Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Property/DIY

Join our Property forum for renovation, DIY, and house selling advice.

Original poster

Please help - is she entitled to anything?!

22 replies

QueenMas · 01/04/2015 09:10

My DP bought a flat with his ex in 2008 on a 100% mortgage. Her parents contributed 3k towards fees etc.

She left in 2010 and hasn't paid a penny since. He has soley lived in the property and paid over 35k of mortgage payments since then, plus house maintenance etc.

We are finally at a stage where we can remove her from the mortgage (previous negative equity), and she is asking for money. What exactly is she entitled to? The flat now has around 5-10k equity, if that.

She is also claiming that if they don't come to a mutual agreement that she will move back in with her son Sad. Is this allowed after 5 years?! I'm terrified we will come home one day and she will be sat on the sofa!

Please help - this is making me so anxious Sad

OP posts:
prepperpig · 01/04/2015 09:14

He needs to take legal advice but yes she is likely to be entitled to something. She's a part owner of the property. How is the property held, as joint tenants (they both own the whole thing) or as tenants in common (they each own a defined share)? The deeds to the property will set this out.

I know it feels unfair but without her being on the mortgage (and therefore being restricted in her ability to take out her own mortgage) then she has allowed you to remain in the house.

Feckeggblue · 01/04/2015 09:16

Yes. I would offer her £3k as a start. Worst case she wants it sold so you may end up giving her half the profit on sale (this is what I would want)

lunar1 · 01/04/2015 09:17

She probably can claim on the house, especially if she can prove she paid all the fees.

Original poster
QueenMas · 01/04/2015 09:18

Is she really entitled to half when she hasn't paid a penny towards mortgage payments?

OP posts:
Original poster
QueenMas · 01/04/2015 09:19

Prepper - I'm not sure about which type of tenancy they have...

OP posts:
InfinitySeven · 01/04/2015 09:22

Yes, your DP is going to have to sit down and work out a fair settlement with her, taking into account that she did contribute at the beginning, and that she has effectively allowed you to keep the house by staying on the mortgage (and restricting her ability to take out another mortgage).

You'll probably want to look at whether they are Joint Tenants or Tenants in Common, and start from there.

As she owns at least part of the house, I'm not sure that there would be much that you could do if she wanted to move back in, but realistically she's unlikely to want to do that - she's just using it as leverage to get a fair settlement, because at the moment she has a potential nest egg tied up in your home, and after seven years, she's probably keen to resolve it now.

Feckeggblue · 01/04/2015 09:23

Look at it another way- if she was able to get another mortgage it would've been at a greatly increased interest rate, and she took the risk those years your partner would default on the mortgage and render her bankrupt, so she took risks too

In the experience of my friends it's usual for the person who stays in the house to cover the mortgage- otherwise the party who moved out is paying for nothing when they also need to pay to live elsewhere

InfinitySeven · 01/04/2015 09:25

Cross-posted - I'm a slow typer today!

You really need to check the deeds.

Surely your DP was aware that she would be entitled to a portion of the house? Was he hoping that she didn't realise?

Feckeggblue · 01/04/2015 09:25

Actually I misread. I'd want £3k equity plus my fees £3k- and maybe a bit more as compensation for future increases. A good £10k. Sorry.

But look at it another way- you and H got a property without saving up a big deposit like you'd need to now.

prepperpig · 01/04/2015 09:26

She's not paid the mortgage but neither has she had the benefit of living in the house. She's had to pay rent to live elsewhere.

She's not entitled to half of the value of the house of course, just half of the equity in it.

2boys2girls · 01/04/2015 09:28

Yes she is entitled to half .. Your dp should have sorted on her leaving not just carry on paying her half as such ..

SolomanDaisy · 01/04/2015 09:30

When we sold a house recently, we both had to sign an agreement to have all the equity paid into one account. If we hadn't, the solicitor would have automatically paid half into each of our accounts. I'd start negotiating with her. Once you've paid estate agent and solicitor fees her half of the equity is going to be tiny anyway. She's probably going to end up with less than £1k.

