Mortgage Arrears Term Extension - but ex won't sign paperwork

B

Bear15

Registered User
Messages
11
Hi all, hope im in the right thread
I hope someone could give me any advice in relation to my situation.
Joint Mortgage, realtionship split 6 years ago, other party not paying mortgage since then and refusing to engage with bank moved to abroad.
I have engaged with bank for past 3 years. Interest only offered to me on my sole salary and my sole signature for these 3 years which i accepted.
Repayments sustained on affordability for past 12 months. Term extension now offered and capitalisation of arrears (arrears €6,000).
Bank now insisting other party (abroad) signs the term extension agreement to which there is no cooperation.

I have another party lined up to take the mortgage over with me. Bank have told me verbally that credit control have santioned same but await term extension document signed by myself and other party (abroad) or pay the €6000 to bring account back to normal in which case they will proceed with transfer. (original party has agreed to transfer of mortgage through solicitor).
I applied for a loan top up on an existing credit union loan for the arrears balance. I have been refused this loan as arrears on mortgage. Any suggestions or alternative options would be appreciated. Feeling backed into corner, cooperated with everything to date with bank, person waiting to take over mortgage and still getting no-where due to non cooperation of other party.
Many thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
This seems like a pure bureaucratic paperwork issue. The term extension is in your interest. It's in your ex's interest. It's in the lender's interest. But there are boxes to be ticked which cannot be ticked.

You are being responsible. He is not. The only thing you can do is to sign the forms. Then put your ex's signature on the form. The lender won't care. Your ex won't care.

Brendan
 
There are a number of issues in your post that you need to bear in mind.
The fact that you have a joint mortgage with an absentee joint owner. This is of primary concern as literally nothing can be done in respect of either the property or the mortgage without the co-operation of the co-owner.
positively the co-owner appears to be prepared to transfer the property upon payment of €6,000 by you to the bank. Mortgage cannot be transferred. A new mortgage will need to be issued by the bank in the names of the new parties. You have not mentioned whether there is positive or negative equity in the property. If negative equity exists will the new party be prepared to take that over? If positive equity exists why will the existing co-owner agree to relinquish his/her share?
There is no easy fix here. Best option is to sell the property, clear existing mortgage with proceeds/deal with the bank on negative equity issue and move on. Even selling the property is impossible without co-operation of joint owner.
 
thank you for your replies
Brendan i would be nervous about putting the ex's signature on the form for fear of fraud but it has crossed my mind
44Brendan house is 100k in negative equity and my husband is willing to take over everything to get out of this mess. Also on a tracker which bank have agreed to let us keep. Selling is not an option for me as i will be liable for the shortfall of at least 100k and also bank wont agree to sale of property as ex will not agree to sell.
my understanding is if i pay the 6k everything will return to normal and they will not need his signature on the term extension documentation and they will proceed with the transfer but i am very wary of same. Bank will not issue confirmation in writing. my husband and I told bank we are prepared to take on the term extension together (to be honest we dont have €6k) but theyre still insisting on the ex's signature even though its on my salary going forward!
 
Just to clarify position for you again Bear15. This house is in the joint names of both you and the current co-owner. The Bank can legally do nothing without the consent of both parties. They have no choice here. If you and your husband pay down this mortgage you will be initially reducing the negative equity in the property but in time will return the property to positive equity. However your husband will have no ownership interest in this property and you can still do nothing with it without the consent of the co-owner. This type of situation is a legal nightmare and can only be resolved with the consent of both existing owners.
 
44brendan said:
Have a re-think on this advice Brendan! By no means do this OP as you would open yourself up to all sorts of trouble! .
Click to expand...

44brendan said:
This type of situation is a legal nightmare and can only be resolved with the consent of both existing owners.
Click to expand...

The reality is that there is no other way out of this legal nightmare. This is not fraud in any real or moral sense. You are not forging a cheque. You are not claiming social welfare falsely. You are not committing someone to something to which they do not want to be committed.

This has no negative implications for anyone. In fact, it has positive implications for all involved. I don't recommend forging signatures, but this is a clear case where it's necessary. Of course, if your ex co-operates and signs it voluntarily that would be better. But if he can't be got, then put his signature on it.

Your husband should think carefully about whether he wants to sign up for a mortgage in negative equity. That doesn't seem right to me. You might provide the full figures.

Brendan
 
"However your husband will have no ownership interest in this property and you can still do nothing with it without the consent of the co-owner. This type of situation is a legal nightmare and can only be resolved with the consent of both existing owners"

understood 44brendan, the co-owner has sent a confirmation through his solicitor he consents to transfer the property, copy sent to bank, bank have consented verbally they will consider transfer on his application once either the arrears are paid or the term extension document is signed by me and co-owner. would i be correct in saying that if i could clear the arrears outright and with co-owners consent to transfer it would be full steam ahead or am i still going no where and making matters worse

Brendan Burgess "You are not committing someone to something to which they do not want to be committed"
i agree as Im the one committing it is defintely, a bureaucratic paperwork issue. The ex wants nothing to do with it. The ex does not want to pay any monies and hence happy for my husband to take it over. Husband has thought long and hard, its not right at all however we are desperate to move on with life and the stress its causing to us is almost unbearable. We are both more than able to cover the mortgage repayments, he dosent own a property and going forward eventually the house may be worth more. Keeping the tracker is also a bonus.
 
