Buying ex out of house

Barr

Hi All


I bought a house with my ex about 8 years ago. We have a joint mortgage , joint life insurance etc.


My ex now lives abroad and wants to be bought out of the house. We have agreed a figure which I will pay to her and in return I will own the house fully.


I assume the bank will be the first port of call. The issue that I have is that we are on a tracker at the moment. I’m afraid if I talk to the bank about me taking over the payments they will try and get rid of the tracker. Would this be possible for them to do ?

Advice welcome

Peanut2011

Hi Op,

What I can tell you is you will need to speak to your bank, they will treat you as a new lender and will asses your income and the rest as a new applicant.

You will also need to speak to your solicitor and have the deeds transferred in your own name as well as have the bank issue a new cheque to him/her.

You will need to close the old life insurance as well and open one in your own name.
Basically the whole process will be as if you are buying a new house on your own.

In reference to the mortgage, does the bank still offer tracker?? If they do not, then you will not have the option of getting one again.

Furthermore regardless if you are the one paying mortgage on your own at the moment they will do the stress test on their own criteria at the moment and they may not even grant you the mortgage.

Speak to your bank and see if you can get one on your own first.

Addle

Unfortunately, if you make any change at all to your mortgage, you'll lose your tracker.

Are you hoping to borrow more? If not, I don't think it's compulsory to inform the bank of the change of ownership.

D3PO

OP you will essentially have to get a new mortgage to buy her out. Which means in essence yes you will lose your tracker.

That is if you actually meet the banks criteria for that mortgage now for a house that I suspect is probably in neg equity. In which case why would you be paying her anything ......

Unless your in a very strong position as a candidate the bank may not want to do this, right now they have a stronger hand if there was a default with two people to go after on the other side by granting you the mortgage they cut their options.

If the house is in equity as you paying your ex something would insinuate again it has cons for the bank to do this for you, as you will probably need a mortgage to cover the payment to your ex plus on top of the current mortgage balance, reducing or removing all their equity protection and also removing one of the libel parties.

Various factors will be at play here, first step is to talk to the bank.

D3PO

Addle wrote: »

Are you hoping to borrow more? If not, I don't think it's compulsory to inform the bank of the change of ownership.

the bank will have the deeds, you cant change ownership without them !!!

Addle

D3PO wrote: »

the bank will have the deeds, you cant change ownership without them !!!

What deeds?

D3PO

Addle wrote: »

What deeds?

Registration of title then. This will list any burdens on the property (mortgage) preventing change of title

Addle

D3PO wrote: »

are you winding me up ?

No. If you're on about Land Certificates, they've had no legal effect for years now.

D3PO

Addle wrote: »

No. If you're on about Land Certificates, they've had no legal effect for years now.

Just think about how stupid your suggestion is.

Your suggesting that I could for example change ownership of my house to my brother without telling the bank.

I could then refuse to pay a penny on my mortgage and the bank would now have no security or way to reposess the house as I no longer own it.

Seriously now think before you type.

Addle

D3PO wrote: »

Registration of title then. This will list any burdens on the property (mortgage) preventing change of title

I don't know what the terms of the mortgage in this case are, maybe he's obliged to inform the bank of a change of ownership, but what's to stop the current owners of executing a deed of transfer and having it registered with land registry?

http://www.prai.ie/eng/Legal_Professional_Customers/Legal_Practices_Procedures/Legal_Office_Notices/Retention_and_Return_of_Land_Certificates_-_Legal_Office_Notice_1_2010.html

Addle

D3PO wrote: »

Just think about how stupid your suggestion is.

Your suggesting that I could for example change ownership of my house to my brother without telling the bank.

I could then refuse to pay a penny on my mortgage and the bank would now have no security or way to reposess the house as I no longer own it.

Seriously now think before you type.

Seriously, it would be your brother that's stupid to buy a house with a mortgage outstanding on it and no undertaking to clear same.

D3PO

Addle wrote: »

I don't know what the terms of the mortgage in this case are, maybe he's obliged to inform the bank of a change of ownership, but what's to stop the current owners of executing a deed of transfer and having it registered with land registry?

http://www.prai.ie/eng/Legal_Professional_Customers/Legal_Practices_Procedures/Legal_Office_Notices/Retention_and_Return_of_Land_Certificates_-_Legal_Office_Notice_1_2010.html

you cannot change title. Its IMPOSSIBLE if there is a charge on the title without the bank releasing the charge.

