to expect my name to be included on the deeds for our new home?

[twofatladies]

Brief background - I've lived in various houses with my DH and my name has never been included on the deeds. We are now moving to our 'live in for ever family home' and the forms arrived from the solicitors last night and there wasn't even a conversation about my name being included, my DH just filled out the forms solely in his name.

When we originally first lived together he was already living in his own home and I was still with my DPs so moved in to his house and paid him a monthly rent. We have now moved twice since being married and my name is never included.

Obviously this has been raised in the past by he says that it makes financial sense as down the line we will probably buy a 'buy-to-let' property and I will be named as a sole owner to avoid capital gains tax.

I'm preparing myself to raise the issue with him tonight but wonder if I'm being unreasonable (he says it doesn't matter as we're married!)

[CheshireDing]

Twofat I would ask that you are put on the deeds as this is your final home.
The issues are:-

1. Salary - the mortgage lender might not agree to you being on the deeds unless you work. Sometimes the person who does not work could be seen as sort of a "liability" by the mortgage company because they cannot financially contribute
   

2. The mortgage will match the deeds so if the lender agrees all the conveyancing paperwork needs your name adding and a new mortgage offer submitting to include your wage slips etc

3. I can see where your DH may be coming from with the Buy to Let but to be honest with the market the way it is it might take a while for you to buy you first rental and anyway if you are going to keep the rentals and build up a portfolio AND you are staying in your final home it is a non-issue really about the CGT. You would just pool everything together in your estate if you both died and it would go to your children as per your wills (presumably)

4. Unless there is a reason re your salary you should get the paperwork altered for your final house and buy the buy to lets jointly/separately later

Hope that makes sense :)

[merrywidow]

BestNameEver; trying to negotiate with a Narc/abusive H regarding ANYTHING was just not worth the effort - its not about being stupid.

[MollieO]

Good job I'm not a tax lawyer then !

At least the law does afford you protection if you are married. I wonder how many people who co-habit, have dcs together and the mum isn't named on the deeds. No automatic right to the house at all.

[Nanny0gg]

The bottom line is - you are partners. Legally, morally, financially and presumably through choice.

You just want to be treated like one.

[northerngirl41]

I'd imagine the mortgage is in his name and therefore the Title Deeds are in his name only.

There are lots of reasons for only having one name on the mortgage - for example, if one of you is a first time buyer you can take advantage of first time buyer rates/exemptions by putting it in their name. Also, it can really complicate things if one of you is a mortgage liability - e.g. say if you are a SAHM, or if you've had a default on a loan, or even if you're self-employed or working in an industry which is seen as being high risk in terms of a steady income. In that case, the mortgage might get automatically turned down, even if your partner and the mortgage itself is low risk.

If you're married then it's the marital home and gets split 50:50 regardless. Wouldn't bother me at all.

[SoupDragon]

"If you're married then it's the marital home and gets split 50:50 regardless. Wouldn't bother me at all."

it wouldnt bother you that he could sell it at any time, without your knowledge or consent, and make you homeless? that is why you need to fill in the form I linked to earlier.

[shocked2]

This thread has totally depressed me. This is exactly the situation I am in - dh is on deeds and pays mortgage, we have three dcs. When we met I too was in no position to pay half the mortgage of the property he was considering buying and he said he would not wait for me to get a better job so that we could buy a property together. Admittedly we had not been together that long and were not married at that point but we were living together. He too was divorced and his first wife (though she too was not on the deeds) got their family home whereas he was left with a much smaller business property. He is still to this day very bitter about this.
For years I paid for things like the food etc.. whereas he paid the mortgage and the bills (these last were put through his company because I did ask if we could jointly pay them). Since starting to have the dcs 9.5 years ago, I have not worked, and he has carried on paying the mortgage.
In the past when I have tried to discuss the deeds thing he too views me with suspicion. I haven't broached the subject for years but did not realise how difficult it would be if he died before me.
Agree with merrywidow - this subject would be difficult to broach without having an argument. There is the also not small matter of him being better with money than I am and he would use that as an argument against me being on deeds I am sure.
When my mother died she left me a small inheritance which is being used for holidays, furniture and some of it has been used on overspending if I am honest What should have happened is that my name got put on the deeds and I put the whole lot in the joint pot. It's issues like these that make you realise how crap your relationship actually is! I

[shocked2]

Should add that he is 12.5 years older than me so this is part of the reason he was in a better position than me to buy a property - he already owned a house and had had a business for years. I on the other hand was 27, prone to spending my money, and totally wet behind the ears!

