To worry we gave away 100k of my inheritance!

[howdidIgetthere]

My DH thinks I am, but if I'm right then it's in his interest to say that!

Basically, we were in a pickle buying a house last year. We were consolidating houses with my DF to purchase a big house, and hoped that myself of my DF could be on the mortgage or deeds as a safety due to my DF helping with the deposit.

To cut a long story and identifying details this wasn't possible. Neither of us could be on a plausible mortgage, and the lenders wouldn't like us on the deeds either. But we needed a house. So as I was already engaged, we agreed between us that my DF would 'gift' 100k of inheritance to my DH so that he could solely purchase the house, but we would get married beforehand to safeguard my stake.

So we eloped without telling anyone else, my DF gifted the money and the house was purchased in my DH's name only. We had a proper wedding a few weeks after and all is well. As far as I know, because the house was purchased after marriage, I have a stake in the house should we divorce, and can get some of that value back in lieu of my inheritance/not be left with no money and nowhere to live.

However, since the purchase the house has had extensive renovations and its value is increasing significantly. I have noticed that my DH keeps referring to people that the purchase date was back in the summer, months before our marriage. I know for a fact from the deeds etc that the closing date was not until a month after we were married, when the funds were transferred. Before the marriage, the mortgage may just have been accepted, but zero money had been exchanged.

When I ask him about this he says iabu for questioning him, that yes he bought it before we got married ie he's taking the acceptance of an offer on the house as when he bought it. This is obviously very worrying for me, as if he bought it before we were married or some other loophole then in the case of divorce I have lost most of my inheritance and have no stake on the house!!!

I don't know why he is saying this as at the time he agreed it was the best option so that all parties were happy and protected. I have resisted a marital rights notice on the deeds, but otherwise I am still not on the deeds or the mortgage (I don't have a high enough income). So who is BU? Have we been misled and given away my inheritance, or is my DH wrong and for some reason trying to say something that's incorrect?

Are you in the UK? You can still be on the mortgage and the deeds of a property even if your income is zero as its the affordability of the ‘total’ income that is assessed.

Keep a massive paper trail and get it changed whatever the cost.

How long did you know him ?

seems very dodgy you aren’t on the deeds - your dad gave him £100k ….

seek legal advise now !!

I can't advise you as I don't know, UK law but some really basic rules for life.

1. Don't sign things you don't understand

1. Don't trust others to look after your financial or legal affairs

1. Don't take legal advice of anyone with no legal expertise, DH or DF

1. Don't ever use pushy brokers

1. Go to meeting where there is an impact for you, don't allow DH go only & rely on this word

Does your father even have a right to life re the house?
Was the money gifted to you or your spouse? If your spouse? Was there tax paid if just your spouse or was be even your spouse at the time

1. Her independent legal advice on everything. Independent as in working for your interests not your DH.

1. Stop being naive, ridiculously naive. Wise up big time. You will regret it if you don't. All the warning signs are there.

You don’t need to earn anything to be on the mortgage if your DH earns enough. Our mortgage is in both names but just on my income. This is very fishy.

my point is that the OP is barking up the wrong tree given fact he is happy to 100% financially support her and her children; absolutely no financial controlling-ness over her; the op says she has a “very good standard of life”

That doesn't seem to be your point. Your point seems to be that she isn't bringing in any money, apart from her student finance, so she shouldn't expect her husband to not take her inheritance and put it in a house in his name alone.

A million times you've said it.

What do you make of the fact he's lied about the dates the house was bought.

And what do you think about him telling the OP she couldn't go on the mortgage and deeds?

And how do you think he explained the hundred thousand to the mortgage lender?

Was the money gifted to you or your spouse? If your spouse? Was there tax paid if just your spouse or was be even your spouse at the time

No tax would be due on a straightforward cash gift from a FIL to his SIL. (Unless the FIL dies within 7 yrs, in which case potential IHT.)

I don't really want to engage with you as I think you are on another planet and seem to have an agenda (and talking from a male perspective perhaps?) but do you not get how a marriage works when one parent is a SAHP?
OP is providing childcare/doing all the wifework/chores etc./looking after the dc's (including presumably HIS dc's from a previous relationship) therefore enabling this man to work long hours, often working away for lengthy periods.

Do you not see how this is beneficial to him? The OP even said upthread that she wanted to return to work but he was against it. Just because he is financing their day to day lifestyle (and it's not his money btw - it's theirs, as a couple) from his earnings does not negate the fact that he is being very dodgy about the circumstances leading up to them purchasing the house and there are lots of red flags around the information he is giving the OP.

Even if the DH isn't up to any good, the OP absolutely needs to check everything out herself with a solicitor and protect the £100k her df gave them (if this is even possible) and get herself on the mortgage ASAP. Do you not understand why she needs to do that?

Hopefully the dh doesn't have any nefarious intentions, the OP will listen to others on here and see a solicitor, get it all sorted and it'll be fine. But you banging on about how he funds her lifestyle as a student is just irrelevant and ignorant.

It would absolutely make sense he couldn’t get a mortgage out.

Banks look at outgoings

the dh is 100% financially support the OP as well as her children from a previous relationship as well as having children of his own from a previous relationship
and According to the op they have a “very high standard of living”

So presumably his outgoings are extortionate.