This is only done when the mortgage is paid off. Which is why essentially the OP has to get a new mortgage.

D3PO

Addle wrote: »

Seriously, it would be your brother that's stupid to buy a house with a mortgage outstanding on it and no undertaking to clear same.

My God its like talking to a brick wall. :rolleyes:

Addle

D3PO wrote: »

you cannot change title. Its IMPOSSIBLE if there is a charge on the title without the bank releasing the charge.

This is only done when the mortgage is paid off. Which is why essentially the OP has to get a new mortgage.

If you say so. I still disagree.

How many developers transferred mortgaged lands to their spouses without informing the pertinent lending institutions?

I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, I'm just saying it can be done.

Ray Palmer

I'm not sure how you buy somebody out in this case. It is likely that the house is in negative equity. So shouldn't the partner be paying money to the person still living there. 300k mortgage split to 150k each say the house was 350k to buy. House now worth 200k mortgage probably 280k or 140k each

What do you buy the other person out with? How much do they pay?

Does the former partner have enough money or ability to get a loan for the outstanding amount? The OP should be giving them less than the 100k for their share due to the complicated nature of getting the equity out of the property and not paying EA fees etc...

Marcusm

Barr wrote: »

Hi All


I bought a house with my ex about 8 years ago. We have a joint mortgage , joint life insurance etc.


My ex now lives abroad and wants to be bought out of the house. We have agreed a figure which I will pay to her and in return I will own the house fully.


I assume the bank will be the first port of call. The issue that I have is that we are on a tracker at the moment. I’m afraid if I talk to the bank about me taking over the payments they will try and get rid of the tracker. Would this be possible for them to do ?

Advice welcome

A few things to consider:

If you're buying your ex out, does that mean the house is worth more than the attached mortgage loan?
What's your relationship with your ex like? Would he/she be willing to operate on a pragmatic basis!

If you have positive equity and a good relationship, it would be worth you and your partner acknowledging that the tracker is a laudable entitlement which you should try not to lose (especially if its for the full mortgage term).

Without the bank's involvement, and what seems likely to be a loss of the tracker, it will not be possible to fully remove your ex from the arrangements. However, it would be possible fr you to contract to purchase your ex's interest in the equity of the house and INDEMNIFY him/her in respect of the loan. It is not a perfect situation but a good solicitor could guide you. It won't free him/her entirely but might leave a bigger pot to share.

Peanut2011

Addle wrote: »

Unfortunately, if you make any change at all to your mortgage, you'll lose your tracker.

Are you hoping to borrow more? If not, I don't think it's compulsory to inform the bank of the change of ownership.

Just to clear any doubt in anyone's mind on this. Your bank has the title of your deeds and until the mortgage is paid off they will not release them.

In order to change any of the ownership details Bank has to agree as that is their collateral if you do not pay the mortgage.

Someone suggested how so many builders did it, well they did it to fully paid or mortgage free properties. What people confuse is the fact the banks are looking to repossess them now.

Reason they are going after them is the fact that they were mentioned in the guarantee for a loan that is not a mortgage on a property....

Anyhow, my fist post is exactly what you must do. Trust me I know, I have done that more than once!

Barr

Thanks for the replies.

Ok so it seems I will lose the tracker if I change the mortgage just to myself and it will be like a new application again (not good)

I also cannot change the house into my name as the bank have the title of deeds.

That leaves me in a bit of a pickle

Barr

Marcusm wrote: »

Without the bank's involvement, and what seems likely to be a loss of the tracker, it will not be possible to fully remove your ex from the arrangements. However, it would be possible fr you to contract to purchase your ex's interest in the equity of the house and INDEMNIFY him/her in respect of the loan. It is not a perfect situation but a good solicitor could guide you. It won't free him/her entirely but might leave a bigger pot to share.

Just to clarify the house is worth more than the mortgage so thats why I’m buying her out. We also still have a good relationship which should help matters

Hi Marcusm, could you just expand a little on the above, I don’t fully understand it. Is this some kind of legal agreement we can put in place and leave the bank out of it completely?

