AIBU to advise my daughter that she'd be daft to not put her name on house deeds?

[User197634]

My DD (20) is planning on buying a house with her bf of 2 years. He has been given a lump sum buy his parents to put down on a house, and my DD mentioned that it would only be his name on the deeds, even though she'll be sharing the bills.

I've advised her that, yes by all means her bf should have a contract drawn up to protect the money he's putting in should they split, but I still believe she should insist that her name goes on the deeds too.

I think she thinks that I'm over thinking things, but I want her protected too. Any advice appreciated

I’m confused… I’m not sure you can legally get a mortgage in your name without the deeds being in your name?!…. When I married my husband and he came onto the mortgage his name automatically went on the deeds because he was then in effect ‘buying’ the house…
Also legally if she’s paying half the mortgage and half the bills she has a right to claim against the house anyway.
when my husband moved in with me into my house I sought legal advice and they told me not to put a single bill in his name, and to buy a rent book and record him paying me rent. Otherwise he could technically claim something from the house!
So if DD is on paper as paying half the mortgage it would be a crap solicitor that would allow her to not be on the deeds!

When my husband came in the deeds I already had 1/3 of the house value in equity so we were advised to set up the mortgage as ‘partners in common, meaning I owned 2/3 and him 1/3…. So when we later paid off the mortgage and split we still legally owned the house 66/33 approx split

They're not planning a life together at 20. She's paying rent to live with her boyfriend in the house he and his family have paid for.
If they hadn't paid for it she'd still be paying rent elsewhere

She would to pay half the mortgage and not be on the deed. He should draft something to protect his deposit (if unmarried) but your daughter is being blinded by love. She may have to learn the hard way.

If she means he is charging her rent…I would advise her to find somewhere else to live.

Are they using both incomes to determine affordability or just his?

This happened to my son and his now ex girlfriend but in reverse. She had the deposit but he was on the mortgage and on the deeds. She would not have been able to get a mortgage on her salary alone, so he was able to contribute a benefit in
kind, by using his earning potential. Myself and my husband met with her family and we all agreed that if they split then the amount put as a deposit should be kept by the girlfriend and any further money split between the two of them. Fast forward- they split and this exactly what happened.
Moral of the tale - make sure everyone knows what the arrangements are in the event of worst case scenario.

You said: although they've not applied for a mortgage as yet, they are planning to together.

You can’t get a mortgage on a property you don’t own.

There’s two kinds of ownership setup in the UK. Joint tenants, where both own the whole house, together.
The other is tenants in common. This is where you both own distinct % of the property.
DDBF is right not to put £60k into a house, and have the ownership 50:50. If something goes wrong he’ll lose what’s his. The best thing to do would be to consider tenants in common, with an unequal ownership split, or have some kind of legal agreement drawn up by a solicitor. If the property they’re looking at is worth £300k then DB is buying 20% outright, the remaining 80% is split equally. Therefore DD owns 40% and DB 60%. Tenants in common would suit this approach. This protects his investment and ensures he gains from appreciation, but also does not over expose DD if the price depreciates. Ultimately though, the mortgage debt would be settled before any equity could be drawn in the event of a split.

If it's a joint mortgage she will have to be on the deed. If she is just paying rent to live in his house, even if it does amount to roughly half the bills, then that's a different matter. But I'm not entirely sure what she needs protecting from. They're very young, she'd have living expenses wherever she lived. They can always reassess as and when they become more serious, or when their financial circumstances change.

Of course she should be on the deeds if she’s putting in money for the mortgage! She needs to protect herself financially because if it all goes wrong (and she’s very young, is this a lifetime relationship, who can tell?!) then she can be kicked out with no recompense.

Yes she needs to be on the deeds if she is taking out a joint mortgage on a property - if either contributes/owns a bigger share (due to deposit contribution or more mortgage payments) - then it needs to be a 'tenants in common' arrangment where the different shares of ownership are specified.

Perhaps his parents dont want her on the mortgage and believe he can buy somewhere with his own earnings?

if shes on the mortgage or contributing of course she should are they applying together?

If she is not putting anything towards the purchase of the house and isn’t contributing to the mortgage then they split the utility bills and council tax and her name doesn’t get put on the deeds they are both very young and it could end up really messy. Maybe later down the line they could review that decision and add her to the deeds.

My point is that the DD can be on the hook foe the full loan and not be on the deed.

DD is an adult and will be bound into the contract with or without legal advice. The onus would be on her to prove to the court that she did not understand what she was signing or that she was coerced etc.

What the bank want is a quick cheap easy court process to be able to sell the house and attach any shortfall to the contracted parties (DD and BF). Which is why banks normaly also require proof of the origin of funds and letters from connected adults confirming they have no claim to the property.