This would stop banks on current climate in their tracks from his getting out a second mortgage as sole earner

It is always sensible to get your own independent legal advice about your own financial and legal situation. I do think this thread is unreasonably hyped up at the idea your DH might get one over on you. You aren’t in a hugely dodgy situation. You haven’t just given up 100k. The only “dodgy” thing your DH has done so far is refer to the purchase date as when he made the offer, but his claim that’s when he bought it has no legal standing and he doesn’t seem to be trying ton use it like that. Its perhaps just a bit of self-identity thing - where he wants to seem to himself and others as though he has it a bit more together than he does. Or it may be the way he thinks of it - saw the house, negotiated the price. So acceptance of the offer is, in his mind, when you secured it. None of that is a big sign of someone who is trying to do one over on you.

Not being on the deeds makes the house his property and that means he has control of it (limited by your marital rights notice). But in the event of divorce or his death you aren’t unprotected. You only have a short marriage but a judge would take into account the fact the money was gifted to your DH by your DF for the purposes of buying the house. You haven’t ring fenced it so you wouldn’t unquestioningly get it all back, but you would likely get the lion’s share (all else being equal). You not working while you’re a student isn’t unreasonable either. You would be well advised to put effort into a career once you’ve graduated, and if there’s an opportunity to get something that would really help your career now than going for that makes sense. But there’s not much point in taking on a minimum wage, non-career related job just for the sake of a few quid now. It’s your financial power you need to concentrate on, not your immediate earnings. You are contributing to the marriage by looking after the children and a family court would recognise that.

Get independent legal advice, but don’t panic about this.

Get your solicitor to register your marital interest in the property. This can be done immediately. (Notice of Home Rights). This gives some immediate protection. The reality is in a divorce situation you would get a share. However on death the property would pass according to his will or intestacy rules if no will.

I was a sahm for 9 years!
now divorced
yes I contributed enormously
but a) my husband didn’t 100% financially support my children from a previous relationship after knowing them a couple of years and b) we actually had children together!

I think you and your df have indeed given away 100k.

@Doingprettywellthanks
But in the meantime he 100% supports you and your children, with no financial control imposed on you at all and you live a “very good standard of life”?
If he is trying to scam you out of £100K he is not going to make much after you deduct what he has spent on you and your children is he?
That's how you see it. My reading is that he has managed to acquire a live in nanny for his kids, free of charge beyond some increased household bills, because it 'works better for him' for the OP not to work so he can travel for work etc. If you take the OP out of the equation, yes he doesn't have living costs for her and her kids, but he'd have to pay for a full time nanny for the same level of Important Job facilitating childcare. He's quids in this way before you even get to the fact that the OP and her Dad gave him £100k for no good reason. And for only three years effort on his behalf. As scams go, it'd be quite a decent return for the time period.

The purchase date is completion date. When the money is transferred from buyer to seller. That is the date that will be registered at the Land Registry as the purchase date.
You need independent legal advice, away from your husband. Get you name on the deeds ASAP.

While it is technically possible to be on the deeds but not on the mortgage most Lenders won’t allow it
take legal advice Asap

Haven't read all the responses, but you are worrying about the wrong thing. It's not at all about whether the house was bought by husband before or after marriage. If you divorce after a short marriage you are highly unlikely to get half or anything near of the property. You need to get your name added to the deeds.

OP, why were you having difficulty getting a mortgage?

With a £100k deposit and a high earner it should not be difficult. How did he explain this?

Do you definitely know what he earns and does for a job? Does he do something you can check or is it just what he says?

How did you meet?

So he has a young wife doing all the domestic work, a house in his name and a free gift of 100k. That is a pretty good deal. I think it is likely that the paperwork you signed gives you the right to live in the house while you are married and he is alive. I asked this before, but did you carefully read what you were signing?

Lenders don’t like having joint title and sole mortgage so forget the advice above telling you to ‘get yourself on the deeds’. If the lender declined you as a joint mortgage holder then it is unlikely they will authorise you to be a joint title.

What did your solicitor advise?

One thing that makes very little sense is why the almighty rush. You're very young, still studying, and you have rushed every step of this.

Why get engaged to a man you'd only known 2 yrs when you have young children to worry about? Why the rush to marry a man you obviously don't trust or know very well?

Why the rush to financially commit to him when you don't even know things like what his will says?

Why the rush to buy a house so soon, rather than waiting a year or so until after graduation, and then doing so as equal partners? You could have taken a year or so to address the credit score issues.

Why are you planning to TTC imminently (I think you said next year) when you claim to want to build a career? What's the rush?

When there were arguments about the secrecy, why did you and your dad still push ahead with it all, despite the fact that you coild have chosen to delay things until those issues had been resolved?

You say your dad is sensible, but frankly, it doesn't sound like it. Unless he had an ulterior motive (money laundering?) he has been anything but sensible.

Who was it that drove the pace of all this? That rushed everything?

Was it you? Your DH? Your dad?

There was nothing dodgy about the 100k, where it came from on my dad's side or how it was in the paperwork but I agree I will speak to a solicitor about it and see if it can be protected or noted somehow.

we were told that my dad could not be on any paperwork as contributing to the purchase as they wouldn't accept that. Same as for me. the mortgage offer was for my husband based off his income only. My dad's age was a problem, my credit score and low income was a problem.

So why didn't you wait?

Once you graduate, you will presumably have an income. And credit scores can be improved.

@eighteenmonthstogo I've not refused to acknowledge that at all I've said multiple times I will make an appointment with a solicitor as soon as possible. I will ask about all those things and do everything I can. My DH has not said he has an issue with this, although I'm not sure if he is saying sure but will be funny about it