Ray Palmer

Barr wrote: »

Thanks for the replies.

Ok so it seems I will lose the tracker if I change the mortgage just to myself and it will be like a new application again (not good)

I also cannot change the house into my name as the bank have the title of deeds.

That leaves me in a bit of a pickle

Tracker mortgage loss is not good in lots of ways. If you didn't include that calculations you need to go back and talk to her. It will be a large financial commitment to take on. You could be talking a couple of hundred euro now and 3 or 4 hundred in a few years.

Bigcheeze

I suppose if you still have a good relationship you could look at not involving the bank and putting a separate contract in place with 1) you paying her a sum today, 2) you continue to pay the mortgage and 3) her assigning her interests in the property to you at the end of the mortgage term in exchange for 1) and 2)

Obviously a good solicitor would need to draw up this agreement but it's what I would explore.


Edit: I see Marcusm has already suggested something similar.

Honey-ec

Bigcheeze wrote: »

I suppose if you still have a good relationship you could look at not involving the bank and putting a separate contract in place with 1) you paying her a sum today, 2) you continue to pay the mortgage and 3) her assigning her interests in the property to you at the end of the mortgage term in exchange for 1) and 2)

Obviously a good solicitor would need to draw up this agreement but it's what I would explore.

This is exactly what my sister and I did when she bought me out of our house. The solicitor we used to buy the house in the first place did up the agreement for us.

StillWaters

Honey-ec wrote: »

This is exactly what my sister and I did when she bought me out of our house. The solicitor we used to buy the house in the first place did up the agreement for us.

This is what people are in in increasingly doing, however it is not watertight, and you need a solicitor versed in this to protect both parties.

helimachoptor

I would be very interested to see how that would stand up with a judge looking at it.

Which would he deem to have priority, both your contracts with the bank or the legal agreement with your sister.

In the case of your sister not paying the mortgage one would presume the bank would deem you both liable rather than just your sister.

Bigcheeze

Honey-ec wrote: »

This is exactly what my sister and I did when she bought me out of our house. The solicitor we used to buy the house in the first place did up the agreement for us.

Thinking about it more, this scenario must come up frequently. During the property boom lots of young single people were purchasing with their siblings in the belief that they needed to get on the "ladder" as it would be too late when they were ready to settle down with a partner.

Bigcheeze

helimachoptor wrote: »

I would be very interested to see how that would stand up with a judge looking at it.

Which would he deem to have priority, both your contracts with the bank or the legal agreement with your sister.

In the case of your sister not paying the mortgage one would presume the bank would deem you both liable rather than just your sister.

Yes the mortgage would take precedence over the contract. However, in the OP's there is equity in the property so it could be sold to clear the mortgage if problems arose later.

It may start to get funky if the OP remarries and establishes the property as a new family home.

Marcusm

Barr wrote: »

Just to clarify the house is worth more than the mortgage so thats why I’m buying her out. We also still have a good relationship which should help matters

Hi Marcusm, could you just expand a little on the above, I don’t fully understand it. Is this some kind of legal agreement we can put in place and leave the bank out of it completely?

I don't want to stray into anything that might be regarded as legal advice; you need a good solicitor.

The basic point is that your ex can sell what she holds - the beneficial interest in the property subject to the mortgage. In order that you can perfect this later, you or your solicitor would require a long dated power of attorney permitting the execution of formal legal transfer of the legal interest (ie the name on the Land Registry) in the land at a later date when the mortgage is released. She would require you to undertake to pay the mortgage and to indemnify her in the event the bank came back against her. This is not perfect for her as she is still legally responsible for the loan and would need to declare it when looking for other finance. However, it's unlikely that a bank holding a first charge on a property worth in excess of the mortgage would chase a non resident in preference to seeking possession of the property. Your ex would require independent legal advice.

In due course (maybe a year or so), I imagine that you would approach the lending institution establishing that you have been paying the mortgage solo and that you have the beneficial interest in the property and asking them to permit the transfer to be effected without losing the tracker.

There are lots of other issues which could arise especially in the event that you form a new family and occupy the property.

Legal advice, legal advice, legal advice is what you should seek.