Last edited:
44brendan said:
Have a re-think on this advice Brendan! By no means do this OP as you would open yourself up to all sorts of trouble! .
Click to expand...

My mother used to do this with my fathers cheques all the time for lodging, and other things too. When I was getting a mortgage one time my OH was away and I needed his signature on something, I think it was a house insurance doc, but but sure now, I signed it anyway, paperwork sorted. Sometimes you got to think outside the box.

Many posters on here down the years no doubt they finally realised if all that was needed was a signature that was impossible to get managed to get it signed anyway.
 
What people are not realising about this persons problem is that she will solve the problem for the ex partner by taking this course of action. If that person came back to Ireland the bank could go after him. They could even go after him now, but the likelyhood is they won't.
 
Two thoughts on this thread.

The new husband should NOT put his name to the mortgage. This has nothing to do with the relationship between husband and wife, and everything to do with the husband taking on €100k in negative equity, for no reason. He will become €100k poorer overnight for no advantage to anyone except the bank.

If the paperwork goes through the ex will no longer be liable for the mortgage, will he continue to be a joint owner?
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Your husband should think carefully about whether he wants to sign up for a mortgage in negative equity. That doesn't seem right to me. You might provide the full figures.
Click to expand...

cremeegg said:
This has nothing to do with the relationship between husband and wife, and everything to do with the husband taking on €100k in negative equity, for no reason.
Click to expand...

Hi cremeegg

I don't think you can be so definite in this situation. The answer is not clear.

Option 1 - continue as is.
The OP will continue with her full mortgage payments, anyway. In time, she will clear the negative equity and have a valuable asset. The ex will continue to own half of the house. If she ever wants to move home or sell the house, she will find it very difficult without the ex's cooperation. She may have to buy him out. It's a terrible position to be in.

Option 2 - Husband takes over the mortgage
He takes on a liability for a shortfall of €100k. It is mitigated a fair bit by the fact that it is a tracker mortgage. If he and his wife split up, he will be very sorry that he is fully responsible for the mortgage. On the other hand, his wife is fully responsible for the full mortgage anyway and is making the full repayments. At least they will be completely free from the OP's ex.

The best outcome is that the ex pays an amount in settlement of the negative equity - but that is not going to happen.

The second best outcome is that the lender allows the OP take over the mortgage on her own. I presume that this won't happen either given that she is in arrears.

On balance, I think that the husband taking over the mortgage is the best thing to do. But, as I say, it's not at all clear.

Brendan
 
Why would the husband want to take on the ex's liability under the loan if he has no interest in the mortgaged property? Presumably if the ex won't sign a term extension, he won't have any interest in transferring his interest in the property to the husband (or the OP for that matter).

If the husband takes on the loan obligations of the ex he won't simply be liable for the negative equity - he will be liable for the full amount of the loan - with no interest in the mortgaged property.

I think the OP would be mad to forge her ex's signature. Besides everything else it's an offence.
 

Bear - I have made an assumption that what is proposed is that your husband takes over both the title deeds and the mortgage and not just the mortgage.

There is absolutely no reason why your husband should take over the mortgage without taking over ownership of the property. That would solve nothing and would cause huge problems for your husband.

Brendan
 
How would he take over the title deeds without the ex's consent ?
 
Rebuttal said:
How would he take over the title deeds without the ex's consent ?
Click to expand...

Bear15 said:
(original party has agreed to transfer of mortgage through solicitor).
Click to expand...

Whatever way the original party agreed to transfer the mortgage, I presume that they have agreed to transfer the deeds.

I can't imagine that the OP is considering taking over the mortgage from their ex, while leaving her ex with ownership of the house.

Brendan
 
Thank you for your replies

My husband intends to take over both the title deeds and the mortgage. The ex has agreed to transfer the deeds. Letter from his solicitor confirming this.
The ex however is not signing the term extension and this is the problem. My husband and I dont have €6000 to cover the arrears balance (which the ex has run up). The bank are insisting on the term extension document being signed by me and the ex before they will allow husband to take on the mortgage with term extension.

I did try to get a loan for the €6000 as the bank did tell me if the arrears were paid they would then proceed with the transfer (no need for the term extension document) however i cannot get a loan from my credit union as the ICB has it recorded that i have mortgage arrears!

I feel the bank are being unnecessarily awkward, ive cooperated fully with all my dealings to resolve this situation and have laid a solution on a plate to them. Does anyone know if the banks have any leniency to oversee this part. My husband and i have clearly told them that we are willing to take over the arrears and would even be willing to pay extra every month to incorporate the arrears into the remaining term of 27 years.

TIA
 
Last edited:
Can your husband get a loan for the 6 thousand as presumably his ICB is not impacted?
 
I don't understand why the ex is being so awkward on this especially if he's willing to sign the transfers.
 

Before you proceed Bear 15 can I just point out to you that the bank do not need your ex's or your's consent to sell. If the mortgage is not being paid they will sell it.

Is your husband aware of what he is taking on.

Would you have the bank chase you for the 100K + if you defaulted. They cannnot take into account your husbands earnings etc.

I'm also worried that if your ex won't sign the term extension that he might not sign the transfer documents either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register