Repossession of house with ex partner...i need some advise!!

[Rugbymadmummy]

i currently have a mortgage on a house with my ex partner. i left in 2009 and have not lived in there since. the house has been up for sale for 2 years, but no luck. i have now been summond to court for litigation proceedings to start as i havent payed my half of the mortgage payments since november. i have 2 small children and have had to live with my parents (paying rent) and support my children without any financial support from their father. i do not want the house at all and this seems like the only option to move on. if and when it does get repossessed will i be expected to pay half of the shortfall? or will they take my personal circumstances into consideration? i am working part time and paying ridiculous childrcare costs. and as you all know the cost of living is just absolutely crippling. i know he is earning a decent wage, would this go in my favour or should i just expect the worst?
any advise would be amazing as all organisations & law firms that i have spoken to have been extremely unhelpful. Thanks, Amy x

[Collaborate]

You are jointly and severally liable. That means the lender can go against either or both of you, and isn't limited to seeking half of the shortfall from each of you.

If either of you pays more than half they will have a right to pursue the other for the excess they have to pay pver the 50%. In reality, they will go after whichever of you is the easier target.

[iheartdusty]

I do agree with Collaborate about the mortgage lender and what they will do.

However, when it comes to you and your ex taking responsibility for the money, there is another way of approaching it.

if your ex has remained living there, there is an argument for him paying you 'occupation rent' which could conveniently be valued at 50% of the mortgage payments.

ie you and he bought the house on the basis that you could both occupy it; 50:50; but he has been occupying it 100% since you left.
so he should pay his 50% of the mortgage, and should pay the other 50% of the mortgage on your behalf

This won't help with the mortgage lender and repossession, but it could free you from some or all of the debt.

The relevant law is section 13(6) of the Trusts of Land & Appointment of Trustees Act, if you need to quote it to get some more specific advice. It's not

[iheartdusty]

sorry, stray words at the end there.

It's not entirely straightforward, but it's well established law.

[Collaborate]

s13(6) deals with the powers of the trustees rather than the courts powers in the usual separation situation.

The occupation rent principle will apply to payments of interest only, but not capital. As iheartdusty says, this only applies to the situation between the owners/debtors, and doesn't prevent the lender going after one of the owners for the whole lot.

[Ram19]

Hi there,
I am in a similar-ish situation at the moment, did you manage to sort it out? If so what happened? Thanks!