Married but not on mortgage

[Jessesgirl13]

Hi,

I was hoping someone could give us some advice. I've been married to DH for 4 years and have 1 child and another on the way. He bought our current home himself prior to this. We are now about to move house and was hoping to include me on the mortgage this time.

However, I was made redundant last October and have been freelancing part time since then. This has been successful but as we expected non of my earnings count towards our mortgage application as I've only been doing it for 6 months. Basically adding me onto the mortgage actually brings down the amount around 70k!

So it looks like we're going to have to go ahead just in his name on both mortgage and deeds.

So my questions are:

How protected am I if we were to divorce in the future? (not expecting it to happen, but I'd be a fool to not question this)

Is there anything we can do legally at this time to ensure that I'm always protected?

Thanks

I am not a professional - this is amatuer advice.

Marriage is a legal contract to share your lives, including your future financial prosperity. This creates the security which allows us to take risks with our individual prosperity (e.g. by taking maternity leave).

A mortgage is a legal contract enabling individuals to buy a house they couldn't otherwise afford, with a legal obligation from the borrower to make repayments to the lender, and the lender has the right to take posession of the house and auction it off to the highest bidder if the borrower fails to keep up the payments.

Being on named on the deeds to the house is what confers ownership. It is possible to be named on the deeds of the house without being named on the mortgage. There is more than one way of being named. You can be named as a co-owner, you can be named as having a "charge" on the property (an amount of money which is due to you if the property is sold), you can be named. I think I recall that it is possible to also be registered as a resident in the house which gives you some rights against being evicted but I can't remember the term for that.

Being named on the mortgage isn't the key issue - that is just the person who is agreeing to stick to the terms of the loan. What you need for security is reliable acknowledgement that you have rights over the asset which is the (gradually increasing as you pay off the mortgage) equity in that house. That is most simply acquired by being named on the deeds as a co-owner - that might require the agreement of the mortgage lender.

If you don't get divorced, and he dies first, and if he nominates you as the sole or main beneficiary of his Will, then it makes no difference.

If you don't get divorced and you die first, then what happens will depend on his decisions after that - he could remarry and disinherit your children for example. That would be a major concern for me.

If you do get divorced then whose name is on the mortgage shouldn't make a huge difference but in practice it can do. However, ostensibly all "assets" held by either party to the marriage are considered as part of what has to be divided up. Some consideration would be given in the event that one party had very large assets before the marriage and one did not, if the marriage was of relatively short duration. However, it is not at all unusual for a woman who sacrificed her own earning potential in order to follow a family-friendly flexible but lower-paid career path might get a larger share of the assets in recognition of this. The work that one person in the partnership which earns money is not of higher real value than the unpaid work that the other person does to create and sustain the family environment at home, therefore all assets are "joint" whoever nominally owns them. The name on the mortgage wouldn't prevent that from being decided in her favour if it was appropriate.

I was on the same boat when we re-mortgaged, my earnings weren't included. But my name is still on the mortgage and deeds so I'd defo talk to someone first.

If you divorce the house will go into the pot to be divided between you regardless of the fact that it is in his sole name. You don't have to do anything to ensure you are protected. The law is on your side.

Theoretically you can be on the title but not on the mortgage but most lenders won’t allow it

Im not sure that either of the above is true, you must get legal advice.

If it does go in his name you can file form MH1 with the Land Registry.

@BlueDahlia69

Im not sure that either of the above is true, you must get legal advice.

Yes, both my post and user1487194234's post are correct.

Regarding my post, that is primarily what marriage is about. If an unmarried couple splits, ownership of assets is important. The OP would then struggle to make a claim for any of the equity in the house. However, when a married couple splits all assets go into the pot to be split between them regardless of ownership. The OP would have a claim for some or all of the equity in the house. This is clearly set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.

Regarding user1487194234's post, there is no law that says the OP can only be on the deeds if she is on the mortgage. The only bar is practical - most lenders will not permit it.

It's possible you have a set time and then remortgage with your name on the deeds and mortgage. Try to get on the deeds though. How about paying the mortgage from a separate account which you pay equally into to prove you have physically paid half?

@notagainmummy

It's possible you have a set time and then remortgage with your name on the deeds and mortgage. Try to get on the deeds though. How about paying the mortgage from a separate account which you pay equally into to prove you have physically paid half?

