Mortgage - ex misled court

[SultansOfSwing]

DH separated from first wife in 2010, divorce finalised in 2013. He was happy for her to have the matrimonial home if she could take on mortgage herself. Court agreed she could keep the house and relinquish him of all financial responsibility. We married in 2014 and bought our house in 2015. When we applied for mortgage, husband found that his ex had not told the lender they had divorced nor had she made any application to remortgage in her own name. It was found that she would not have been approved for the mortgage at the time it went to court due to affordibility and she knew that. Even so, she took him off the deeds with land registry and did not inform the lender. She did not tell the court any of this and actually told them she would do everything she can to make sure he came off the mortgage straight away. As of December 2020, the mortgate has 104k over 17 years left on it. She will not make any application to remortgage and continues to fob him off. She has worked as a NHS nurse for 17 years, so we know what she earns and cannot think she would be turned down for £104k on her own. She has not met anyone else since 2010 so no partner she could apply with. He fully intends to see a solicitor but in the meantime we are anxious to know where he stands. The judge made a ruling after being deliberately misled by her. If neither could have the mortgage in their sole names then regardless of who wanted what the house should have been sold and equity divided IMO. If anyone know much about family law, could this be brought to the attention of the court via a solicitor for the particulars surrounding the ownership of the house be reviewed in light of evidence proving she misled them?

[WellIWasInTheNeighbourhoo]

I'm not a lawyer, but I do know from my own divorce that 'endeavouring to do all you can to .... ' is a bit of a cop out. It's not a legal obligation, it's an I'll do my best scenario.

Id try nicely to get her to remove your DH from the mortgage. If she outright refuses then you tell her you will be informing the bank DH was removed from the deeds. That cld have v serious repercussions for her. Banks want to know the people they've lent a secured loan to, actually possess that security. She cld be up for fraud on that, but I'm not sure you'd need to research further.

[SultansOfSwing]

She always sends back emails saying "Once again let me reassure you I am doing everything I can..." which always translates to "I'm burying my head in the sand and hoping you'll go away" as whenever husband has rang the lender they always confirm they have not spoken to her in years.

The lender is aware of the deeds as he brought it to their attention. Their response was "This is a most unusual situation" and advised her to make her own application which she never did.

[bigbluebus]

I'm no legal expert but in a former life I did work with mortgages and deeds. How did she manage to take his name off the deeds without the lender's approval. There would have been a charge registered with the land registry do the would surely have needed to seek the lender's approval before doing anything.

[RandomMess]

Wonder if he can put a charge against the property??

That may hurry he up at sorting it out.

[SultansOfSwing]

It was in 2011 so some time ago. I have the paperwork here in front of me, she went to land registry with her solicitor July 2011 and got it completed by August 2011 as DH had agreed she could have the house on provision she re-mortgages in her name. Her monthly earnings at the time were 1120 a month, how could she take on a 165k mortgage? Nonetheless she has paid it monthly without fail and paid 61k in 10 years so far.

[MrsRockAndRoll]

Did he have a divorce lawyer? If so I'm shocked they didn't want proof of the actions being completed by her

[Disfordarkchocolate]

I'm surprised his solicitor didn't chase this up. When I divorced there was a joint loan, my solicitor made sure it was changed to just his name and proof provided.

[SultansOfSwing]

He did have a solicitor yes, and as he was in agreement for her to have the house they told him it was fine for him to sign the documents enabling her to transfer the house in her name, but again on the provision she re-mortgaged. He was told she was in the process of doing that and foolishly believed her. I was not with him at the time so going on what his paperwork says. It was in 2015 when we applied for our own mortgage some 4 years after this happened that the lender was informed by DH that him and ex had divorced and he was not living there and enquired why his name was still showing as being on joint mortgage with ex during credit checks.

He emailed her yesterday (she will only communicate through email as she has someone write them for her) asking about re-mortgaging and she replied that there is nothing she can do, she can't get a mortgage on her own due to affordibility so he just has to stay named on it for next 17yrs. Even though he has not paid it since he left her 10.5 years ago. He spoke to the lender - she has not contacted them at all so she is lying. The problem is she hid the affordibility from the court and we believe that had the judge been aware that neither of them could take the mortgage by themselves the house would have had to be sold regardless of him being happy for her to keep it because she simply could not get the mortgage on her own.

