Remortgage ex won’t agree
Discussion
I’m after some advice for a friend of mine. Her ex let her and their 2 children 4-5 years ago. They were not married and are tenants in common on their home. She has stayed there with the children (15 and 12 now) and paid the mortgage on her own.
She is currently stuck on a variable rate as her ex refuses to let her move to a better product as he is insistent that she should see the house this year so he can take his share. She will obviously take professional advice but I wondered if anyone has any thoughts on this…
- Is there any way she can move to a better mortgage rate if he digs his heels in? Does the fact he walked out years ago and doesn’t contribute to the mortgage payments count for anything?
- I believe her only option to resolve this might be a financial dispute resolution hearing in court, but is there any alternative to what could be a costly option?
- is there anything else to consider here?
Basically any advice would be very welcome.
Thanks in advance
She is currently stuck on a variable rate as her ex refuses to let her move to a better product as he is insistent that she should see the house this year so he can take his share. She will obviously take professional advice but I wondered if anyone has any thoughts on this…
- Is there any way she can move to a better mortgage rate if he digs his heels in? Does the fact he walked out years ago and doesn’t contribute to the mortgage payments count for anything?
- I believe her only option to resolve this might be a financial dispute resolution hearing in court, but is there any alternative to what could be a costly option?
- is there anything else to consider here?
Basically any advice would be very welcome.
Thanks in advance
Edited by wiggy001 on Monday 3rd February 09:07
zsdom said:
If its just a simple rate switch your friend should be able to do this online without the need to involve the other party, the other points, speak to a lawyer
Who is the mortgage with?
He would have a valid complaint if an ERC was payable when the property came to be sold, due to the OP's friend committing both of them to a new product without his authority or knowledge............Who is the mortgage with?
Thanks for the quick responses. So what I’m hearing/thinking is that she is stuck paying more than she needs to because he refuses to allow her to remortgage, and as far as I am aware no judge would force her to sell the home now when she still has 2 children at home (so the remortgage will in reality make no difference to him).
And the only way to resolve this would be legally through the courts (he is unlikely to entertain mediation).
Presumably the fact that he walked out 5 years ago makes no difference to this except potentially influencing a judges decision in an FDR hearing?
As to why he wants his money in the next year, he (mistakenly) believes the house should be sold when their eldest is 16, whereas I believe it would be when their youngest is 18 or out of full time education. But obviously all of that would be at a judges discretion.
And the only way to resolve this would be legally through the courts (he is unlikely to entertain mediation).
Presumably the fact that he walked out 5 years ago makes no difference to this except potentially influencing a judges decision in an FDR hearing?
As to why he wants his money in the next year, he (mistakenly) believes the house should be sold when their eldest is 16, whereas I believe it would be when their youngest is 18 or out of full time education. But obviously all of that would be at a judges discretion.
wiggy001 said:
Thanks for the quick responses. So what I’m hearing/thinking is that she is stuck paying more than she needs to because he refuses to allow her to remortgage, and as far as I am aware no judge would force her to sell the home now when she still has 2 children at home (so the remortgage will in reality make no difference to him).
And the only way to resolve this would be legally through the courts (he is unlikely to entertain mediation).
Presumably the fact that he walked out 5 years ago makes no difference to this except potentially influencing a judges decision in an FDR hearing?
As to why he wants his money in the next year, he (mistakenly) believes the house should be sold when their eldest is 16, whereas I believe it would be when their youngest is 18 or out of full time education. But obviously all of that would be at a judges discretion.
She needs to see a divorce lawyer and get a financial settlement arranged. Although they are not married and don't need a divorce to end the marriage, the joint mortgage makes it more complicated than one of them disappearing in a soap opera taxi.And the only way to resolve this would be legally through the courts (he is unlikely to entertain mediation).
Presumably the fact that he walked out 5 years ago makes no difference to this except potentially influencing a judges decision in an FDR hearing?
As to why he wants his money in the next year, he (mistakenly) believes the house should be sold when their eldest is 16, whereas I believe it would be when their youngest is 18 or out of full time education. But obviously all of that would be at a judges discretion.
