Is a wife liable for a husbands debts???

Twiggy69

Couple took our joint mortgage to build a home before they got married. Later after they married, both took out equity release on Principal Private Residence to purchase holiday home.

Subsequently, he took out mortgages in his name only for investment properties. Those properties are now in negative equity. They are now separating, she is of the view that as hubbie took out the mortgages in his name, he is 100% responsible for them.

Is she right or does she have an equal liability or partial liability in this scenario??? Is there precedence for this scenario?

I look forward to your responses

T

sawdoubters

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1957/en/act/pub/0005/sec0011.html

Twiggy69

Thanks sawdoubters, this is the reverse of the information I am looking for, or am I reading it incorrectly?

The statute you refer to pertains to liabilities incurred by the married female. I am asking, is the wife liable for mortgages taken out in her husbands name or is he 100% liable???

Pro Hoc Vice

Twiggy69 wrote: »

Thanks sawdoubters, this is the reverse of the information I am looking for, or am I reading it incorrectly?

The statute you refer to pertains to liabilities incurred by the married female. I am asking, is the wife liable for mortgages taken out in her husbands name or is he 100% liable???

Was the mortgages taken on the family home or was the money advanced on other property.

While the simple answer would be neither spouse is usually liable for the others debts. They can of course for example be liable if it was a joint mortgage, or if one guaranteed the others borrowings. Also was a family home protection act declaration signed.

In reality without going through the documents no one could fully advise, if a person every found themselves in this position the advice of qualified professional should be sought.

BTW the reason for the quoted Act was before 1957 to the best of my knowledge a husband was liable for his wife automatically but not the other way around, so the Act was required change that so that neither was automatically liable for the other.

Twiggy69

Thanks infosys, to the best of my knowledge, he took the 100% mortgages out in his own name. The family home was not required as collaterol. The wife does not appear on either the title of the investment properties or the mortgages. So based on what you state, it appears she has no liability in this case. Very interesting indeed.

Pro Hoc Vice

Twiggy69 wrote: »

Thanks infosys, to the best of my knowledge, he took the 100% mortgages out in his own name. The family home was not required as collaterol. The wife does not appear on either the title of the investment properties or the mortgages. So based on what you state, it appears she has no liability in this case. Very interesting indeed.

Maybe she has or maybe not, if he goes bankrupt that may effect property they jointly own, or assets they jointly own. It might be a simple answer the spouse is not liable but it may also be that property the spouse owns is caught up in Bankruptcy and may have to be sold to satisfy the others debts. The value of the wife's share would in all likely hood remain hers. But as I said it may not be a simple answer.

Twiggy69

Thank you infosys. You have grasped the principles and furnished a very balanced reply.

Many thanks,

T

Peregrinus

What infosys said.

Plus, of course, the fact that the husband is in the financial position that he is in obviously goes to the amount of maintenance that might be ordered between the husband and the wife. So that is another route by which the husband's obligations might adversely affect the wife's finances.