AIBU to think this is a form of financial abuse?

[tigerbear]

I’ll try to keep the background brief:
When exDH and I split up, we were fortunate enough to own two properties. We agreed that he’d stay in the house we were then living in and keep that, and I’d get the proceeds from a flat we owned, in order to buy somewhere else.
All worked out fine.
When we split up, it was agreed that I’d pay to have myself removed from the deeds of the house, which was supposed to be a very straight forward process, paying £500 or so to a solicitor to facilitate the process.
Stupidly though, as everything was quite overwhelming at the time of the split, I just didn’t get round to doing it, it was just one of those things that would get done in time.

Fast forward 8-9 yesrs, and I tried to get removed from it year before last. Due to exDH being slow with the paperwork needed, I didn’t go full steam ahead with it until last year.

The paperwork from the solicitor specifies that the mortgage company needs to give their permission for me to be removed.
The lender is refusing to allow me to be removed from the deeds because my ex has made a change to the terms of the mortgage as he now lets out the house.
I didn’t even know I was on the mortgage (considering that I haven’t lived in the house for over 8 years). ExDH says that when he renewed the mortgage a few years ago, it just ‘somehow automatically renewed online or something’ 🤔
So I’m on a mortgage I didn’t sign up for, and have no financial contribution to, yet the mortgage company steadfastly refuse me to be taken off it (they say because they have my signature on the original mortgage taken out over 10 years ago, I still need to remain on it.
They say that I can’t be removed from it until EXDH no longer has tenants, and reverts it back to a non letting mortgage (which he’s not really willing to do as it means he loses rent. He’s saying I have to cover any loss in rent he might incur (which would be a couple of thousand).

AIBU to think the mortgage company is wrong to only consider the actions and wishes of 1 party on the mortgage , ie EXDH’s? It leaves me totally open to financial abuse.
I don’t understand why they won’t just allow me to be removed from it, when I don’t contribute financially towards paying the mortgage - surely there is no risk there??
I last had contact with the lender last July, where I said I’d contact the financial Ombudsman, and they pretty much said ‘fine, you’re welcome to’
At that point I was pretty worn down by it, but now I’m ready to fight again !
Does anyone have any experience in these matters or any advice please?

It absolutely isn’t financial abuse and nothing you have said makes me think the mortgage company have done anything wrong either. It sounds like original mortgage is still in place and he has merely told them the property is being let out now. I did this myself when I temporarily went to live overseas and rented it out, I didn’t remortgage at that point.

You cannot borrow huge sums of money and then expect to be released from the obligation to pay it back because you want to be! And it would not have necessarily been straight forward had there been no tenants, your ex would still have had to apply to take over the mortgage and prove he could afford it by himself, just as if it were a brand new mortgage.

At this point, you need to either negotiate with your ex or go to court to force a sale. I would start with the negotiating, that is, you want to come off both the mortgage and the deeds. If he won’t do that, then the only way to get off the mortgage (and the deeds obviously) would be to apply to court for a forced sale. Perhaps the threat of this, would encourage your ex to negotiate.

It's not financial abuse.

It is a mess caused by you both.

You chose not to get this sorted eight years ago. That's not abuse on your ex's part, it's laziness on yours.

You can't just opt out of your debts.

Do you have children together? Is there anyway he could reasonably claim he couldn't find you

@AuntieJoyce I’m not sure re consent order, but I think so.

@aprilx the original mortgage was taken out over 10 years ago. He got a new mortgage 3/4 years ago which he did in my name too.

@Theunamedcat no, I don’t think he could claim he couldn’t find me. We do have a child together.

Ok, totally accept that I’m BU to think it’s a form of financial abuse, I should have got it sorted ages ago.

He got a new mortgage 3/4 years ago which he did in my name too.

Did you sign this?

I don't think all changes to mortgage terms necessarily require a signature do they?

@Goldbar no.
The lender is saying it’s still ok, as my signature was on the ORIGINAL mortgage, over 10 years ago.
This is the bit that doesn’t sit right with me.

If ex-DH ‘renewed’ the mortgage with the original lender he wouldn’t need any further evidence.

A product transfer with the same lender only needs one of you to click the product and agree to the terms.

As I stated in a PP it’s the only option for a lot of divorcees how can’t (or claim not to be able to) find their ex partner.

If a mortgage company was not to allow a product transfer in this situation they could be held to account as they are effectively keeping the mortgagor a ‘prisoner’. Which under new (ish) FCA legislation they are not allowed to do.

[quote tigerbear]@AuntieJoyce I’m not sure re consent order, but I think so.

@aprilx the original mortgage was taken out over 10 years ago. He got a new mortgage 3/4 years ago which he did in my name too.

@Theunamedcat no, I don’t think he could claim he couldn’t find me. We do have a child together.

Ok, totally accept that I’m BU to think it’s a form of financial abuse, I should have got it sorted ages ago.[/quote]
Well if he has taken out a second mortgage in your name that is fraud, so tell the bank there has been a crime.

Still the first mortgage would not disappear all by itself. Mortgages only go away when they have been paid off so, if you have not done that, this mortgage is still there.

I rather doubt he has taken out a second mortgage in your name, banks are quite good at preventing that kind of thing. I suspect the first mortgage, that you signed up to, is still sitting there as neither of you have done anything to change that.

And as long as the loan amount has not been amended and the length of term not extended/shortened then no further underwriting is needed.

I think he has fraudulently signed the mortgage document.