IDontDoIroning · 01/04/2015 09:33

Here is my thoughts
He owed half the fees say £ w
Ds would have had to pay to live somewhere and he lived in a house which only half belonged to him. Therefore she is owed some kind of rent. Say £x
he has paid all the mortgage - (question is this interest in both interest and capital?) if he has paid any capital then he has paid her share which she owes him back say £y . This will off set any increase in equity below.
has he put in any major refurbishments which have added to the value ? Like a new kitchen bathroom extension conservatory ? She owes half that cost say £a
has there been any increase in property prices in the area generally over time if so he owes her half that plus any capital equity say £b.
So it's £w +£x-£y-£a+£b which hopefully won't be a lot.

I suspect she wouldn't be just allowed to move in.
But I would suggest he takes some legal advice.

Madamecastafiore · 01/04/2015 09:34

You need to realise that he got the benefit of living in the flat too.

SolomanDaisy · 01/04/2015 09:34

Oh, I misread that, you're not actually selling so there won't be those costs. She's probably going to want at least the £3k her parents paid in that case.

peggyundercrackers · 01/04/2015 09:39

I would think she should get her fees back and then half of any profit if the house had been sold in 2010 when she moved out. there is fault on both sides - both of them should have taken steps to get her off the mortgage back in 2010 however maybe she didn't want off because she knew she would get nothing out of it if the house was in negative equity...

cestlavielife · 01/04/2015 09:47

TOLATA applies.
starting point would be half the equity. she could argue for her 3k deposit back too.

yes she is entitled to live in the flat as much as he is.

he has been occupying so has been paying occupying rent ie the mortgage payments. unless he has eg invested 30k in a new kitchen, then the fact he has paid all the mortgage payments is not relevant.

get valuations from estate agents (at least 3, tell them you thinking of selling) and see if she is in agreement then offer her half the equity plus her 3k. if you don't agree on the estate agent valuation then you would need to pay a valuation surveyor to value.

Maliceaforethought · 01/04/2015 09:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PiratePanda · 01/04/2015 09:54

Post this on legal.

Original poster
QueenMas · 01/04/2015 09:54

Thanks for the feedback.

The reason why she wasn't removed from the mortgage until now is that the lender wouldn't allow it - firstly the property was in negative equity, then there were arrears when he was made redundant. He paid off the debts and had to wait 12 months before they would consider an application - which brings us to now.

Just found out that we are now at a point where they will still now allow him to remove her - as the property has less than 15% equity.

We didn't want to sell but I think we may be forced to. If she has half of the profit that will be around 2k I would imagine.

OP posts:
Original poster
QueenMas · 01/04/2015 09:55

*not allow, not now!

OP posts:
CrispyFB · 01/04/2015 10:39

Many years ago I split with my ex after we'd spent 9 months in the house as a couple, with me making half those mortgage payments. There was no deposit (100%) and we split paying for the fees etc.

By the time we got around to taking me off the mortgage, it was 12 months since purchase.

We got the house valued by three estate agents. As I had lived in the house and paid mortgage payments for 75% of the time, we agreed I would receive 50% of 75% of the equity if that makes sense. He had the funds available and sent me the cash.

To me that seemed really fair. To cash in on the equity of a place for a time you haven't lived in it and haven't contributed to it seems unfair. Yes, she could not have got a mortgage of her own, but was she likely to need one in that time?

Can you find out how much equity there is and divide it up depending on the amount of time she did live/pay there?

As for the fact she paid for the fees, she still had some use of those fees as it enabled her to buy a house and get some equity. If I were a judge I'd say pay her back her fees as a proportion of the time she didn't spend there if that makes sense. e.g. if she didn't live there for 75% of the time, give her 75% of the three grand back.

Good luck! These things are complicated enough when everyone is amicable, let alone when things get like this.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread