# Removing an ex from the deeds, but not the mortgage



## Markswoman (3 Aug 2013)

As requested by Brendan some days ago, here is my outline case study. If Brendan could edit I would be much obliged as have to just rush off a quick study of basic details at the moment.

2003 bought house with husband - house price 177k.
2004 remortgaged to value of 205k
2006 marital split
2008 ex moved out and I was left liable for full mortgage plus arrears as ex refused to deal with bank 
2013 finally got divorce, ex signed forms to relinquish all rights to property and name is removed from deeds. I take on negative equity, arrears and mortgage with a view to taking exes name off mortgage/transfer of equity in the future. Judge agrees no sale of order to be made on property unless I stop paying mortgage for a term of 6 or more months. 

These are the very basic details of the case, if needed I can provide more information.


----------



## Markswoman (29 Aug 2013)

*Bank ignoring court order??*

Got my divorce granted in July with a court order to prove my ex relinquishes all rights to home, deeds to be signed off to myself only and his name to stay on mortgage until a transfer of equity can be established. Divorce is now more than 6 weeks old (i.e legal financially) yet a recent meeting with the bank to change terms of loan is still not being commissioned without my exes consent although the court order which I have copied and given them, states that I am now sole owner and the only person to deal with them over the course of the mortgage.
Who can I discuss this with? Are they able to just ignore a court order? 

I am also still in the uncomfortable position whereby my solicitor has not yet sorted out the title deeds issue and my ex husbands name is currently still on the title deeds. I have been in touch with the land registry and they have confirmed that while the request was put in on 12th aug it was rejected on the 14th because my own solicitor had not commissioned it herself - I am baffled? I was told by my solicitor that I would basically not have to deal with her again yet the land registry (who put me through to a different dept) have now told me it is only my own solicitor who can do this AND she has to still get my now ex husband to sign off on all of this. Did the court ruling and signing mean nothing? What can I do here? My ex has never been an agreeable sort and I really do not want to have to contact him myself but I was given legal aid and as such, presumed that once my case was given it's day in court then that would be final. Any advice/thoughts?


----------



## Time (29 Aug 2013)

If they are ignoring a court order, they can be brought to court for contempt. That would soften their cough rather quickly.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Aug 2013)

HI Markswoman

Are you sure that you are interpreting the court order correctly? 

I can see that the court might order that he transfers the house into your name.
But the court cannot order that the mortgage be put in your sole name and it appears that is what it has not done.

So your ex is still a joint mortgage holder. Therefore surely his consent is needed to change the terms of the mortgage. 

For example, if you want to take a one year full payment mortatorium, it is increasing his exposure and he should be able to veto it. 

You will need to take legal advice on it.


----------



## Markswoman (20 Sep 2013)

Have been awaiting word from the mortgage company before updating this but they are still of the opinion that he has to sign off every change made to the mortgage which is not what I had been advised would happen. Have been unable to get in contact with my solicitor but the wording is as follows on settlement terms:

_That the court grants a declaration that the Applicant is entitled to the entire legal and beneficial interest in the family home at **** as comprised in Folio ***** 

Upon transfer of the family home into the applicants sole name, an order pursuant to section 54(3) of the act of 1995 dispensing with the consent and/or the necessity of the respondent's consent to any future dealing howsoever by the applicant with that property_

Just to add I have been on again to the land registry and the home is solely in my name since earlier this month having only been rejected the first time due to a spelling error. 

Am I reading it incorrectly?


----------



## Bronte (20 Sep 2013)

Markswoman said:


> _Upon transfer of the family home into the applicants sole name, an order pursuant to section 54(3) of the act of 1995 dispensing with the consent and/or the necessity of the respondent's consent to any future dealing howsoever by the applicant with that property_
> 
> Just to add I have been on again to the land registry and the home is solely in my name ?


 
So the property title is now solely in your name. But the mortgage is not. 

The phrase in italics, while it seems to mean your husband has no say now over what you do with the property, as in you can sell it or transfer it without his consent, it doesn't deal with the mortgage. You cannot for example sell the property unless you've no mortgage or the banks consent.


----------



## Jim2007 (20 Sep 2013)

Markswoman said:


> Am I reading it incorrectly?



I don't see where in all of this the bank was ordered to do anything... And in any case the court is not going to alter the terms of the mortgage without hearing from both sides, so unless the bank was represented at the proceedings it is hard to see how this could happen...

From what you have told us I'd say the bank is not ignoring the court order, simply because the bank was actually never ordered to do or not do anything.


----------



## Lucuma (20 Sep 2013)

Markswoman said:


> Just to add I have been on again to the land registry and the home is solely in my name since earlier this month having only been rejected the first time due to a spelling error.
> 
> Am I reading it incorrectly?


 
That is fantastic news that the title deeds of the house are now solely in your name. It must be such a relief. Well done!


