Friend is married with two kids (she is the mum). They are both professionals, he outearns her now, but at the start of the marriage she had savings and family cash which she used for a deposit on a house for the pair of them. He however took out the mortgage (to take advantage of some rate or other as a FTB) and is sole owner on the home. They pool their income now.
She is sole owner of a flat from prior to the mortgage which they now rent out.
They are now moving house and he has gone through mortgage checks etc as sole owner and mortgagor but she is just thinking ahead to what happens if they were to split if he is the only one on the register?
My initial view is that regardless of names on the title, if they split and the court gets involved they would be looking at provision for the kids (one of whom is quite significantly learning disabled and likely will need specialist education from hereon) and their combined assets regardless of names on the register, but.... presumably you are in a better position if your name is on the deeds whatever.
She has apparently raised this with him who has said he doesn't want to delay things on the mortgage so is resisting changing things now.
If they stay as they are, with him sole owner of the family home, what happens if they split and can't agree?
2
2
If they are both professionals they can pay for their own bloody advice. Not glom onto something gratis which nobody in their right mind would provide cos Hedley Byrne.
0
3
Unless she is up to her eyeballs in debt, it will literally be a formality to add her to the mortgage, so no idea what the gimplord is on about. Even if he is porting you normally just fill in a form and they probably run a credit check. They would rather have two people on the mortgage.
While on divorce the court would start from a 50:50 split with provision for kids, practically speaking you don't want to risk him trying to sell the house quickly. People become massive fookers on divorce and you are better to have the cash. If he is this shifty now imagine what he will be like when the gloves are off.
I am actually quite stunned at how clueless she has been to date.
0
6
There is some context but I get the points.
Bump for daytime crowd - I think she would rather not change things at this point unless she is doing herself a mischief
1
4
She is an idiot if she lets this happen.
He could be gambling, or could re-mortgage the house/could become charged to the hilt with debts, and she would be left with nothing to claim from any subsequent divorce.
What sort of husband is worth staying with if he plays fast and loose with his wife's financial and 'well-being' security...?
0
3
so she paid a deposit on the house but they didn't buy it jointly because they wanted to take advantage of a cheaper mortgage rate? Presumably they didn't want her flat taken into account for the SDLT calculations either.
0
2
But generally, yes, better to get everything sorted as to ownership of the family home sooner rather than later and now would be a good time to do it as they're moving. If he is resisting, then that sounds like a massive red flag, especially if she will be paying half the mortgage!
0
6
Get a declaration of trust which confirms the split of the sale proceeds.
0
4
Kimmy if they were married they’d have to pay the extra stamp duty anyway as married couples are treated as a single entity.
0
3
ok, but the OP says he was he treated as a FTB...
0
4
I think as the flat was already being rented out at that point the additional sdlt thing didn’t apply but I could be wrong and frankly so could she.
0
3
Fwiw I am sole mortgagee and name on the register as Mrs GA was on mat leave at the time and we were told that putting her on everything would reduce the amount we could borrow so it is a thing or at least there is a perception of it being a thing among shiny suited mortgage folk. I still declared them as dependents.
0
4
Final daytime bump for any family law heads on
Join the discussion