[northerngirl41]

SoupDragon Let's say that happens: you're married and a SAHM, he has the house in his name and decides for whatever reason to sell. You kick off, take him to the divorce courts, get 50% of the profit from the sale.

Alternate scenario: you're married and a SAHM, the house is in both your names and he wants to sell. He kicks off, takes you to the divorce courts for being unreasonable, you still get 50% of the profit from the sale.

I'm not seeing why having your name on the deeds makes any difference in those scenarios? The key thing here is that you have the conversation and an agreement BEFORE you give up work. The only difference if your name is on the title deeds and he wants to move and you don't is who files first!

The shared title deeds is only really of benefit if you aren't married. In that case, it makes absolute sense because of course, you wouldn't be entitled to 50% of anything if you can't prove that you paid the mortgage.

[QuintessentialPains]

My husband is not on the deeds of our London house.
When we bought the house, I put down 80% of the value of the house in cash, and the mortgage was in my sole name. The bank made my husband sign a declaration that he would not make any claims to the house.

It doesnt matter for us one jot. It is our house. We have never really been bothered about it.

Now, if there are any implications to him if I were to die, then we might have to reconsider.... I should look into that.

[SoupDragon]

gosh, yes you're right, Northerngirl, I don't know why solicitors tell you to fill one of those forms in then .

Except he could sell it without you knowing and you find yourself homeless with no warning. your future 50% of the proceeds will be a fat lot of use then and there because you won't have them and will have to go to court to get them. Provided he doesnt spend it all in the meantime. But of course, your DH would never do something like that. I thought mine was nice until he left. First thing I did was get my name added under Home Rights for peace of mind and safety. It would have been far nicer not to have had to bother because I was named on the deeds anyway or to already have it in place.

it is free to fill the form in and get the Home Rights added to the deed.
Whilst the person named on the deeds is informed, this is after it is done and they have to apply to get it removed.

[killingTime]

Well I'm pleased to know about the Home Rights thing SoupDragon.

DH just put him on the deeds on our house despite deposit coming from me. Pretty sure he not planning on leaving but .... He is very odd with things like this - we have had him seriously injured and my lack of access to money and bills all being in his name did cause problems. I got agreement from him to get a few things changed after flaming row and looked into but he put things off and life is busy so nothings been done - not even the joint bank account.

This thread has been a timely reminder I have to get things sorted not just for me but for the DC. I have no idea quite how I have ended up in such a vulnerable position.

[southofthethames]

OP and other ladies in her situation - you need to have your name on the deeds!!! Else the house is his and not yours! If something happens to your DH or you separate, you could find yourself (potentially) evicted!! (even if only temporarily). Even if the court eventually awards you half (in event of divorce) or the whole thing (if he dies suddenly) you don't need the stress of possibly getting chucked out. If you have at all contributed to mortgage payments, downpayment/stamp duty/conveyancing fees or repairs/renovations you could end up losing all the money you've put in. What you DH is saying about capital gains and tax is wrong - it's still the same even if you have it in your name jointly. It's different with regards to a buy-to-let that you DON'T live in.

[southofthethames]

Shocked2 - the fact that you pay other household bills like food while he pays the mortgage means that you are still partly paying for the home. How about if he paid for all the food, clothes, toys, etc everything? After all, he doesn't pay you for the free housekeeping, cookery and nannying you are doing, which are fulltime jobs. I know some men feel sorely about this esp if they are previously divorced.

[cestlavielife]

hmrc told me that if buy to let is joint owned everything is split 50/50 - so if is sold then each person can claim theri own CGT allowance on their 50 per cent share of profit. so effectively is advantageous cgt wise to own/sell jointly

[southofthethames]

(cont'd) Shocked 2 - but even if they are divorced, it is still putting you, the mother of his kids, in an unfair and precarious situation. I don't know how to advise you to bring up the matter with him as discussions about money themselves can spark discord. But he owes it at least to his kids, and in fact you, if he were to call himself a spouse, that you and they are not left (potentially) homeless in the event of something happening, like death or divorce. Whether that is a copy of his will to show the house will go to you, or putting your name on the deed. I'd be tempted to stop paying the food bills etc and making him pay for everything, and putting your own money in a nest egg (return guaranteed, nothing risky) for yourself so you can rent a place if the worst should happen...but hey, you are not me and that may not be the most sensible thing in your relationship. But stop paying for things and getting nothing in return. I hope you have your own (substantial) bank account/savings in only your name. Seriously.

[twofatladies]

Didn't get a chance to update last night.

Result - my name is now on the purchase forms to send off to the solicitors and DH phoned bank last night to add my name to the mortgage. They didn't seem to have any problems with me being a SAHM.

A little heated discussion for about 5 minutes and he told me where to add my name and sign and then phoned the bank without even me raising the mortgage.

He really didn't understand why I needed / wanted to be on them and thought its best to keep our options open if they change the rules further down the line re: BTL etc. His view is that we're married and I would get 50% in the case of any divorce etc and it doesn't make any difference being joint owners.

[Morloth]

Our banker suggested this for our new house.

I said 'over my dead body'.

I love and trust my DH 100% now but shit happens. My house means my name.

[Northeastgirl]

Good result. Well done you

[MrsMoppet]

Yay! Great news

[shocked2]

I'm happy things have worked out twofatladies :) Quite envious in fact (but in a good way!)
Thanks for your message to me southofthethames - am in the process of doing a stressful essay but once I've done that and a few others things which need doing and which are a source of stress between dh and I, I shall get my courage in my two hands and broach the whole issue of wills and life insurance with dh...
This thread has brought my feelings about the whole thing flooding back which I think I have buried for years (dh and I have been together for 15 years) and I am feeling really down about it. I do have my own savings account but without enough to buy a house in it unfortunately .
I know that if we were to get divorced the house would probably end up being split between us - it might be acrimonious but it would be ok.
It's the dying thing which scares me (obviously dying itself!) in that if a portion of assets goes to me and the rest to dcs, then I may be in the situation of having to live with them or ask for their assistance in my old age and I really don't want to be in that position. I haven't worked for the past 9.5 years and at 42 I am now doing a course to be a teaching assistant. This is not going to make me loads of money and I do feel vulnerable. Annoyed with myself for having gone down the whole not working towards owning something myself route. The whole thing highlights my problems with dh as well. This set up with no will etc... leaves him "in charge" with his money being distributed to me and to dcs should he die. He is far nicer to them than to me and I don't want to be one of his dependents in this way... Surely with a will all assets go to me assuming he dies first, then when I die they would all go to dcs so it is not as if they would be left out - it's just that I will be old and presumably have far less earning power than them. Don't know if I am making sense and sorry for hijacking thread!

[southofthethames]

@babybarrister - you can be evicted if the sole owner husband sells the house! The moment he signs on the dotted line and contracts are excahnged the existing occupants have no right to be there. Yes, some people have done that prior to getting a divorce. It wouldn't be the first time.

@shocked2 - am no lawyer but if your DH dies without a will (intestate), you AND dcs may be without a home because the taxman will take some of the share of the house, and you might find yourself having to empty all your bank accounts just to buy back the portion of the house that is technically already yours and your children's! The taxman can take a massive share of the deceased's estate depending on how much the value of it is - if the house is worth over half a million he'll have to sort out a will! My friend was in this situation because her husband died suddenly of a heart problem aged 30....she had to spend a lot of money to get back what was rightfully hers/theirs (no kids and she herself has a good salary but even then you don't want to "donate" it to the taxman!) I would really advise both you and DH to make sure you have wills that are up to date and DO NOT let the bank "offer" to be your executor as they will charge a lot of commission to do it (sucking out a lot of the DCs' inheritance). Get a relative or friend who is honest and fair - you're allowed to leave them some money or a gift as a thank you.

Don't want to stir up any problems for you both, but a way to broach the subject of name on deed might be to say that you want to ensure the children have a home if something were to happen, and then discuss what is on the will at the same time. It would take a very evil father not to want to provide for his own children in the event of divorce/parental death.