to think, if you buy a house with your partner while you are in fact in another relationship with someone else, your partner should be able to sue you!

[patienceisvirtuous]

For something like getting them to enter into a contractual agreement under false pretences?!

I know you probably can't... but you should be able to!

Long back story, but someone I know is now stuck with a house and mortgage with a cheating b*stard who is refusing to sell/rent out etc.

[Theycallmemellowjello]

I hope your friend is taking legal advice. This kind of thing can in some circumstances be taken into account by the courts.

[Newbrummie]

She can force the sale, tell her to get advice quickly - oh and this is shitty behaviour but my ex is getting away with it - she can also stop paying the mortgage and make him cover it if he wants his credit record untarnished.

[londonrach]

She needs legal advice.

[19lottie82]

This kind of thing can in some circumstances be taken into account by the courts. Very unlikely I'm afraid. Either party still owns half the property despite what is going on in their personal life. A judge is unlikely to force once party to sell because he doesn't approve of their morals.

Unfortunately court based action in cases like these can be VERY long and VERY expensive.

The OP's friend would be better keeping the lawyers out of this and trying to reach an amicable agreement. (What does her ex actually want, in regards to the property?)

I'm not denying it's shit, but that's the way things work I'm afraid.

[HeyDuggee]

How can you force a sale if you're not married and you haven't drawn up paperwork specifying this condition beforehand? And if you stop paying a joint mortgage, you screw up both of your credit records.

[19lottie82]

she can also stop paying the mortgage and make him cover it if he wants his credit record untarnished

no, no, no and no! This is TERRIBLE advice!

if she "stops paying" the mortgage, and her ex doesn't pay the full lot, her credit rating will be trashed too, for at least 6 years. She can't "make" him pay it.

Really please ignore this advice, it's a very dangerous tactic!

[Newbrummie]

Well it's working very nicely for my ex husband I can assure you

[19lottie82]

Exactly HeyDuggee, well said. It's very dangerous when other posters give out inaccurate and misleading advice on matters like this.......

[Newbrummie]

He will pay the whole mortgage ... He clearly wants the house doesn't he ? Or he'd be selling it

[19lottie82]

Newbrummie Yeah, good idea, never mind the risk of him not doing that and the OP's credit rating being trashed and her not being able to buy another house or even take out a mobile phone contract for the next 6 years. Not to mention if the house gets repossessed and sold at auction for 70% of the market value, then the Op's friend is held liable for the difference, great idea....clearly!

[PlaydoughGirl]

This happened to my BIL. His fiance was the one in a relationship with someone else. It's shitty and it really screwed him over for a few years, even though she was quite agreeable to selling the property when everything came to light.

[Newbrummie]

As apposed to the great idea of paying somebody else to live in a house for years whilst you spend thousands on solicitors, she's fucked either way tbh but my idea will bring things to a conclusion quicker and once the house is sold she can repair her credit record quickly by clearing any outstanding debts owed on the mortgage rather than spending the same money lining the pockets of lawyers.
As I said my ex is doing exactly this and it's working brilliantly for him

[HeyDuggee]

I'm no expert at all... But I understand there's a difference in how they set it up... Joint tenancy or tenancy in common (the first one is a bit like if you're married I think?). You can apply through courts for a forced sale isnt it a very costly process?

[Newbrummie]

And the likes of Shoosmiths solicitors who handle repossessions are very good at limiting the damage if you talk to them and explain the situation rather than bury your head in the sand, they don't want your credit rating damaged as it's one less customer for the finance industry.

[Newbrummie]

But to answer the OP yes it ought be fraud, or gaining a house by deception or something

[19lottie82]

Newbrummie No, you can't rebuild your credit rating "quickly", the defaults will still be present for 6 years, paying off any debts will not wipe these away, they may appear as "settled" further down the line, but that doesn't magically fix things.

Again, if the property is repossessed it will be sold at way less than market value and the OP will be held fully and separately liable for the FULL amount.