L1011

Addle wrote: »

How many developers transferred mortgaged lands to their spouses without informing the pertinent lending institutions?

I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, I'm just saying it can be done.

They didn't. It can't.

Developers transferred their own, unmortgaged, assets which could have been taken to call in personal guarantees - not mortgages.

The_Conductor

OP- how do you reckon that the property isn't in negative equity if you bought it 8 years ago? Did you have a low loan to equity ratio on the mortgage (aka did you part finance the purchase with cash/savings). Its a bit of a stretch of the imagination that it isn't in NE if you bought it 8 years ago.

How did you come up with a mutually agreeable price for the property with your ex? Does it have any basis in the actual recent sale prices of similar property in the vicinity- or is it something that you came up with between you?

Personally- given the limited information given, I would be of the opinion that your ex would owe you money- considering the fall in the value of the property- and the additional cost associated with it (property tax, the fact that you'd be loosing the tracker mortgage etc etc etc)

I'm not sure that you've thought this through properly.

D3PO

The_Conductor wrote: »

OP- how do you reckon that the property isn't in negative equity if you bought it 8 years ago? Did you have a low loan to equity ratio on the mortgage (aka did you part finance the purchase with cash/savings). Its a bit of a stretch of the imagination that it isn't in NE if you bought it 8 years ago.

How did you come up with a mutually agreeable price for the property with your ex? Does it have any basis in the actual recent sale prices of similar property in the vicinity- or is it something that you came up with between you?

Personally- given the limited information given, I would be of the opinion that your ex would owe you money- considering the fall in the value of the property- and the additional cost associated with it (property tax, the fact that you'd be loosing the tracker mortgage etc etc etc)

I'm not sure that you've thought this through properly.

It is possible that they are out of NE although unlikely. My best mate bought 8 years ago and according to the last sale on the Property Price Register the sale was only 2k less than his outstanding mortgage balance (South Dublin, no overpayments made)

Mind you there cant be much equity unless overpayment has been made Id say.

The_Conductor

Or- the LTV of the mortgage at the outset was in the (perhaps) 70 to 80% range (aka there was equity put into the property, aside from the mortgage, at the outset.

Marcusm

The_Conductor wrote: »

Or- the LTV of the mortgage at the outset was in the (perhaps) 70 to 80% range (aka there was equity put into the property, aside from the mortgage, at the outset.

You mean the manner sensible mortgages were and continue to be advanced!

Aineoil

Just know a friend who did this last year - expensive business

phormium

IF you do not need to borrow more to pay ex off and IF you qualify for a loan of the amount you have with your lender and IF your lender was willing they could just remove the other party's name from the mortgage with no loss of tracker. It can be done however obviously banks don't want to as they see it as a way of getting rid of a tracker by making you apply for a new loan but it's worth a fight IF you fit all the other criteria.

The_Conductor

phormium wrote: »

IF you do not need to borrow more to pay ex off and IF you qualify for a loan of the amount you have with your lender and IF your lender was willing they could just remove the other party's name from the mortgage with no loss of tracker. It can be done however obviously banks don't want to as they see it as a way of getting rid of a tracker by making you apply for a new loan but it's worth a fight IF you fit all the other criteria.

He'd also need her name removed from the ownership of the property- its not just removing her name from the mortgage- its also removing her name as an owner of the property- which is a separate matter altogether.

phormium

Removing her name from the title will be a minor detail if he gets the bank approval to take her off the mortgage, it's the name on the mortgage that is the stumbling block in cases like this. The bank would probably allow her name to be taken off the deeds no problem, they are not as bothered about who owns the house, more about who is liable for the mortgage!

The_Conductor

phormium wrote: »

Removing her name from the title will be a minor detail if he gets the bank approval to take her off the mortgage, it's the name on the mortgage that is the stumbling block in cases like this. The bank would probably allow her name to be taken off the deeds no problem, they are not as bothered about who owns the house, more about who is liable for the mortgage!

Minor detail?
Errr- no, its not.
It requires legal work and a registration of the amended deeds etc.
Depending on whether the bank do it in house of whether an external solicitor is used- it can be anything up to over a grand of work (at very least if its all straightforward, its about 400).

