1976 Family Home Protection Act.....

[know it all]

A lending institution lent money to my spouse. The security given for this loan was property that includes the family home. I, the other spouse raised objections under the 1976 Act prior to the money being discharged. The lending institution proceeded to give the money. What is the position with the security provided?

 

[VOR]

I would contact a solicitor on this. Judging by your post you didn't sign a consent. It would appear that you expressly stated your dis-satisfaction with the proposed security.
If this is true, it is quite possible that the security is comprimised as it includes the family home. Only a solicitor who looks at your specific case and the documentation can say for sure.

See [broken link removed] for a brief explanation.

In 2001, the case of Ulster Bank v Fitzgerald established that, where dependent spouses sign a personal guarantee, it will be enforceable against them if the bank advised them to obtain independent legal advice, and where the bank met the spouse and explained the transaction. In that case, the bank was not held responsible for the wife’s failure to get legal advice

 

[dewdrop]

In my view and i am not a solicitor the bank cannot rely on the residence as security. From memory the Act clearly states that the prior written consent must be obtained and later decisions indicated such consents must be informed and also could not secure overdrafts

 

[know it all]

I did not give my consent to the security. I thought that by approaching the lending institution and expressing my objections to the security that other avenues would have to be sought. I was amazed to discover recently that the loan had been authorised after I approached them. Can i do anything at this stage?

 

[dewdrop]

I reckon a lending body can give a loan to whoever they want but they cannot rely on the security of the family home without the required consents.

 

[huskerdu]

As dewdrop has said, it is the lending institution that has a problem not you. If the lending institution ever tries to repossess the property, the Family Home Protection Act can be used to prevent this.

 

[know it all]

I want to thank those who have been replying to my post. the lending institution had told me when i first discovered the money had been given out to my spouse that they held the security over all the property including the family home. can they a few months later do a 180 degree turn and tell me that they will not include my family home in the security but that they now hold it over the remaining property? i have been worried sick about all this.