Law And The Home

[Jackietwirl]

If a couple have been living together in a house under 7 years and are not married, the man has put the deposit down paid all the bills and she only paid for food. Is she intitled to half the house?

[woofgang]

not married? no entitlement unless there are kids

[AliFlump]

Are they both named on the mortgage?

[woofgang]

assuming this is uk

[Jackietwirl]

The couple have one child, and the mortgage is in both names and live in the uk.

[janbee]

Yes she is entitled, especially as there is a child involved.

[Retrochic]

Mortgage in both names = ownership in both names - both own the house and any money owing on the Mortgage, any profit made on selling the property. One cannot sell the property without the others permission.

[Butterbun]

If the mortgage is in both names then yes, they both own the house and have equal shares whether there are children or not.

[Retrochic]

Janbee it has nothing to do with a child, nor with being married. If it is jointly owned then it belongs to both parties.

[woofgang]

ah,name on mortgage, joint responsibility....whose name on land registry?

[New Judge]

This is not straightforward and a number of factors may influence the outcome. The child will complicate the separation, whether the house is owned as joint tenants or tenants-in-common, and the relative contribution each made to the entire household costs (not just the mortgage) will all have a bearing. The following is an extract from some guidance on the subject (which is not my own work):

If the couple purchased as joint tenants, either of them could apply to the court for an order that the home is to be sold and that the proceeds are to be divided equally between them.

If it's bought as tenants in common then it's assumed that both will have a beneficial interest and the property to the extent that they contributed.

If it's only owned by one of the couple, an investigation has to be made as to whether the other has an interest because they have contributed to its purchase, mortgage repayments or repair and improvement. If there has been no such contribution, what the parties said to each other or led the other to believe by their conduct may be important and what they intended has to be considered. Over the passage of time that may have altered or become blurred. It is not uncommon for one of the couple to find that, despite living together in the same home for many years owned by the other, they have no interest in the property because they made no financial contribution to it and there was no indication from the other that it was a joint property. On separation they may have to leave without any financial help from the other to re-house.

You can see that a simple "Yes/No" answer is not possible from the brief facts you have provided and a much more detailled examination of the couple's finances would have to be undertaken.

[Retrochic]

Both their names will be on the Land Registry as it both belongs to them. When the Mortgage Company informs land Registry of a lien on the property they have to inform them who the owners are.

[Retrochic]

New Judge, half of that cut and paste was not needed as you already had information stating the property was owned in both names and no children were involved.

[SirOracle]

But there is a child involved here Retro.

[New Judge]

Please pay attention, retro:

"The couple have one child, and the mortgage is in both names..."

So, the couple do have a child. The mortgage being in both names does nothing to establish ownership. One party may have put up a 90% deposit meaning the mortgage only represents 10% of the purchase. It also does nothing to establish whether the house is owned as tenants-in-common or as joint tenants (an important distinction).

I provided the extract to demonstrate that the issue is by no means straightforward.

[Retrochic]

Normally mortgages are sold under Joint Tenancy agreements The property is owned in equal shares, including any profit made when you sell it. It does not matter who put up the most money on a mortgage, nor does it matter what the original LTV was. Once you both sign the dotted line the property becomes 50% yours and 50% your partners (Joint Tenancy) If your mortgage is under tenants in common rules then you will have to see the paperwork to see what % ownership you have -but you will have some ownership or you would not be named on the mortgage.

So tyhe simple answer to your question would be yes -if you have a joint tenancy mortgage you will be entitled to 50% of any profits on the sale of the house. If you have a Tenants in common mortgage then you will have some % ownership of the house and you will have to check with your mortgage company or Solicitor who did the conveyancing.

[Old_Geezer]

Many years ago my sister moved into a house she had bought with her deposit with someone who had nothing to offer. Later, when it all broke up, he was entitled to half even though he had previously signed a paper saying he had not contributed and had no claim. Apparently it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. It seems to be that the law likes to support the gold-digger rather than the victim.

[themas]

Old-G - either the law has changed or your sister was badly advised.

Jackietwirl - NewJudge's answer is the correct one.

Retroc - the ownership is what matters not the mortgage, although the latter almost invariably will have the same person or people on it. The ownership is decided first, & the mortgage reflects what the ownership is. I may have misunderstood your post, but liability under mortgages is not limited to a % of the property value - each mortgagor can be pursued for the whole amount.

[Peter Pedant]

There are zillions of questions of this type on this thread
you should go thro most of them and listen particularly to Barmaid and New Judge

I think the answer is yes maybe

she needs advice ( for which she'll have to pay no legal aid nowadays )

[Old_Geezer]

Maybe, but if she was badly advised then that leads to the question, if you can't trust a professional lawyer type then what hope do the general public have ?