[RedHelenB]

It shouldn't really be a problem if it's not stopped him getting another mortgage and she's making the payments.

[SultansOfSwing]

It is a problem because it has affected our affordibility

[prh47bridge]

The court could only order that she makes best efforts to release him from the mortgage. The lender is not party to proceedings.

If the lender really has told him she hasn't contacted them that is a breach of GDPR. They certainly cannot tell him if she has applied and been refused. Indeed, they may not class her booking an appointment with a mortgage adviser and being told how big a mortgage she can get as contacting them about this mortgage. There is, of course, also the possibility that she has contacted other lenders or used the current lender's online calculator to check affordability. Her salary is not the only factor determining affordability. If she has other loans or significant outgoings she may not meet affordability criteria.

If your husband agreed that she could keep the house on condition that she make best efforts to remove him from the mortgage, it is unlikely the courts would interfere with that. Even if he hadn't agreed, the court would have wanted to ensure that she had a roof over her head so, if they had been aware that she couldn't get a big enough mortgage to buy a house with whatever deposit she had available, that would have been even more reason for her to keep the house.

Since your husband knew she was a nurse, he should have been aware that she would not be able to release him from the mortgage at the time they divorced. There is no way she would have been given a mortgage of that size on a nurse's salary. Indeed, given that both sides will have made full financial disclosure, I'm sure the judge was aware that she wasn't going to be able to release your husband from the mortgage any time soon.

If she did not make a full disclosure or she lied about her income or assets it may be possible to re-open the financial settlement. However, provided she made a full and correct disclosure, there are no grounds for changing it. If you want to know for sure, your husband needs to consult a solicitor, but on the information posted I don't think you will get anywhere with this.

[QuitMoaning]

If the lender really has told him she hasn't contacted them that is a breach of GDPR
Is it a breach of GDPR if it is a joint mortgage? If i called up my joint mortgage, I would have thought I am entitled to know everything about it.
Her application on affordability is separate to the mortgage and I agree about the potential breach there but is it a breach on the existing joint mortgage?

[prh47bridge]

@QuitMoaning

If the lender really has told him she hasn't contacted them that is a breach of GDPR
Is it a breach of GDPR if it is a joint mortgage? If i called up my joint mortgage, I would have thought I am entitled to know everything about it.
Her application on affordability is separate to the mortgage and I agree about the potential breach there but is it a breach on the existing joint mortgage?

You are certainly entitled to know how much is outstanding and similar. Her contacting the lender about the mortgage is, in my view, her personal data and should not be disclosed. Having said that, I doubt the ICO would get particularly worked up about it.

[SultansOfSwing]

It is a joint mortgage and the lenders stance is that they must be notified of separation and of intention to transfer ownership so that they can assess affordibility first. She has not done that. It is all on their website. When my husband contacted the lender in 2015 they told him that she had not informed them of the separation and had not informed them that she had transferred the deeds into her name. Surely they need both names on the deeds and mortgage? Not on the mortgage and not on the deeds? It was agreed in court she is to remove him from the mortgage and all financial responsibility but if she could never get a mortgage in the first place how could the court let her keep a house she can't afford? Her monthly income was the exact value of the repayments - £650. Our local solicitors are closed so we are waiting to make an appointment.

[prh47bridge]

@SultansOfSwing

It is a joint mortgage and the lenders stance is that they must be notified of separation and of intention to transfer ownership so that they can assess affordibility first. She has not done that. It is all on their website. When my husband contacted the lender in 2015 they told him that she had not informed them of the separation and had not informed them that she had transferred the deeds into her name. Surely they need both names on the deeds and mortgage? Not on the mortgage and not on the deeds? It was agreed in court she is to remove him from the mortgage and all financial responsibility but if she could never get a mortgage in the first place how could the court let her keep a house she can't afford? Her monthly income was the exact value of the repayments - £650. Our local solicitors are closed so we are waiting to make an appointment.

The fact she has not notified the lender and has taken your husband's name off the deeds is a problem for the lender. It is not something you can do anything about. Your husband certainly isn't entitled to anything just because of that.

