Halifax mortgage: apparently I can't be added?

[BlitheringIdiot]

Briefly: when we bought (in Scotland), I wasn't working as our daughter was small and I had been on a temporary contract before Mat leave.

We (my partner, really) were advised that we would get a far better deal if the mortgage was in his name only. He has a good job with a decent income.

The deposit came from me entirely: it was my inheritance after the death of a parent.

We recently renegotiated the mortgage in order to free up some cash for some renovations, and I was very clear that now would be a good time to make us equal partners in the mortgage.

We have gone from my partner dragging his feet to telling me he has asked for forms to be sent out, to now having been advised that we would need to reapply all over again as a couple. He feels this would not be worth the expense.

I do trust him, but dislike being in this position. We both work, although currently I am part time (24.5hrs) as we have a toddler as well as a 7 year old. We are not married.

Can anyone advice? TIA.

But is your mortgage not up for renewal? Then he needs to reapply anyway!

That's wrong. A change of product with the same lender (at the end of a fixed rate, for instance) does not require a new application and financial assessment.

I’m a bit confused as to whether he’s just remortgaged or is in the process of doing so. In order to borrow more money, as the OP describes, would’ve had to remortgage with a new application. If he has done this, alone, then you’ve missed your chance until your fixed period is over. If he is in the process of remortgaging, then now is the time to do it jointly. It’s not about him getting forms though, it’s about you both going and getting a mortgage and applying together

Rainbowmelon that's exactly right. It's literally my job to do the legal paperwork for mortgages and remortgages and I can't tell you the amount of partners etc who thought they owned half the house when they do not.

It shouldn't be any problem to get you added to the mortgage as long as your credit rating's decent. It's not a huge job to do. Don't understand why you couldn't be on it when you bought it to be honest, I've seen a few women on here believe their partner's bollocks about how they can't be on the mortgage if they're not working. Rubbish. And at the same time you're added get the solicitor to draw up a deed saying you're entitled to deposit amount first if you sell before the rest of the equity is split. At the moment he could walk away with the house including your inheritance and you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. The fact he's dragging his feet would make me very very concerned.

Been there, they will not just add you on, if you want me to walk you thorough the entire process and reasons drop me a pm, I was in exactly same situation as you 💐

In England, I was not on the mortgage or the owner of the house but we had a declaration of trust drawn up which set out our entitlement to house equity. This covered the fact we were tenants in common and how much of the house equity we each owned as a percentage. It allowed for me to receive a deposit back then the rest of the equity to be shared 50:50 in my particular case on sale

This would have been effective on death and it was also effective when we split up. It set out the terms on which the house could be valued and under what circumstances one could buy the other out which is helpful if you later split up

To the best of my knowledge it was nothing to do with the mortgage company at all as it only addressed equity that would have been available after the mortgage had been settled on sale of the property

If your OH is a twat about it, in Scotland there are potentially more rights when unmarried couples split up and it could potentially be easier to claim your deposit back and share of the house than it would be in England as there is at least case law supporting this providing you can prove you contribution. Expensive to enforce though

We (my partner, really) were advised that we would get a far better deal if the mortgage was in his name only. He has a good job with a decent income.

I am by no means an expert but something about this doesn't ring true to me, unless you have terrible credit or he's told Halifax he's single?

I had to tell them about the existence of my husband despite him not being on the mortgage (due to terrible credit) and my broker said many lenders would count him as a dependent and reduce my affordability accordingly. But leaving him off was explained to me as something that might reduce the likelihood of people lending to me, not get me a better rate (aside from his credit situation), because lenders like everyone living in the property to be liable to pay the mortgage.

I reiterate I am by no means an expert and happy to be corrected here, but it doesn't sound right.

It does seem unlikely but it does happen
I have had a few clients where if one is a SAHP they get a better deal if the mortgage (and therefore the title) is in the working party's name only
They have all been Halifax loans but that might just be because they are the biggest lender where I practice
I think it's a very dangerous practice (particularly for unmarried partners)
It is like a move back to the 1950s
You try and advise clients against it but they just want the house and the biggest mortgage they can get
And nobody ever thinks they will split up
I have been thinking about contacting my MP about it

And a solicitor in these circumstances (at least in Scotland) cannot advise the other partner or draw up deeds to protect them
All they can do (and must do) is advise the other party to take independent legal advice

OP you definitely need to sort this out.

A mortgage is a liability not an asset. The house is the asset. You should definitely have been on the title when the house was purchased because you paid for part of it. If you split up now you will have big problems especially as you are not married. You should not have allowed this to happen as the mortgage company will have asked you to sign an acknowledgement that you had no interest in the house at the time of taking out the mortgage. This is not true.

There are two routes: (i) to put you in the position you should be in and have the house transferred to you as tenants in common with a declaration of trust which gives you your deposit plus 50% of the value on sale after redeeming the mortgage.There will be costs associated with this - mortgage fees plus stamp duty (which is why you should have had your share of the house at the time). Unless you are a bad credit I can't see why the mortgage company would refuse to do this so this is a bit of a red flag. Insist on participating in any discussions.

(ii) if you can't/don't want to pay the fees then go Joyce Temple's route BUT you are vulnerable if he simply sells the house and naffs off with all the proceeds. Yes you have a trust claim on the proceeds but you have to get your hands on them first.

See a solicitor asap.

I'm going through this with my new partner of two years. He bought the house in March 2018 and I have virtually lived here since then but moved in officially when I gave up my rented house in September 2018. I pay half of all bills as we earn similar. He is trying to arrange a new mortgage deal currently and I have some equity now from a house sale and have said if I match his original deposit I can go on the mortgage. I can actually just go on the deeds though and not on the mortgage so that is another option as you are 50/50 owner without debt liability.

@trayjkay you should really start a new thread and it is really important to state what UK country you are in. The law is different in England and Wales to Scotland.

We remortgaged when I was pregnant with our second child. With our first mortgage I was the main wage earner but when we remortgaged (increased amount, no change in term, different lender) I hadn’t worked for nearly 5 years and was heavily pregnant and we were both on the mortgage both our lives were insured for the loan value too.

That child is 16 now and mortgage all paid off... heaven.....