Certainly the banks main concern is that the mortgage is repaid- however the OP is going to have to satisfy proper mortgage checks- that were not necessarily followed during the boom years. If he doesn't meet the lending criteria- the bank can insist on leaving his ex on the mortgage- and legally liable for the mortgage- in case the OP for whatever reason, defaults on the mortgage (and totally irrespective of whether he is the only person paying it or not).

Getting her removed from the mortgage- is not straight forward- it provides the bank with comfort- the knowledge that they have someone else liable for the debt. Even if the OP does qualify for the mortgage on his own- the lending institution will probably charge a higher rate of interest- as he is on his own, and considered a higher risk. Its all about risk- and how likely the bank is to be repaid- and if there is an issue- whether there is someone else they can chase to make it good, or not............

Marcusm

phormium wrote: »

Removing her name from the title will be a minor detail if he gets the bank approval to take her off the mortgage, it's the name on the mortgage that is the stumbling block in cases like this. The bank would probably allow her name to be taken off the deeds no problem, they are not as bothered about who owns the house, more about who is liable for the mortgage!

In reality, the lending institution would insist on the ex giving up any ownership interest (ie transferring her interest) as they would not be willing to have a claim against the title complicated by an owner who is not responsible or the mortgage.

Peanut2011

Marcusm wrote: »

In due course (maybe a year or so), I imagine that you would approach the lending institution establishing that you have been paying the mortgage solo and that you have the beneficial interest in the property and asking them to permit the transfer to be effected without losing the tracker.

Legal advice, legal advice, legal advice is what you should seek.

As I mentioned before and it is from first hand experience, no Bank will just simply change the Mortgage no matter if you can prove you were the only one paying the mortgage for months / years......

They will want to re-asses you as a new applicant based on the lending criteria at the moment. Basically they can refuse your for the mortgage.

Doing any other deals, indemnities and so on will be problematic. If his ex decides to buy other property, apply for the loan and so on, she will have the mortgage still registered in her name and will have difficulties.

Furthermore, if for whatever reason OP defaults on the payments they will pursue both of them.

Also one thing to consider is that the ex would inherit all of the property should anything happen to the OP as she is still on the title.

In any case, do speak to solicitor and get the exact legal requirements and pro's and con's!

But before you do that and end up paying for the legal fees without knowing what you can do, speak to your bank.

phormium

I mean a minor issue in the way that it will be easy to get permission and agreement to do it, obviously you can't just scribble out the name on the deeds, of course it has to be done legally and will incur a cost but if the OP had got to that stage I am sure they will quite happy to be paying for that work. The real hurdle will be getting the mortgage in their own name, not the ownership issue, that is just paperwork. This all hinges on whether or not the bank's underwriting criteria will approve the amount of the mortgage in sole name, find that out first.

Banks are perfectly able to remove one name from a mortgage without setting up a whole new mortgage, they just don't want, especially if it means they can get rid of a tracker. However some people have managed it, there was a case lately on Askaboutmoney.com where the poster had managed it.

It was commonplace before the banking disaster and I can assure is still being done for example where one holder dies, the system is there, the willingness is not!

Here you are, found the case http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=143959

Barr

The_Conductor wrote: »

OP- how do you reckon that the property isn't in negative equity if you bought it 8 years ago? Did you have a low loan to equity ratio on the mortgage (aka did you part finance the purchase with cash/savings). Its a bit of a stretch of the imagination that it isn't in NE if you bought it 8 years ago.

How did you come up with a mutually agreeable price for the property with your ex? Does it have any basis in the actual recent sale prices of similar property in the vicinity- or is it something that you came up with between you?

Personally- given the limited information given, I would be of the opinion that your ex would owe you money- considering the fall in the value of the property- and the additional cost associated with it (property tax, the fact that you'd be loosing the tracker mortgage etc etc etc)

I'm not sure that you've thought this through properly.

We were lucky enough to get a house through the affordable housing scheme in a good area. There was a sizable chunk taken off the price at the purchase time.

Having seen the sale agreed prices in our area versus the amount left in the mortgage the house has equity in it. Very fortunate really given the time we bought.

With regards to the amount agreed to compensate my ex. What she basically wants is to be repaid her outlay i.e any payments to date including her share of the mortgage which she has paid.