While he may not entertain mediation, they will usually be expected to try it before they get to court. If they go to court first, they will probably get thrown out and still have to carry the cost of the day - barristers and solicitors etc.
For the financial settlement it wont matter who did what when, unless one of them spunked the lot in a casino or similar.
As far as the settlement agreement is concerned, from what you have said she has one child at home, the 12 year old, and the 25 year old would have to fend for themselves in the eyes of the family courts. The financial settlement would normally run until the youngest turns 18 or finishes full time education which can mean university.
This would be a good start, but make sure you get the right UK version https://www.amazon.co.uk/Divorce-Dummies-UK-Thelma...
Thanks again for the responses. I have edited my original post to correct the children's ages - they are 15 and 12.
She would like to get this agreed and sorted as soon as possible but also needs security for the children. There is only around £120k equity in the property, she earns around £20k (but is looking to increase this with a job change if possible) while he is on around £60k (he is single and living back with parents at the moment). This is in south-east london/north-west Kent so no chance of getting her own mortgage to buy in this area.
I guess it is time to get some legal advice and mediation.
She would like to get this agreed and sorted as soon as possible but also needs security for the children. There is only around £120k equity in the property, she earns around £20k (but is looking to increase this with a job change if possible) while he is on around £60k (he is single and living back with parents at the moment). This is in south-east london/north-west Kent so no chance of getting her own mortgage to buy in this area.
I guess it is time to get some legal advice and mediation.
No judge can force one partner to pay anything towards a mortgage only child maintenance.
She forever be stuck with a variable mortgage rate unless she sells. Even if she does this if she in forced to sell he is entitled to recieve half the net including the amount she has been paying off the mortgage on her own.
She forever be stuck with a variable mortgage rate unless she sells. Even if she does this if she in forced to sell he is entitled to recieve half the net including the amount she has been paying off the mortgage on her own.
CraigNewmarket said:
He can force a sale if it goes to court. The person who doesn't want to sell gets 2 years to arrange other accommodation. Just because you have kids together doesn't mean you can sit on the house till kids are deemed old enough legally to stand on there own.
I was thinking that. Surely he can’t be forced to be on the mortgage forever because he is not paying and not living there.He may want to buy another house, etc and being in a mortgage will affect is ability to do so.
If they go to court she might be forced to sell.
CrgT16 said:
CraigNewmarket said:
He can force a sale if it goes to court. The person who doesn't want to sell gets 2 years to arrange other accommodation. Just because you have kids together doesn't mean you can sit on the house till kids are deemed old enough legally to stand on there own.
I was thinking that. Surely he can’t be forced to be on the mortgage forever because he is not paying and not living there.He may want to buy another house, etc and being in a mortgage will affect is ability to do so.
If they go to court she might be forced to sell.
But a legal case would force the father to support his children so it's probably in the father's interests just to let the house go rather than be forced into paying £££ by the CSA.
However, he may choose chaos and therefore the OP's friend may have to go that route.
Those saying she can be forced to sell, do you know this for a fact or is this just your opinion?
My understanding (having just been through my own divorce) is that only a judge could force a sale, but this is unlikely when there are children living there that she has sole care for (he does reluctantly pay CMS for them).
My situation was different in that we have shared equal care of our children but I was advised that if my ex had got full custody, I could have been kept on the mortgage (and paying it!) until my children turned 18 even though I was not living there.
I'd be interesting in any case law on this if anyone is aware of any.
My understanding (having just been through my own divorce) is that only a judge could force a sale, but this is unlikely when there are children living there that she has sole care for (he does reluctantly pay CMS for them).
My situation was different in that we have shared equal care of our children but I was advised that if my ex had got full custody, I could have been kept on the mortgage (and paying it!) until my children turned 18 even though I was not living there.
I'd be interesting in any case law on this if anyone is aware of any.
I don’t know for a fact but this is just a discussion forum not a legal helpline.
I thought it could be forced to sell. I think it all comes to the circumstances, etc. he is entitled to his share of the house adjusted to the 5 years he didn’t contribute. He may have to pay maintenance, etc for the children. He may have to wait until the children are adults before getting whatever he may be entitled too.