All that could be agreed in court was that she would make best efforts to remove him from the mortgage. The court would not order her to remove him from the mortgage nor could she agree that she would do so as it is up to the lender. As I said previously, the lender was not in court so the court would not make an order that relied on the lender giving her a mortgage.

To repeat what I said previously, the court would have wanted to be sure that everyone had a roof over their heads. If her income was too low to get a mortgage that is potentially a good reason for the court letting her stay in a house she couldn't afford, doubly so if her income was insufficient to allow her to rent.

You seem to be changing your story. You previously said her monthly income at the time was £1120, now you say it was £650. Either way it makes no difference. Your husband agreed she could have the house. He knew her earnings. He should have known she would not be able to remove him from the mortgage any time soon. Provided she made a full and honest financial disclosure on Form E, including showing her correct income, the court would also have known she would not be able to remove him from the mortgage any time soon. He may have a case that she has not complied with the financial order if you are correct that she has not made any attempt to have him removed from the mortgage, in which case he can take enforcement action to make her comply. But, unless there is some major piece of information missing from this, I do not see any basis on which your husband can go back and get the financial order changed.

[Pickledpenguin]

I am baffled as to how she got his name off the title deeds to be honest. My divorce was similar, ex agreed that the house was mine and that I was to endevour to get his name off the mortgage and subsequently the deeds. I could not get him off the deeds with him still being on the mortgage so I had to get him off that before off the deeds. Are you sure you have the correct land registry file for that property??

[SultansOfSwing]

Sorry just to clarify her part timewages were £650, and the rest was benefits to bring it up to £1120.

She went straight to land registry without consulting lender before any order was made in court and we have all of her solicitors letter and the correct land registry documents.

It just seems ridiculous that he is just expected to sit on her mortgage for the last 10 years and the next 17 years?

He wants nothing financially - just name off the mortgage and not be tied to her because it is affecting our affordibility to buy a bigger house. Ours is too small.

[Pickledpenguin]

My conveyancing solicitor dealt with land registry on my behalf but my ex had to sign off the deeds and could only do it once my mortgage had been approved, theres no way it could have been done without that. Shes either forged his signature or something to have done it without him knowing. Get him to contact mortgage provider and explain it as you are right, he should not be liable for a loan on a home he has no rights over.

[WolfHunter]

Yeah the whole thing is very odd. I couldn't be removed from the deeds of a house whilst I was named on the mortgage. The person keeping the house had to remortgage the house without my name before I could be removed from the deeds. Our solicitor said it was the only way. I'm going to be pissed if you can just go to the land registry and take someone's names off the deeds. It cost us money in solicitor fees.

[DorisLessingsCat]

Did she forge his signature on anything?

[AyyMacarena]

She can't have done this correctly - you can't just take the other parties name off the land registry without their consent or knowledge.

Has he signed forms knowing that it has taken him off the deeds but assumed she would do the mortgage as soon as she could? That's silly of him and he should have ensured she remortgaged at the time.

Off to look at how I can get DP off the deeds but still get him to pay half...

[Pickledpenguin]

I paid approx 2k to my solicitor to get this done. If i find out there was another way i will be asking for a refund!

[DinoHat]

I can’t believe he signed a transfer without an undertaking from her solicitor that he’d been taken off the charge. Did he have a lawyer? That’s pretty negligent.

[DinoHat]

@WolfHunter

Yeah the whole thing is very odd. I couldn't be removed from the deeds of a house whilst I was named on the mortgage. The person keeping the house had to remortgage the house without my name before I could be removed from the deeds. Our solicitor said it was the only way. I'm going to be pissed if you can just go to the land registry and take someone's names off the deeds. It cost us money in solicitor fees.

You can’t. There’s a hole in this story.

[frazzledasarock]

He must have signed to have his name removed from the deeds.

If I remember the wording of the court order it says something like the party who is awarded the house will endeavour to remove the other person from their mortgage.

Judges cannot order to remove people’s names from mortgages, as it’s the banks decision who to lend to.

I don’t think you’ll manage to get him off the old mortgage unless the ex actively remortgages.