We both are married at this stage (to other people of course ). I have lived there with my family for the past 3 years. My ex returned home and is now living back in Italy.

I suppose it is a complicated situation. My ex does not want to be tied to a house in Ireland and just wants the cash. I don’t want to loose the tracker and get screwed by the bank.

Peanut2011

Barr wrote: »

My ex does not want to be tied to a house in Ireland and just wants the cash. I don’t want to loose the tracker and get screwed by the bank.

Unfortunately both of you will not be able to get what you want in this case! Either her name will stay on the papers or you will lose the tracker mortgage.

That is the bottom line.

Godge

Barr wrote: »

We were lucky enough to get a house through the affordable housing scheme in a good area. There was a sizable chunk taken off the price at the purchase time.

Having seen the sale agreed prices in our area versus the amount left in the mortgage the house has equity in it. Very fortunate really given the time we bought.

With regards to the amount agreed to compensate my ex. What she basically wants is to be repaid her outlay i.e any payments to date including her share of the mortgage which she has paid.

We both are married at this stage (to other people of course ). I have lived there with my family for the past 3 years. My ex returned home and is now living back in Italy.

I suppose it is a complicated situation. My ex does not want to be tied to a house in Ireland and just wants the cash. I don’t want to loose the tracker and get screwed by the bank.

Which affordable housing scheme?

If your ex is selling her interest in the house to you, she may be liable for the clawback, in fact that sale may trigger the clawback for both of you.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/owning_a_home/help_with_buying_a_home/affordable_housing.html

"f you sell your house within 20 years, you will have to pay the local authority a percentage of the proceeds of the sale - known as 'clawback'. This percentage is expressed as the percentage difference between the sale price and the market value of the house. This amount will be reduced by 10% each year after you have owned your home for 10 years. So, if you sell your home after 20 years, you will not have to pay any clawback to the local authority.

The market value at the time of selling your affordable home is used to calculate the amount of clawback due to the local authority. If the gap between the original sale price and market value has narrowed, the amount due to the local authority will also reduce. If the proceeds of the sale of your affordable home are below the initial price actually paid, you will not be liable to pay the local authority a percentage of the proceeds of the sale."


You really need legal advice on this.

Barr

Godge wrote: »

Which affordable housing scheme?

If your ex is selling her interest in the house to you, she may be liable for the clawback, in fact that sale may trigger the clawback for both of you.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/owning_a_home/help_with_buying_a_home/affordable_housing.html

"f you sell your house within 20 years, you will have to pay the local authority a percentage of the proceeds of the sale - known as 'clawback'. This percentage is expressed as the percentage difference between the sale price and the market value of the house. This amount will be reduced by 10% each year after you have owned your home for 10 years. So, if you sell your home after 20 years, you will not have to pay any clawback to the local authority.

The market value at the time of selling your affordable home is used to calculate the amount of clawback due to the local authority. If the gap between the original sale price and market value has narrowed, the amount due to the local authority will also reduce. If the proceeds of the sale of your affordable home are below the initial price actually paid, you will not be liable to pay the local authority a percentage of the proceeds of the sale."


You really need legal advice on this.

The claw back is there if we intended on selling. I plan on living there

Although from talking to others, it appears since the crash the local authorities have no issue with selling affordable houses. They don't seem to be enforcing the claw back either as the values has fallen considerably.

Barr

Godge wrote: »

You really need legal advice on this.

If anyone could recommend a solicitor that they used with a similar scenario to mine I would appreciate it( pehaps by pm). Any legal agreement will have to be water tight to protect both our interests so would like to get someone who knows what they are doing.

The_Conductor

Barr wrote: »

We were lucky enough to get a house through the affordable housing scheme in a good area. There was a sizable chunk taken off the price at the purchase time.

Ensure you comply with the rules of the Affordable Housing Scheme- and clarify this in advance- you do not want to end up owing a massive clawback to the council. One of the joint purchasers selling their stake in the property- is akin to the whole property being sold.

Barr wrote: »

Having seen the sale agreed prices in our area versus the amount left in the mortgage the house has equity in it. Very fortunate really given the time we bought.

Very fortunate indeed. But for the fact that it was under the Affordable scheme- you'd be up the proverbial creek.