Most lenders will not allow the OP to be on the deeds since she isn't on the mortgage. And I'm not sure why you suggest proving that the OP has paid half the mortgage. That may be worth doing if the OP was not married but that isn't the situation. Paying half the mortgage will make no difference to the financial settlement if the OP divorces, nor will it make any difference to the lender's willingness to include her on the mortgage.

Thanks all for your input.

So the mortgage lender wont agree to me being on deeds but not on mortgage. I cant even put a cash deposit towards the house without being on the mortgage either.

Basically the lenders wont take into account any of my self employed income, but do take into account my outgoings, which is really only a car on finance.

Basically with my husband just on the mortgage we get 275k. Adding me drags that down to 205k as they only take into account my outgoings.

So to afford the home we want, we're going to have to go ahead with just him on it. This will be for a 5 year term, after that hopefully we can add me back on as i'll have years of accounts or be employed.

But for the next 5 years I just want to make sure that im protected should anything go wrong.

Ive read about Matrimonial Home Rights but cant work out whether thats something I should apply for now, or if its only something you apply for in the process of divorce.

You are married and you have children.

In the event that you divorce the children come first, it is expected that they be impacted as little as possible.

So this usually means they and their primary carer stay in the marital home. It’s also expected that if the means are available they should live the same quality of life as they are accustomed to.

Your contribution to the marriage partnership is valued even if you aren’t working. By doing the bulk of the childcare you are facilitating his career success.

Basically, don’t sweat it unless you really think things are going tits up 😅

I have never had my earnings included on our mortgages. If you do this it makes no difference to the amount you borrow, it is just 3.5 or 4 times his earnings.

Should add I have always had mortgage in joint names

@Iamsodonewith2020

I have never had my earnings included on our mortgages. If you do this it makes no difference to the amount you borrow, it is just 3.5 or 4 times his earnings.

Did you have any outgoings though?

This is what is depleting our mortgage value. I can put my name on the mortgage, but it means we cant afford the house we want as me being on it reduces the value nearly 70k. Hence it making sense to not include me.

Some ,not all Lenders ,are now doing this, effectively reducing the amount that can be borrowed if it is a joint loan.

I think it is bordering on indirect discrimination.

It doesn't matter so much if you are married ,but really tricky if you are not.

Lots of people will say, well i wasn't working and it didn't affect the amount I borrowed ,and i am on the title deeds, completely irrelevant if the Lender in the particular case takes a different view

Can't really blame buyers who need to borrow as much as possible, also often buyers are unwilling to pay additional legal fees to build in protection for the person not on the title,not great but again understandable when cash is tight

I was in a similar position a few years ago, albeit I didn’t reduce the available mortgage by much, just didn’t add to it. I was advised that it was okay, as we were married. I could register a charge on the property, but they advised me not to do this until/unless we were having trouble, as it needs to be removed before you remortgage as the bank needs the first charge, and it’s a lot of paperwork and hassle each time.

I’d recommend getting your own advice for peace of mind, but I don’t think this situation is that uncommon, and we couldn’t find a mortgage provider who would allow me to be on the deeds but not the mortgage.

I did this, I own our house and DH isn't on the mortgage or the deeds.

He had to sign something with the mortgage provider to state that he had no claim on the property at all. But this was really for his protection I think, so they couldn't chase him for it if I stopped paying the mortgage or whatever.

As far as I know, if we were to divorce our house would just go into the pot of marital assets that other posters are talking about, regardless of him having signed this form and not being on the deeds to the house. I'm my last marriage the car and things that were solely in my husbands name were part of the marital assets and I think this would be the same.

Get legal advice though, clearly I didn't because the house is mine, and my DH didn't either because he's lazy. But if I was in your position I would.

You can add a person onto the deeds/mortgage later though if your situation changes. We nearly did this a couple of years ago but we decided not to bother, I think it cost about a grand.

I'm my case they didn't take into account my husbands earnings or his outgoings and didn't view him as my dependant (lots of lenders do in this scenario), they described it like he was a sort of long-term lodger in my house!

This was Halifax and I went with them because they were the most flexible about this situation at the time.

And I've just remembered that the reason he had to sign that form was because the deposit money came from his bank account. It was my money but I had moved it for boring reasons and because it was in his account they viewed it as a gift. So he had to sign a big saying even though he had gifted me all this money (which was mine in the first place) he wouldn't have a claim on the properly.

So it's irrelevant to you!

As you are married and have children I think you would be awarded half in event of divorce. That is starting point.