Stamp Duty -anyone do this

  • Thread starter Unregistered
  • Start date
U

Unregistered

Guest
My fiance & I are currently in the process of looking for our second home...he is not a FTB but I am.

We will have a joint mortgage obviously but my question is if its possible just to put my name on the deeds of the house to save on the 15k+ stamp duty, and then when we're married just go to a solicitor and have his name added to the deeds?? It seems almost too easy so Im interested on anyone who has done this or anyone else in the know on this subject

cheers
 
This may be possible but you would have to satisfy the mortgage lender that you could repay th loan yourself. You would have to get the mortgage in your own name.
 
I'm interested in this. As an askaboutmoney.com user, I'm reading how this is the way to go but as a practitioner, I'm finding that the lending institiutions do insist that any party with an interest in the property, who is on the mortgage is also on the deeds. I think also that a lending institution will require (if one name only is on the deeds and/or mortgage ) that that person could handle the mortgage and would fit the requirements.

Apart from anecdotal evidence, can anyone confirm which institiutions would/do allow the original scenario?

mf
 
Why would I need to get the Mortgage in my own name? I thought the deeds/stamp duty issue would be seperate?

I definitely wont be able to get the mortgage in my own name as FTB, i though it would be as simple as getting mortgage approval together then when it came to signing for the house only my name goes on the deeds. Fiance would be like a guarantor so to speak?

Any advice greatly appreciated thanks
 
I had the same problem in relation to a site my girlfriend had that we wanted to build on. Cost more to put my name on deeds so left it in her name and went to Ulster bank for mortgage. They didnt insist that both names be on the deeds in order to get mortgage in both name , but I think some banks do...
 
have seen it before plenty of times with friends that both names are on the mortgage with only one person registered on the title deeds, IIB and PTSB and UB all do it.

Person who is not being registered on the title deeds has to get independent legal advice, and the couples i know usually signed a document confirming that the proeprty was to be split equally if they split.
 
If both names are on the mortgage they will have to be on the deeds. Talk to your solicitor, they will confirm this.
 
In my experience, I was able to have two people on the mortgage but only myself on the title deeds. It was through Ulster Bank and wasn't an issue. This was 2001 and the other person didn't have to get independent legal advice but they did meet my solicitor so he could verify that they understood that they wouldn't have any claim on the property.
 
It is possible to have two on the mortgage but only one on the title however the person not on the title has no legal right to the property and can end up being liable for the full mortgage payment/sum on an asset they do not own. Due to that scenario most mortgage lenders will only approve mortgages set up on this basis between family members (presumably on the basis that they all less likely to fall out irretrivably!).

Sarah

www.rea.ie
 
Unregistered said:
If both names are on the mortgage they will have to be on the deeds. Talk to your solicitor, they will confirm this.
Click to expand...

Not true. First Active also allow borrowers to put both names on the mortgage and only one of them on the Title Deeds. It is recommended that the person not on the Deeds gets Independant legal advice.
 
The revenues position on this is pretty clear, if someone is a beneficial owner of a property and will in effect be paying part of the monthly mortgage repayments then that persons FTB status is important to deciding Stamp Duty Issues.

The announcement of this recently is what caused the hulabaloo about Parents helping children to buy houses.

Keeping one name off the Deeds and writing some sort of separate contract may sound like a way around it, but if that contract had any validity then surely it would be grounds for Revenue to charge the stamp duty.

I suspect that doing this will have some or all of the following results:

1. The Contract will have no validity, the Deeds will determine who actually
owns the house.
2. If the extra party is ever added to the Deeds he/she may be liable for
Capital Aquisitions tax. If it is claimed that he/she paid "rent" to "acquire"
their half of the house then they may be liable for the Stamp Duty that they
should have paid originally.
3. The Revenue may make Stamp Duty "evaders" their next target, when they've
finished with the Insurance Policies they're currently looking at.

As for me...I don't know what I'd do.

The solution is bloody simple, where one partner is a FTB and another isn't, allow half stamp duty to be paid, or a proportion if there are more than 2 buyers. Instead we'll get a couple of years of couples being advised that they can do this and then a big "Bogus First Time Buyer" scandal in about 10 years.

There's no incentive for Revenue to clamp down on it now. They can make a much bigger profit if they let interest and penalties build up for a few years.

-Rd
 
Exemption from stamp duty is based on who is paying the mortgage, not on who's name is on the deeds. If your fiance is going to be helping pay the mortgage, then you will be eligible for stamp duty. There have recently been a number of articles in the newspapers around this topic. There was concern as to the position the revenue was going to take in cases where parents were listed on mortgages as guarantors. As the law stands, they could demand stamp duty on the basis that the parents are listed on the mortgage and are not first time buyers. The position they are taking is essentially that if anyone who is PAYING part of the mortgage is not a first time buyer, stamp duty must be paid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top