Barr wrote: »

With regards to the amount agreed to compensate my ex. What she basically wants is to be repaid her outlay i.e any payments to date including her share of the mortgage which she has paid.

She might have a reasonable request for her deposit back- alongside half the principle that has been paid of the mortgage (not her share of the mortgage- at the outset the bulk of mortgage payments are interest payments- not payments off the principle. She has no right to seek her mortgage payments back- half the amount paid off the principle, up to the date when she last paid half the mortgage, on the other hand, sounds fair).

Barr wrote: »

We both are married at this stage (to other people of course ). I have lived there with my family for the past 3 years. My ex returned home and is now living back in Italy.

You need to get this sorted. Aside from anything else- your wife and indeed her husband- both have a financial interest in the property. This could well be a lot messier than you imagine. Both of you getting married to different people- has introduced 2 new people into the equation, with legal claims on the property.......... You need good advice on this- simply paying her off, isn't going to cut it. Further- if you do pay her off- are you even aware of the tax implications both Irish and Italian (and thankfully we do operate reciprochal arrangements)?

Barr wrote: »

I suppose it is a complicated situation. My ex does not want to be tied to a house in Ireland and just wants the cash. I don’t want to loose the tracker and get screwed by the bank.

She just wants the cash? Thats nice. Her deposit and half the amount of the principle repaid to the date she stopped paying towards the mortgage- and not a penny more. You could very well end-up in a clawback situation- in which case she'll actually owe you considerable sums of money.


You need professional help with this. Its a hell of a lot more complicated than you first suggested- and the issues including two different tax jurisdictions etc- on top of two spouses, is ripe for all manner of war between 4 different people. Its not just you and your ex in the equation- and if you check the terms of your mortgage- you're probably supposed to inform them of any change in material factors that might affect the banks claim on the property- such as 2 spouses............

You've a very interesting time ahead of you. Now go get proper legal advice on this- simply running with comments I or any of the posters in this thread offer you- could result in very costly errors for both you and your ex.

Get professional legal advice. Its going to cost you. It'll be money well spent.

Richard Dower

The_Conductor wrote: »

you're probably supposed to inform them of any change in material factors that might affect the banks claim on the property- such as 2 spouses............

+1....that stands out most to me, aside from the other stuff. Its the most basic thing the OP should have done + i am sure there are clauses in the contract that you may have broken.

Trish56

Op you never mentioned what bank you are with. There are banks transferring trackers to new mortgages so it's definitely not a no no that you will not be able to retain the tracker rate... it totally depends on your bank. You definitely will have to make an application to the bank and qualify for the mortgage in your own name... do you have the funds to buy her out? or will you be looking to increase the amount of the mortgage. It will be easier if you just want to transfer the outstanding mortgage to your name

As previous posters mentioned you need legal advice. You also need to get a current valuation on the property.

I presume your ex lived in this property at some stage so she can hardly expect to have lived rent free for that period.

Barr

Trish56 wrote: »

Op you never mentioned what bank you are with. There are banks transferring trackers to new mortgages so it's definitely not a no no that you will not be able to retain the tracker rate... it totally depends on your bank. You definitely will have to make an application to the bank and qualify for the mortgage in your own name... do you have the funds to buy her out? or will you be looking to increase the amount of the mortgage. It will be easier if you just want to transfer the outstanding mortgage to your name

As previous posters mentioned you need legal advice. You also need to get a current valuation on the property.

I presume your ex lived in this property at some stage so she can hardly expect to have lived rent free for that period.

The mortgage is with the Bank of Ireland.

I have the funds to buy her out. Its just the balance of the mortgage I need to transfer into my name.

whippet

If her actions were to force a sale and the subsequent loss of a tracker rate I would suggest that you should factor the projected cash penalty for this over the life of the mortgage and deduct that from any potential payment you will make.

This would be something only an experience legal practitioner could help you with.

Trish56

Barr,
Solicitors are well used to dealing with this issue...my advice would be go see your Solicitor and ask him/her to contact BOI to find out what exactly is required to transfer the property and the o/s mortgage into your sole name. You need to provide your mortgage account number and a recent valuation which you should get completed for approx. €130

Best of luck
Trish 56