Getting name off a joint mortgage/redress split and credit score

Discussion in 'Mortgage arrears & negative equity case studies' started by Lone Star, 20 Feb 2019.

  1. Lone Star

    Lone Star Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    189
    Posting this for a friend. (3 items)

    EBS case - house that was in arrears - now in the clear
    House arrears arose after a divorce
    Arrears most likely would not have occurred had overcharging not been a factor
    EBS have given 12K compensation
    House now in positive equity and mortgage being paid
    My friend moved out and now rents - the ex lives in the property
    The 12K (redress) is still with the bank - they won't release the money until the form is signed by both parties - the ex in the house won't sign the same form!! and won't agree to what and how the 12K is divided. The bank won't issue two forms or accept two forms with a signature on each (they want 2 signatures on the one form) and won't issue two cheques.
    That's Item 1 - Any suggestions??!!

    Item 2 - the person who moved out has been trying for 3 years to get name off the mortgage? wants nothing to do with the house - even in years to come - just wants to move on - bank are saying they won't take the name off.....any suggestions/ways in which this is done/can be done? would ex need to apply for an entirely new mortgage in own name?

    Item 3 - Credit rating - the credit score has been impaired - however as arrears most likely arose due to the overcharging - can the bank request the credit bureau to adjust the scoring?? At some stage my friend wants to buy a new home.

    Thanks!
     
  2. elcato

    elcato Moderator

    Posts:
    2,996
    Who pays the mortgage currently on the house ? Best outcome here would be to force a sale and split any profit 50/50 but I'm guessing the occupier will not agree to this. Solicitor should be consulted.
     
    Lone Star likes this.
  3. Lone Star

    Lone Star Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    189
    Yip force a sale was an option considered OR radical move of moving back in/occupy half of house. (Which would be messy but worth the threat perhaps)
    Person in house is 'now' paying the mortgage. Other person put in huge deposit back at start. How does one party force a sale if person in residence won't agree.
     
  4. elcato

    elcato Moderator

    Posts:
    2,996
    Was there not an agreement in place when the divorce was being settled ?
     
    Lone Star and RETIRED2017 like this.
  5. Lone Star

    Lone Star Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    189
    I will ask, but I very much doubt it. Occupier very reluctant in all aspects.
     
  6. huskerdu

    huskerdu Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    2,116
    Is this a fair summary of the situation ?

    Jo and Pat bought a house while married

    Jo and Pat are now divorced. Par lives in the house and currently pays the mortgage

    Jo wants to get rid of the house
    Pat wants to own the house, but cant get a mortgage to buy it off Jo

    They can't get the €12K from the ESB until they come to an agreement
    The haouse is in positive equity

    Jo paid a majority of the deposit on the house when it was bought ( while they were married)


    Questions

    How much positive equity ?
    What does the divorce settlement say ?
    Will Pat be able to get a mortgage on their own ?

    Most importantly....

    What does Jo want ? Their share of the 12K, their share of the equity ?
     
    RETIRED2017 likes this.
  7. elcato

    elcato Moderator

    Posts:
    2,996
    No doubt Jo and Pat are at odds about who paid the mortgage when they lived 'happily' together also but Pat wants to move on so doesn't want to dwell on that. Could he ask her to sign if he gave the 12k up ? I know it would be hard.

    Part 3 - He should write to EBS asking them to correct the ICB at least.
     
  8. Lone Star

    Lone Star Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    189
    bought while married.
    no one wants to get rid of house
    Jo wants a clean start even though jo paid massive deposit
    Pat lives in house yes - and only after the overcharging mess was sorted did the payments revert to normal
    Pat won't agree or do anything re taking Jo off the mortgage
    Jo is as a last resort thinking - forcing a sale might be only option if Pat won't get a new mortgage solo.

    Bank said options are: Pat applies for new mortgage or Jo takes case to court to force a sale
    Bank said yes they will sort credit rating if arrears were only due to the overcharging


    Positive equity is probably only a few thousand
    settlement may not have covered this?? I can check.
    Jo wants 6k and nothing more.
    Pat if Pat had any sense would bit the hand of Jo
    Jo is more than reasonable person.
    Pat is not.

    Jo just wants to get on with life, buy a home and live happily.
     
  9. Lone Star

    Lone Star Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    189
    The 12K is the balance - the redress was closer to 40K - and the 28 was used to settle off the arrears.
     
  10. elcato

    elcato Moderator

    Posts:
    2,996
    Maybe suggest to write the 12k off the current mortgage ans see if they can get a mortgage on their own then ?
     
    Lone Star likes this.
  11. Lone Star

    Lone Star Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    189
    The fairest would be to split the 12K - at the moment it's in limbo/held in the bank - the occupier of the home would end up with the property at the end of the day if they were agreeable to taking the ex off the mortgage/reapplying for solo mortgage - means wise it should be possible. My friend did a data access request some months ago and has yet to hear back from the bank on it. I'm wondering how the redress and restructure came about with only one signatory....yet they won't release the 12 K without 2 signature on the same form...
     
  12. elcato

    elcato Moderator

    Posts:
    2,996
    What restructure ? The redress may have been triggered without any involvement of the mortgagees if they were deemed impacted in the investigation in general.

    And if this is what current occupier wants then the other party should agree to do it based on the 12k being split. They cannot do this without both signatures
     
  13. Lone Star

    Lone Star Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    189
    I think yes that the redress was part of wider investigations. Current occupier has heels dug in. it would be the simplest and fairest solution that cuts all ties and lets both move on.