Removing my name from Mortgage?

miley55

Hello,

Hopefully people here can help so thanks in advance! I have an issue that I would love to get sorted as it is affecting my life in a negative way. I share a mortgage with my father on a property we bought 10 years ago. Both our names are on the title deeds and mortgage account. The house is in negative equity and mortgage arrears. However I am wondering is it possible to transfer my name/share of the property over to him for his sole ownership? This is something he wants as he wanted to buy the house originally and wanted my help at the time to get the mortgage. I have heard that the bank must agree to any changes and considering my fathers age (67), property in negative equity and mortgage arrears, they will not do this. Is this true? Any informed advice would be much appreciated. Thanks

Gmol

Very unlikely, it would not be in the banks interest to do so.

jlm29

Even if they would (which is highly unlikely), they'd probably charge a fair bit for it (a friend of mine paid around 5k to the bank to take his partner off the mortgage when they split up).

Kop On

jlm29 wrote: »

Even if they would (which is highly unlikely), they'd probably charge a fair bit for it (a friend of mine paid around 5k to the bank to take his partner off the mortgage when they split up).

5K for what?

Don't understand why or how the bank could charge anything for this. Maybe your friend had legal fees etc with their own solicitor but the bank couldn't charge them a random fee of a few grand for this process?!

Toots

Your dad would need to qualify for the mortgage on his own before the bank will take your name off. My father's name is on my mortgage, because when I bought my apartment, my husband's wages were too low, so my dad went on it as well so that we could get approval. That was in 2006, so as you can imagine there's a lot of negative equity now, and when we enquired about getting my dad taken off we were told there was basically no way because with the new mortgage guidelines, we don't qualify for the amount outstanding.

Pawwed Rig

You are in arrears with the banks. They are presumably trying to recover these amounts from you and your Dad. You are now asking them to let you off and put all of the burden on your Dad thereby increasing their risk. He cannot pay half the mortgage and now you want him to pay the full amount? No way on Earth the bank would agree to this.

Wabbit Ears

I enquired about adding my wife to the deeds and it was going to cost a hefty sum so I'd imagine the cost alone for doing the opposite would be huge. I'd imagine if you are that much in arrears you wouldn't have the money to do the transfer in the first place let alone the fact the bank wouldn't agree to it. IIRC it was at least 4K for the solicitors fees.

jlm29

Kop On wrote: »

5K for what?

Don't understand why or how the bank could charge anything for this. Maybe your friend had legal fees etc with their own solicitor but the bank couldn't charge them a random fee of a few grand for this process?!

I'm not sure what exactly it was for, but I know he encountered fees from the bank. Perhaps it was also for changing the deeds. I didn't get into the details.

slowjoe17

miley55 wrote: »

Hello,

Hopefully people here can help so thanks in advance! I have an issue that I would love to get sorted as it is affecting my life in a negative way. I share a mortgage with my father on a property we bought 10 years ago. Both our names are on the title deeds and mortgage account. The house is in negative equity and mortgage arrears. However I am wondering is it possible to transfer my name/share of the property over to him for his sole ownership? This is something he wants as he wanted to buy the house originally and wanted my help at the time to get the mortgage. I have heard that the bank must agree to any changes and considering my fathers age (67), property in negative equity and mortgage arrears, they will not do this. Is this true? Any informed advice would be much appreciated. Thanks

In the discussions with banks about mortgages, they won't lend beyond aged 68.

If that's universal, that means you have no hope of having your name removed, even if negative equity weren't an issue.

miley55

slowjoe17 wrote: »

In the discussions with banks about mortgages, they won't lend beyond aged 68.

If that's universal, that means you have no hope of having your name removed, even if negative equity weren't an issue.

Thanks everyone for their comments. So basically there is no chance really with the banks and one must grin and bear it. I just wonder would they even been open to negotiating on the mortgage/arrears as currently it looks unlikely of ever been paid off.

Icaras

I think renegotiation is a possibility. From my understanding the bank would prefer the money over a house the may or may not sell. A few of my friends renegotiated around 2010 - 2012 where they got happy out comes (don't know the details though).

Peregrinus

Kop On wrote: »

5K for what?

Don't understand why or how the bank could charge anything for this. Maybe your friend had legal fees etc with their own solicitor but the bank couldn't charge them a random fee of a few grand for this process?!

This probably wasn't a fee, but a reduction of the loan amount.

Currently the OP and his father jointly owe the bank a certain amount of money. The loan is secured with a mortgage over a property which is, however, worth less than the amount of the loan. The bank is naturally nervous in this situation. To recover what is owing to them they are dependent on the OP and his father continuing to make repayments on the loan.

What the OP now wants is to step out of this arrangement, be absolved from any liability for the loan, and leave just his father to make repayments on the loan. His father is 67 and, ten years ago when the property was purchased, the bank were not happy to lend to him alone. They will be even less happy now to have just the father's covenant to repay.

So, basically, there is nothing in this for the bank. It would make their position dramatically worse than it already is, and it's not great now.

One thing that might get them talking is if the OP offered to part-repay the loan, reducing the amount outstanding, in return for his being released from further liability. The bank would then be taking a risk on the father' credit alone, but a smaller risk.

It's possible that jim20's friend's situation was somewhat similar. It wasn't in the bank's interest to release him from liablity under his mortgage but, balanced against 5k on the nail, it became in their interest.