Only a competent lawyer in these matters can offer detailed advice on the laws and, like you said, probably only a judge will have the final say.
I thought it could be forced to sell. I think it all comes to the circumstances, etc. he is entitled to his share of the house adjusted to the 5 years he didn’t contribute. He may have to pay maintenance, etc for the children. He may have to wait until the children are adults before getting whatever he may be entitled too.
Only a competent lawyer in these matters can offer detailed advice on the laws and, like you said, probably only a judge will have the final say.
wiggy001 said:
Those saying she can be forced to sell, do you know this for a fact or is this just your opinion?
My understanding (having just been through my own divorce) is that only a judge could force a sale, but this is unlikely when there are children living there that she has sole care for (he does reluctantly pay CMS for them).
My situation was different in that we have shared equal care of our children but I was advised that if my ex had got full custody, I could have been kept on the mortgage (and paying it!) until my children turned 18 even though I was not living there.
I'd be interesting in any case law on this if anyone is aware of any.
The judge will do what is best for the childrenMy understanding (having just been through my own divorce) is that only a judge could force a sale, but this is unlikely when there are children living there that she has sole care for (he does reluctantly pay CMS for them).
My situation was different in that we have shared equal care of our children but I was advised that if my ex had got full custody, I could have been kept on the mortgage (and paying it!) until my children turned 18 even though I was not living there.
I'd be interesting in any case law on this if anyone is aware of any.
That can involve forcing a sale of the house, but the father would highly likely have to stump up money to allow the mother to replace said house.
The judge may decide that staying in the house is best for the children and force the father to pay towards said mortgage.
It depends on the circumstances, but your friend should get legal advice as it sounds like nothing will be decided or actioned without legal intervention.
Muzzer79 said:
It depends on the circumstances, but your friend should get legal advice as it sounds like nothing will be decided or actioned without legal intervention.
Agreed and was always the plan. I just know there are some very knowledgeable people on here that might mention something she hadn't considered which could change her thinking on this.Muzzer79 said:
wiggy001 said:
Those saying she can be forced to sell, do you know this for a fact or is this just your opinion?
My understanding (having just been through my own divorce) is that only a judge could force a sale, but this is unlikely when there are children living there that she has sole care for (he does reluctantly pay CMS for them).
My situation was different in that we have shared equal care of our children but I was advised that if my ex had got full custody, I could have been kept on the mortgage (and paying it!) until my children turned 18 even though I was not living there.
I'd be interesting in any case law on this if anyone is aware of any.
The judge will do what is best for the childrenMy understanding (having just been through my own divorce) is that only a judge could force a sale, but this is unlikely when there are children living there that she has sole care for (he does reluctantly pay CMS for them).
My situation was different in that we have shared equal care of our children but I was advised that if my ex had got full custody, I could have been kept on the mortgage (and paying it!) until my children turned 18 even though I was not living there.
I'd be interesting in any case law on this if anyone is aware of any.
That can involve forcing a sale of the house, but the father would highly likely have to stump up money to allow the mother to replace said house.
The judge may decide that staying in the house is best for the children and force the father to pay towards said mortgage.
It depends on the circumstances, but your friend should get legal advice as it sounds like nothing will be decided or actioned without legal intervention.
The father will be arguing the case this doesn't have to happen if he can buy a home using the tied up equity.
He doesn't have to pay anything towards the mortgage only CMS.
The worse that can happen for him is the house is repossessed and they both have trashed credit record for years.
Muzzer79 said:
CrgT16 said:
CraigNewmarket said:
He can force a sale if it goes to court. The person who doesn't want to sell gets 2 years to arrange other accommodation. Just because you have kids together doesn't mean you can sit on the house till kids are deemed old enough legally to stand on there own.
I was thinking that. Surely he can’t be forced to be on the mortgage forever because he is not paying and not living there.He may want to buy another house, etc and being in a mortgage will affect is ability to do so.
If they go to court she might be forced to sell.
But a legal case would force the father to support his children so it's probably in the father's interests just to let the house go rather than be forced into paying £££ by the CSA.
However, he may choose chaos and therefore the OP's friend may have to go that route.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff