means you can't) without her name on it, and she doesn't want to be listed, which to be fair, I wouldn't as she would be liable as well if it all went to ****.
What % was the downpayment you both made when you bought it?
I can't understand a 15yr period of zero increase in value...
How long was she paying with you, when it was a repayment mortgage? Technically, that's what she's been paying. Since it's been interest only, it's basically just renting from the bank.
You really need to sell. The bank have said that you cannot afford it (they won't take the risk anyway, which means you can't) without her name on it, and she doesn't want to be listed, which to be fair, I wouldn't as she would be liable as well if it all went to ****.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2017
- Posts
- 303
Either way, you ain't keeping that house if she is adamant in selling. She will either force a sale through the courts, or you can voluntarily sell it with her and save a lot of legal fees. You could try another mortgage provider and remortgage on your own but it sounds like you won't be able to do that.
I was starting to think this - she has probably been biding her time assuming a good slab of the mortgage has been paid off. Potentially this is going to explode on both of them.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,173
Yeah, if she is on the mortgage then she would have to have been involved.
Potentially yeah not very clear from the details provided. A lot of people don't understand what an interest only mortgage is however :s
If she didn't know you had changed to an interest only mortgage and you did it without her consent isn't that illegal?
I would expect so
I would be quite surprised if the OP could change the mortgage without both parties having to sign the documentation. Of course it's always possible that she didn't know what she was signing. But she still should have read through it and understood it. There are so many factors involved here that the OP really does need legal advice (and I know he's indicated that he will get it). For example could the fact he's had benefit of living there mean that she's owed 'rent' from any equity? Could the OP actually be owed more equity because he has been maintaining the property, etc.
But it is very odd that the property is worth little more than when it was bought, considering the massive price rises that have taken place.
But it is very odd that the property is worth little more than when it was bought, considering the massive price rises that have taken place.
Mortgage fraud isn't unheard of. The OP said that he applied on his own and was declined, that's what got me thinking that he could have applied for the interest only with her details that he/they already had(and she possible didn't know hence her thinking that he was paying the full original mortage) - and the correspondence would go to the house that he occupied.. I'm not accusing the OP of that, but going from what he's said it's a possible interpretation.
I also don't believe that the house hasn't risen in value over the 10-12 years that they have separated, let alone the extra 4 years that they were together. House prices in my area have more than doubled in 16 years, closer to trebled I would guess...
We sold a house in 2012, which we'd bought in 2006, and the overall market was down about 10%. We had bought well, and sold for £500 more than paid, luckily.
Since then, prices have gone up by maybe 20% so OP's house, if it were following the general market, might be worth 10% more than when they separated. Regional variations, though. And he probably hasn't done much work on the house, given budgetary constraints - might cause some devaluation.
She obviously thinks there's a load of equity in the house. There's absolutely no point in her selling as she won't get any money, in fact she'll owe money due to fees etc.
She should just leave it as it is , she's getting the interest paid anyway.
If there was a divorce, there must have been a ruling on the house, if you were not married then she can't force you to sell, you don't owe her any money and you made most of the mortgage payments.
For those who say she could force a sale, she would have to go through the courts and it would be very difficult, I suspect they would just say tough.
She should just leave it as it is , she's getting the interest paid anyway.
If there was a divorce, there must have been a ruling on the house, if you were not married then she can't force you to sell, you don't owe her any money and you made most of the mortgage payments.
For those who say she could force a sale, she would have to go through the courts and it would be very difficult, I suspect they would just say tough.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,662
- Location
- La France
This is why jointly held assets must be sold off/transferred as part of the divorce.
Doubt it - she's on the hook for OP missing mortgage payments. I'm not sure courts would insist that situation remains.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2009
- Posts
- 19,893
- Location
- Wales
Things become quite different when there are kids involved. Courts take the welfare of minor children pretty seriously.
no she isn't, she just paid the interest for a loan she was a party to, if she didn't the bad credit rep would go to her as well as op.
It doesn't sound like it was a lot of money or that any agreement was entered into. She might be able to take him to the small claims court, but he could just say it was a gift, at worst he would repay just interest money and at a rate he could afford.
If his name is on the mortgage, she can't force him to sell, unless there was a prior legal arrangement for this. Its just tough.
The bank could force him to sell if they wanted to, she could possibly try and claim he owes her half the house value, but he's probably not denying that.
More to the point if it is a joint mortgage she probably can't redeem it with out his agreement.
Whatever, its not cut and dried.