# Transfer of house in arrears/neg. equity



## railroaded (17 Jan 2011)

Am about to legally get former shared house into my own name.I have an apartment in spain mortgage free.Can not afford full mortgage payments on house.Should I offer the bank the apartment for them to change the deeds mortgage to my name?


----------



## PaddyBloggit (17 Jan 2011)

Doubt it .. last thing the bank needs is a holiday home in Spain!


----------



## Bronte (17 Jan 2011)

A bank will not allow the tranfer of a mortgage property to one person if that person cannot afford the mortgage so I don't understand how you state a property is being transferred to you.


----------



## railroaded (17 Jan 2011)

My partner hasnt paid the mortgage in two years so surely I am the better bet even if
its interest only for a time?


----------



## bleary (17 Jan 2011)

Could you not then sell the apartment in Spain and use the proceeds to clear the negative equity?


----------



## railroaded (17 Jan 2011)

Thank You. nothing selling there at the moment so thought they might take the deeds as security to push through the transfer?


----------



## PaddyBloggit (17 Jan 2011)

Ask them.


----------



## horusd (17 Jan 2011)

The offer sounds like ok L.T. collateral if, all things being equal, you have a good relationship& record with the bank. But they probably will be concerned nonethless at you not being able to afford house mortgage. Can you rent a room ? Boost your income in other ways to meet repayments? IF the bank was forced to try & sell you spanish apt ( or even thought this might be a possibility), I think they would be very reluctant. As Paddybloggit says, ask them. But I would look seriously at how you might meet repayments and assume they will not agree to your collateral offer. Leastways then, you will have the workings of a plan B, or realise you need an exit strat. if you can't afford the house. Seems danagerous to consider taking on debt that you maybe cannot afford.


----------



## WinWin (17 Jan 2011)

railroaded said:


> My partner hasnt paid the mortgage in two years so surely I am the better bet even if
> its interest only for a time?



The bank look at is as having to persons so go after if mortgage isn't paid, they'll only allow you sole ownership if you can clear the mortgage and take another one in your sole name.  
They could do this using the apt in spain as collateral.  But you would need to talk to them.


----------



## Bronte (18 Jan 2011)

railroaded said:


> My partner hasnt paid the mortgage in two years so surely I am the better bet even if
> its interest only for a time?


 
This is not relevant to the bank.  They only care that the mortgage is being paid.  In any case it is not the bank who decides on ownership.  In addition there is a mortgage in both your names, you cannot afford the mortgage so why do you want the property in your name?  I don't understand you saying that the transfer is going to be legally transferred to you unless your partner agrees AND the bank agrees to release the deeds and have the mortgage in your name only.


----------



## railroaded (18 Jan 2011)

Thank you all. food for thought.My partner has agreed straight transfer as no equity .
also I put in 300k deposit to his 50k in 2005.My laywer will be asking a judge for transfer to me.

As I have two young kids she feels this will be no problem)

 The problem is the banks. Negotiate myself ( youngish blonde separated female;may not look like a good bet to them) Bring an accountant with me or
leave it to my laywer to try to persuade them? I would like one day to have the opportunity to maybe get back some of my huge deposit if house prices ever rise


----------



## Bronte (18 Jan 2011)

railroaded said:


> I would like one day to have the opportunity to maybe get back some of my huge deposit if house prices ever rise


 Hopefully this is not your main reason for wanting the house in your name.

It's very confusing with two threads running on the same topic.


----------



## dereko1969 (18 Jan 2011)

Bronte said:


> Hopefully this is not your main reason for wanting the house in your name.
> 
> It's very confusing with two threads running on the same topic.


 
Plus 1 kid in this thread and 2 in the other???


----------



## wbbs (18 Jan 2011)

The bank will only be interested in whether or not you meet their present lending criteria for the mortgage in your own name only.   Won't matter if you bring accountant, solicitor etc or whatever, they are not into breaking the rules these days (belated I know) so all they will want to know is what is your income and how secure is it.


----------



## railroaded (18 Jan 2011)

The kids  was a typographical error. I was in no way suggesting the banks "break the rules".My motivation is irrelevent but as a mother should be obvious.Since I have now
been in defensive mode three times I,ll just leave it at that.


----------



## wbbs (18 Jan 2011)

I wasn't suggesting you were asking the bank to break the rules, my point was that if your application to take over loan in your own name i.e. your income, meets the bank criteria then you will get it, if not you wont.

Whether you are blond, separated, accountant, solicitor, alien or anything else will not really be the issue.


----------



## Byca (25 Jan 2011)

I saw this thread and I am similar situation but unfortunately I do not want the house.

At present the house is rented and small balance needed to be paid each month to make the repayment.

There is approx 70k negative equity on the house so I don't want to be left with it as ex is now not paying his half of the balancing payment. 

Will I be forced by bank to pay his half as such because it's a joint mortgage?

Was reading the new ecb code of conduct and it does state if joint borrowers separate then they are considered individual borrowers does that mean arrears can be attributed separately?

I'd really appreciate people's thoughts

thanks


----------



## Bronte (26 Jan 2011)

Byca if you signed a mortgage with another person and one of you is not paying then the other will have to.  There are no two ways about this.  The banks don't care if you are separated or divorced they only care that the mortgage is being paid.  You cannot sell because the house is in negative equity.  Going to court to force your ex to pay will cost money.  Not paying the mortgage will cost you, so you have no option but to pay.  Does your ex have an income and could he afford to pay the mortgage balance?


----------



## Byca (26 Jan 2011)

No he has no income whatsoever.we signed a side legal agreement when the house was bought that gives me the right to force him to transfer the house to me if he defaults on his payment obligations.but obviously I don't want this because it's in negative equity.the legal agreement does refer to current Market value and a figure for transfer would have to be agreed but not sure if this would still stand in the negative equity case.if I force the sale of the house then legally the debt would have to be split between us?I would rather that then me get the house and have the total negative equity...


----------



## monagt (19 Aug 2011)

*This bothered me 2*



dereko1969 said:


> Plus 1 kid in this thread and 2 in the other???



Why the difference children count over different threads? 



> The kids was a typographical error.



Doubt its a typo! 



> I have three young kids and no pension.





> I have one child not his aged 8.



I am totally confused!


----------



## becky (19 Aug 2011)

railroaded said:


> also I put in 300k deposit to his 50k in 2005.My laywer will be asking a judge for transfer to me.


 
This is what confused me, a 350K deposit!


----------



## SarahMc (19 Aug 2011)

350K deposit, and 100K negative equity. I can't get my head around the figures.


----------