When his current mortgage runs out in a year he will have to organise a new deal e.g. 2,3 or 5 years fixed or variable. At this point if you refuse to sign the new deal it will default to the highest interest rates. At this point he will be begging you to take your name off the mortgage.

@Charmtaste

When his current mortgage runs out in a year he will have to organise a new deal e.g. 2,3 or 5 years fixed or variable. At this point if you refuse to sign the new deal it will default to the highest interest rates. At this point he will be begging you to take your name off the mortgage.

Incorrect I’m afraid.

If he stays with the current lender and merely switches to a new product he simply has to say yes please to the new product.

As long as loan amount is not being increased and the overall term not amended then this is completely legal to do. As explained in a PP it’s the only way some divorcees can ensure they don’t fail over onto an SVR due to an absent partner. Which is sort of what OP is here as they didn’t do the legwork years ago.

Best bet is to check the end date of current deal and get the paperwork in place for the transfer of equity to be confirmed on the product end date.

No fee (bar the ToE) for the OP to then pay and if the ex has any nous about him he’ll start looking for BTL mortgage in the 6 months preceding the deal end (if he wants to keep the property)

Everytime we have a change to our mortgage I have to sign separately from DH - we get 2 sets of every bit of correspondence as the bank treats us as 2 separate entities so I think I would be checking the legality of them allowing a new set of terms to be negotiated without your signature. It's not a straight roll over of the same mortgage (which on ours I would still have to sign for but may be slightly more understandable) but new terms, which makes it a new contract.

[quote tigerbear]@Goldbar no.
The lender is saying it’s still ok, as my signature was on the ORIGINAL mortgage, over 10 years ago.
This is the bit that doesn’t sit right with me.[/quote]
But you chose to never remove your name from that mortgage. That was your choice and now you're dealing with the consequences.

Just be grateful the mortgage has been paid and your credit history isn't utterly fucked.

@Charmtaste he didn’t need my signature on the new mortgage he took out 3 years ago.
He wants me off it all just as much as I want to be, the problem is that the lender won’t give permission for me to be taken off until he returns the mortgage to a non permission to let, and also doesn’t have any tenants. They need him to be living back at the property (which he doesn’t want to do, as the house is too small for him and his new family), and he doesn’t want to be out of pocket for rent, so he’s saying I should cover all of his lost rent for however long the process takes (once the mortgage is up for renewal next year). I think he lets it for about 2k per month, so not a small amount.

What @Singlebutmarried said.

If he's planning on tapping you for money for lost rent, can you not say in that case get the bugger sold if it's half my house?

[quote tigerbear]@Charmtaste he didn’t need my signature on the new mortgage he took out 3 years ago.
He wants me off it all just as much as I want to be, the problem is that the lender won’t give permission for me to be taken off until he returns the mortgage to a non permission to let, and also doesn’t have any tenants. They need him to be living back at the property (which he doesn’t want to do, as the house is too small for him and his new family), and he doesn’t want to be out of pocket for rent, so he’s saying I should cover all of his lost rent for however long the process takes (once the mortgage is up for renewal next year). I think he lets it for about 2k per month, so not a small amount.[/quote]
You are not listening to anybody. He did not take out a “new” mortgage in your name three years ago. That would be a massive fraud and considering the mortgage company are already aware of your position, fraud clearly did not happen. The tenant situation is a red herring too, people have mortgages and tenants.

All he needs to do is prove he can pay a mortgage by himself and arrange to remortgage, getting a proper buy to let mortgage if need be. Maybe the current provider doesn’t want to lend on that basis, in which case he needs to find another lender. You need to tell him that he does this or he needs to sell or you will force a sale.

Slightly off topic, but relevent. Taking your name off the mortgage, even without the added complication of tenants, might not be as straightforward as you imagine.

Not all lenders let you just remove a name, even if the remaining party can pass affordability checks. The Transfer of Equity process mentioned upthread means one party needs to effectively buy the property off the other one, with a lot of the same conveyancing processes as a normal house sale. And there may be stamp duty implications. It took me by surprise that it wasn't less admin intensive.

My BIL was in the same situation and ended up on the default high interest rate after his deal ran out. He couldn’t get a new deal because the ex refused to sign. He eventually had to get a court order to remove her from the mortgage.

I think the ‘new mortgage’ 3-4 years ago was an auto renewal, perhaps to a new product but it won’t have required your signature if no one informed the lender that you were now divorced. Onus is on both of you there, I think. You could ask the mortgage company to release the paperwork relating to the ‘new’ mortgage and check the T&Cs carefully.

If he has ‘permission to let’ that is calculated differently to ‘buy to let’ - he’s basically still got the residential mortgage based on your joint affordability, with a small premium (probably) to allow it to be let for a certain time period. This is standard.

What needs to happen if he’s permanently renting it out is you come off the deeds and the mortgage and they give him a buy to let mortgage. This is based on a rental income calculation.

Either way it will cost money and be a PITA.

Better to wait another year til the product is up and do it then?

he doesn’t want to be out of pocket for rent, so he’s saying I should cover all of his lost rent for however long the process takes (once the mortgage is up for renewal next year)

And you say - sod off and get it sorted or we’ll have to sell it. Then you’ll get much less!

And then you compromise somehow on costs.

It’s as much his fault as yours and in his best interests to sort it out.

Some of these replies are really not helpful or correct

You need to get some proper legal advice but from what you’ve said it’s not a new mortgage it’s a product transfer. If it is a completely new mortgage I cannot understand how he possibly managed that without you being involved so that seems unlikely and would absolutely be fraud.

To be honest you waited this long so wait until the end of the current term and then take action and agree this with your exh