As part of the loan application DD would be required to confirm she was not making any legal claim on the house.

The bank want the DD to have a solicitor in that type of arrangment because the client for the purchase of the property is the BF not DD.

The BFs solicitor themselves give the bank undertakings about transfer of the money and the title transfer etc on behalf property owner. They give no undertakings on her behalf.

His solicitor can not act on behalf of DD as DD and BF have divergent legal needs and they are not allowed to act against the BFs interest. There is the potential for error where DD thinks that the solicitor works for her too.

The solicitor being obliged to inform the bank is to reduce a possible fraud by the solicitor/BF where DD is knowingly not added to the deed.

The loan stands independent of the property purchase so fraud against the bank or against DD by the BF could still leave her on the hook to repay all the money.

If it's a joint mortgage she will have to be on the deed.

No she doesnt. They are two separate things. One is a debt - so she is liable for the joint mortgage. The other - the deeds - is about ownership of the property - so its not unusual for example for a parent to have a joint mortgage with their child but not be on the deeds.

If it was my daughter I would be suggesting that she only pays towards bills, not mortgage and starts saving to either buy her own property in future or to properly buy into his should they decide later to marry.
That way they are both protected.

However, we rarely get that level of input into their decisions!

If his parents are putting the £60k towards a deposit, and they are applying for a mortgage together, based on joint income and she will be paying onto it, then yes her name should be on the deeds, but an agreement should be drawn up to protect his deposit and then should they split they split the equity.

But ideally they wouldn't financially chain themselves together at this age.

Should they split up, if he is dependant now on her income for the mortgage, he is unlikely to be able to buy her out - he could get a lodger, but lodger income would not be taken into account when he applies for a mortgage to buy her out. And vice versa. They could end up both losing the house. Much better to get something where he can afford the mortgage on his own and she contributes to bills and saves for her own future....whether that be with him in 5 years time, or without him.

All that being said, it is great that your daughter has an eye on home ownership at such a young age!

YANBU to be concerned. I have a friend who has been burned by this exact situation, she was paying towards the mortgage, upkeep etc, they broke up, her name wasn't on the deeds and because they weren't married she got nothing back.

Your daughter needs to protect herself against that situation. I'm not sure the best way of doing that but she needs to look into it or she could lose a large sum of money if they do break up.

It would be absolute madness for your DD to be on the mortgage and not on the deeds, as she would be responsible for the repayment of the full loan but not own the asset. The BF could stop paying & the bank will come to her to pay up. Her future financial security / credit rating could be completely jeopardised.

Also just on the house price thing and people cant quite believe that 60k would go anywhere to form any sort of hefty deposit, Im not sure why but I keep getting adverts pop up on this site for houses for sale with TS postcodes. I think that might be Teesside or Sunderland or something like that?

Anyway, some fab looking houses and I havent seen anything over 200k yet.

Definitely not wise and you should talk to her about it. To be fair it can work out. When me and my boyfriend got our starter flat I was still a student with some debt so thought we wouldn’t get a mortgage if I was on it so just got the mortgage in his name although it was “our” house and I contributed to bills. It worked out and we’re 10 years married this year and yes I am on the mortgage to our current home! Although I do look back now and think it was silly and I would have been left with nothing if we split.

I would look at it like this. She is either on the deeds, paying half the mortgage and bills or she is living with him as a lodger. She then pays an agreed amount (which wounded be half imo) to him each month and nothing more, no upkeep, no decorating etc.

If the BF can’t afford the house without her paying half then they need to bring fence the deposit and do everything else properly. He cant have it all ways ie her paying half so he can buy a house but her ending up with no asset.

Ok, now you’ve updated, let’s put some actual facts and figures here.
First, if they are buying the house with a joint mortgage, then her name WILL be on the ‘deeds’, regardless as to who pays the deposit, as will the mortgage lender because they will ‘own’ a % of the house until the mortgage is paid off. It means that everyone who has taken out the mortgage is responsible for paying it.
If they buy a house for, say, £200k with a £60k deposit from the BF and £0 from the DD, then the mortgage will be £140k. His deposit will be 30% of the total value of the property. This is important!
If they buy as joint tenants without him ringfencing his deposit, then should they split up the very next day, legally each person would get £30k from the house sale assuming they sold it for what they bought it. If, however, his 30% was ringfenced and they sold the house some time later at an increased value of £250K, having reduced the mortgage to £120k he should receive his 30% of the sale value, which = £75K, the outstanding mortgage to be paid is £120k leaving joint equity of £55k so each would receive a further £27500. In total, BF would get £102500K.