I'm glad your approach worked for someone you know, but they were very lucky. This, on the whole, is a VERY risky tactic and it is not advisable in the slightest.

You're offering very irresponsible "advice" on the basis of what happened to someone you know, who was very, very lucky. If the OP's friend was to follow your advice they face a very serious risk of their whole financial future being trashed.

[Newbrummie]

Well it could be tried for a month or two and if he didn't pay the whole mortgage go back and try the other way, but frankly she's either going to pay somebody else's share and solicitors costs or her credit rating is going to be trashed - and it's not 6 years - it's just not - 2 maximum under extreme circumstances ie bankruptcy. Not ideal either but when she's paid the mortgage for three years, she will still only get her share even if she pays the whole lot. I'd bite the bullet and call his bluff ASAP personally.

[Allwayslookingforanswers]

What would you sue for?

[HeyDuggee]

Person 1: I love you. Let's buy the most expensive thing we can together.
Person 2: ok.
Person 1: I don't love you anymore. I want to sell our expensive thing.
Person 2: what!? I only bought it because you said you loved me! Fraud! Deceit! I'm going to sue you for all the money I lost buying and selling the expensive thing.

[Newbrummie]

But what if they were not in love with you before the expensive thing was bought and indeed were carrying on behind your back with somebody else who no doubt they intend to move into the expensive thing whilst the first smuck pays half towards it ?

[DazzleU]

The OP friend would need somewhere to live immediately the sale went though - unless she has accommodating family.

Unlikely she'll get social housing of any kind - so it would either have to be another mortgage or a private rental - both of which would come with credit checks - a fucked up credit rating going make really hard.

Plus - if it's sold under the mortgage value Op friend who still be liable for the rest.

Family member of mine ended up in their house having to pay all the builds and ex still living there for nearly two years before the could find a buyer. It seriously sucked - couldn't force ex out as he jointly owned it and couldn't risk credit rating being trashed as she needed to have a roof for their DC - who he does everything to avoid paying for.

[DazzleU]

The OP friend would need somewhere to live immediately the sale went though - unless she has accommodating family.

Unlikely she'll get social housing of any kind - so it would either have to be another mortgage or a private rental - both of which would come with credit checks - a fucked up credit rating going make really hard.

Plus - if it's sold under the mortgage value Op friend who still be liable for the rest.

Family member of mine ended up in their house having to pay all the builds and ex still living there for nearly two years before the could find a buyer. It seriously sucked - couldn't force ex out as he jointly owned it and couldn't risk credit rating being trashed as she needed to have a roof for their DC - who he does everything to avoid paying for.

[Newbrummie]

You'd get all your ducks in a row first obviously

[Collaborate]

Just wanted to redress some of the "advice" given on this thread.

Applying for an order for sale under s14 of the Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act is not complicated. In fact, you could almost guarantee a successful outcome. The court would most likely want to fast track it. There would be an initial directions appointment, at which I'm sure a judge would be willing to offer some robust advice to the reluctant seller, which often has the effect of settling matters there and then.

Costs normally follow the event in these situations. In other words - if you win, you get an order making the other side pay your costs. These can be taken out of their share of the proceeds of sale.

If s14 TOLATA proceedings do ever become protracted and expensive that's because or one or more of the following reasons:

1. The parties dispute how the proceeds of sale should be divided. This can be because the deeds are not clear.
   
2. One party is not on the title to the property, so is claiming an interest under a resulting or constructive trust.
   
3. There are minor children living in the property, and one party therefore wants to delay the sale.
   

OP - it sounds like none of these factors is present in your friend's case. Tell her to get legal advice and sort it out through the courts if he still won't agree.

[Newbrummie]

That's exactly my scenario DazzkedU I won't let everything I've worked for go down the drain even if it just goes to the kids.
Collaborate is if course correct if you can stomach and have the cash flow to be paying half the mortgage and renting somewhere else, most people haven't.