Is there any legislative way to solve the problem of an uncooperative joint owner?

[Brendan Burgess]

The problem is unavoidable .

I know someone paying 100% of a mortgage held with an estranged, uncooperative spouse. In 2022 the spouse wouldn’t sign a form to lock in a lower mortgage rate and payments are higher now as a result.

It’s just an inherent fact about joint mortgages that both parties need to agree.

This issue comes up a lot and is not solvable under the current legislation. What legislative changes could be made to mitigate the problem?

For example, put the onus on the joint owner to proactively object to what is proposed.
I apply to reschedule our mortgage with the bank.
I notify the bank that the joint owner is not engaging.
The bank notifies the other party that they will reach an agreement with me unless they hear to the contrary from them.
They don't hear back.
I reach an agreement.
They are notified of it and given 20 days to object.

A difficult joint owner will still object.
But it would solve the problem of a joint owner who has disappeared or who just won't engage

An alternative approach would be for me to apply to the bank to be the lead contact on the mortgage.
The bank notifies the joint owner who either objects, agrees, or agrees by default if they don't respond.

Clearly I would not be allowed to increase the mortgage.

Another approach would be to allow me to apply to the courts to become the lead contact.

 

[DannyBoyD]

I wonder would you have to include separate provision for married owners?

Perhaps it could be similar to presumption of death legislation; in so far as you provide as much evidence as possible, last known addresses, public records etc., and after x number of years have elapsed you can apply to be treated as the primary contact / decision maker.

 

[Raging Bull]

In terms of restructuring a debt you can d it in a PIA or DSA on one side but you will have difficulty in doing it outside a statutory process

note Sale of Property requires dual consent

 

[Dr Strangelove]

This issue comes up a lot and is not solvable under the current legislation. What legislative changes could be made to mitigate the problem?

I see two issues, kind of related:

1) Irish are culturally very slow to formalise a marital separation;
2) Divorce seems to take a very long time even with zero assets and children.

 

[AshKhan]

I think it is also depends on the organization itself as well.

In the organization that I work for we will process most restructures with the consent of one borrower if when there is a lack of co operation.

For example we would process a complex restructure on an account if there other party is not engaging but only after we made extensive contact attempts but are unable to make contact. This is because generally if there is only one party engaging they are the one living in the property and the one paying and they need the help.

However, if the other party engages and advises they do not want the restructure then there is nothing we can do and also if he borrower engages in the future and disagrees with the restructure then we will reverse it.

While not perfect, it does help the engaging party, especially if their partner is a non Irish national who returns to their home country after the end of a relationship.

 

[Raging Bull]

One party can bring an application to Court to sell the property under s31 Land Conveyancing Reform Act, also one party can restructure in a PIA as advised