OP, we know you say you mention youth and inexperience already, but please ask your DD, if she would be thinking of buying a house now, were it not for her BF desire and lump sum? I think this is worth her consideration before her love-brain takes over her executive decision making skills.

My suggestion on the Dos:
Do Ensure Legal Protection for Her Financial Contribution:
-Since your daughter will be sharing bills and contributing to the property in practical terms (even if her name isn't on the deeds), it's crucial that her financial contribution is formally recognised. She should have an official agreement in place (ideally a Cohabitation Agreement), which outlines her share of the property, bills, and any potential share of any future profit if they sell or split. If she's making a meaningful contribution, it should be legally recognised, even if her name isn't on the deeds.
Do Insist on Independent Legal Advice:
-Since this involves significant financial risk and potential legal complications, both your daughter and her boyfriend should seek independent legal advice. It's important that they both understand the long-term implications of their agreement. Your daughter should have her own solicitor to ensure that her interests are protected. An impartial lawyer can help her fully comprehend the consequences if things don't work out.
Do Consider Adding Her Name to the Deeds or at Least a Formal Financial Agreement:
-If your daughter plans to stay long-term in the house and make a substantial contribution, she should consider having her name added to the deeds (as a joint owner, even if it's on a different basis such as 50/50 or a specific share). This gives her legal ownership of the property, which secures her position in the event of a breakup. If adding her name isn't an option, a Trust Deed could be an alternative, which would legally outline her financial interest in the property.

Top 3 Don’ts:
Don’t Rely Solely on Informal Agreements:
-Avoid any verbal or informal agreements. If there is no legal documentation, she may have limited rights should they split. Without something in writing, her contributions could be overlooked, leaving her financially vulnerable if things don’t work out with her boyfriend.
Don’t Ignore the Potential for Unforeseen Risks:
-Your daughter might feel confident about the relationship now, but it's always wise to plan for the unexpected. Breakups happen, and if the property is only in her boyfriend’s name, she could face significant financial loss and legal hurdles if they separate. It’s better to be over-prepared than under-prepared.
Don’t Assume Everything Will Be Easy if They Split:
-Many people assume that when they split, they’ll be able to just divide assets. However, the law can be complicated, and if her name isn't on the deeds, claiming any financial stake in the property could be difficult. The property could be seen as his, and without clear legal documentation, she may not be entitled to any portion of the value, even if she contributed financially.

Additional Thoughts:
You’re absolutely right to be cautious. Relationships, particularly when large financial investments like buying a house are involved, can be tricky. Even if they’re in a loving relationship now, it’s important to protect your daughter’s financial future. Legal agreements may feel like something "over the top" now, but they can prevent far bigger problems down the road.
I’d also recommend her speaking to a financial advisor to consider the broader picture (e.g. tax implications, mortgage terms, etc.) since buying property has long-term financial implications.

I’m confused. You can’t have a mortgage if you don’t own the property. So is he buying the house outright or will a mortgage just be in his name?

I see this all the time. Always the woman who gets screwed.

it does indicate, however, a) that he is not certain about their future or b) he is a dick and to be avoided. Not sure which.

If he is paying all of the deposit, all of the solicitors and moving fees, and does not require her salary to secure the mortgage then if he were my son I would advise him to buy just in his name BUT definitely not get her to pay for half of every single bill including the mortgage and maintenance.

If she is going to be on the mortgage then of course must be on the deeds too but then she should also be paying towards solicitors fees and at least have put some money down as a deposit. It is possible that the house goes down in value and they need to sell. In that case would it be his deposit that takes the hit or would she be able to buy herself out of that?

If he puts down £60K, the house costs £180K and they split the mortgage for £120K. They split and need to sell. House now only worth £165K. Where is this £15K coming from? From his deposit?

Sounds like they both need to think through a few scenarios and what is really fair and protects them both.

Her name on the mortgage - her name on the deeds. End of story.

As a mortgage adviser I can tell you that most banks will insist if she’s in the mortgage she’s on the deeds.

if the mortgage is going in his name only she can’t go on the deeds but a contract can be drawn up to protect her

I would 100% be advising, joint mortgage both on deeds but with a contract that says should they spilt before any proceeds are spilt he is get his £60k back. I would then also encourage your daughter to save what she can so that if they move house in the future, she can put towards the deposit on the new house and he can get his 50% deposit back.

ideally they would have equal footing in deposit so depending on the house the price they could both put some in each. Also me and my now DH bought are first house when we were 20 & 22. Still together 20 years later

Joint mortgage sole owner is a thing however there is few mortgage companies that allow it