----------



## Markswoman (27 Sep 2013)

Thanks for the responses, apologies for again taking so long to come back. So basically I am no better along than I was prior to divorce and deeds being transferred? I need to speak to the bank about a lot of things in the coming years and my ex is still refusing to comment on anything/sign anything.


----------



## Jim2007 (27 Sep 2013)

Markswoman said:


> Thanks for the responses, apologies for again taking so long to come back. So basically I am no better along than I was prior to divorce and deeds being transferred? I need to speak to the bank about a lot of things in the coming years and my ex is still refusing to comment on anything/sign anything.



Well since you now own the house outright, perhaps the bank could be persuaded to take your ex's name of the mortgage, unless he has some other assets that they could go after in the event of a default there would seem to be not much point in having his name there.  In fact you could make the case that having his name there will complicate matters for them as well going forward and see what they say.


----------



## Markswoman (27 Sep 2013)

I spoke to MABS today after posting the above. They have given me an outline letter to send to my mortgage company to state that a) I am cooperating with everything over the past couple of years with them and b) to mention some clause (I left details on work desk so cant quote) that states that in circumstances such as mine whereby I have been the only one to contribute in over 7 years now to this mortgage account, that they can solely deal with me and need to deal with my ex as another matter. I have a meeting with a PIP on Tuesday as advised by MABS about the arrears (I have been practically begging the bank to capitalise the arrears for years but they have refused) and my credit union loan. I am so messed up about all of this right now. I never defaulted on purpose, only stopped paying when out of work and when I could not support myself but have been paying everything in full for years now.


----------



## Markswoman (18 Oct 2013)

So the legal team in the bank have come back to me and said no, they have to get my exes signature on everything. I am at my wits end, nothing else I can do now but save 2500 and employ the services of a PIP.


----------



## Lucuma (22 Oct 2013)

Markswoman said:


> So the legal team in the bank have come back to me and said no, they have to get my exes signature on everything. I am at my wits end, nothing else I can do now but save 2500 and employ the services of a PIP.


 
Markswoman, sorry to hear you're having such a rough time of it. However is it not the most important thing that your ex's name is gone off the deeds of the house? He can never stake a claim in it or come back and demand to move in, or force the sale of it or do anything really. 

Maybe i'm misunderstanding your anguish, but if his name is still on the mortgage  - so what? 
 Eventually the mortgage will be paid off and you'll own the house outright because his name is gone off the deeds.


----------



## Mrs Vimes (22 Oct 2013)

The problem with his name still being on the mortgage is that the bank are refusing to deal with the OP on her own in her efforts to restructure the mortgage.


----------



## Lucuma (22 Oct 2013)

Mrs Vimes said:


> The problem with his name still being on the mortgage is that the bank are refusing to deal with the OP on her own in her efforts to restructure the mortgage.


 
It sounds like the bank are acting the maggot here. I'm sure it's at the bank's discretition to allow her to restructure her mortgage without his signature if there are extenuating circumstances (which there clearly are in this case). 

In fact I've seen another thread (see first post here) http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=179375
where the bank waived the need for the second signature in a similar case where the ex had walked away completely from the mortgage and hadn't had anything to do with it for years.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (19 May 2014)

Markswoman

Any update on this? 

Brendan


----------



## kaza (22 May 2014)

Markswoman completely different situation here, but we own a house that has a side garden with full planning permission. It was being sold as one lot. Myself and my husband bought the house with a mortgage and my sister & her husband paid cash for the side garden. However, the bank insisted my sister go on the mortgage because her name was on the deeds - they said her name could then be removed once the house and land were split into two deeds. Property crash happened almost straight away and bank then refused to remove my sister from mortgage when requested because house was in negative equity.

So jump forward to my point. After 5 years our interest only period was up and capital repayments over remaining 20 years where high - so we asked bank could we extend mortgage to 25 years and pay capital over that period instead, as payments where more manageable.

Involved all 4 of us completing SFS forms - however, my sister in our view was never part of the mortgage and she did not want to complete the SFS forms for herself and her husband. So they submitted blank forms signed by them with a footer note stating the reason they did not feel their earnings should be considered towards the restructuring.

The bank accepted these and worked off the forms from myself and my husband and we successfully restructured without really involving my sister as such.

Could you look to do something similar? Get your ex to sign a blank SFS form with a foot note explaining why? I know it's not ideal but might be a means to an end so as to get your restructure in place?


----------



## Aw7666 (1 Sep 2014)

*Update*

Hi there 
I have just had a divorce order in UK relating to Irish property that deeds should be transferred into my sole name. 

What solicitor did you use to do this and did the Land Registry cause any problems? I was told before that you could not transfer the property into your sole name unless the bank agreed - but seems that in your case the bank had no say in the land registry change. 

In my case I am also remortgaging at a later date when the bank lets me (which the divorce orders agrees with) so my priority is first to get the apartment into my name. 

Thanks for any advice.


----------

