Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
  • Our picks

HP Mum

Removing ex from Title Deeds - HELP

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 557 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Helping a friend here:

 

Friend was married and house deeds in joint names.

She left 10 years ago and has been living with s/o else ever since.

 

The mortgage was paid by the ex-husband ever since and he continued to live in the house.

 

The children lived with him and he had sole financial responsibility for them all this time.

(I understand she had mental health issues and was sectioned a couple times,

so not sure if this will impact any future legal decisions....)

 

He wants to remove the ex-wife from the title deeds.

 

He has been asking all this time and she has always refused unless he gives her 50% of the value of the house.

In 10 years the property price has gone up a lot (x2 in 10y/ x7 since purchase).

 

He has a small mortgage and only a few years left to run

- so the value is almost all capital, no loan.

 

He is also of an age / limited income that it would be almost impossible to get a new mortgage once this expires.

I have so far advised he is in the best position with an existing lender to alter their terms, rather than scrape the barrel finding a new lender.

 

He wants to know:

1) does he have to give her 50% due to the Title deeds being split 50/50

2) if he does have to give her 50%:

is it 50% of the 2007 price, when she left the house and kids and moved in with another man?

Or is it 50% of the 2017 price, despite her having contributed nothing in the last 10 years

 

3) Should he add up all the mortgage payments he ever made.

Or just the last 10 years since she left?

Should he add up any/all payments she made (I don't know if any)?

 

I was just wondering if she never made any mortgage payments / or just didn't make any in the last 10 years

- could he work out what her 50% contributions should have been and then deduct them off her share of the property value?

 

Also - considering he lost out on the use of that 50% could he work out compound interest and charge that back to her too?

 

4) If he rents a room in the property

- is he liable to give her 50% of the income?

 

He did this once,

she found out and the lodger had to leave because she said he HAD to give her half and he didn't want to give her 50%.

 

I can't understand how she can have such a hold on what he does and doesn't do in/with a property that she doesn't contribute to, and doesn't live in...

 

Friend would love to remove her name from the deeds.

He would have to alter/increase his mortgage to be able to buy her out.

But he has some ideas on affordability

- such as renting room/ or renovating and creating separate legal annexe or eventually selling but being free of ex wife...

 

Any helpful hints would be most appreciated.

 

I just feel she has unjustly got him in a corner and it is affecting his health.

He just wants to move on w/o her involved in his life/home.

 

This is my seasonal good deed for a friend...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make an offer to the ex to buy them out and remove them from the Title Deeds, if the offer is accepted.

 

 

Merry Christmas

 

 

Haunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were officially married when they bought the house? Are they now divorced? If so was this dealt with in the divorce?

 

Did the ex-wife contribute:

 

(a) any capital when they bought the house?

(b) pay any of the mortgage before she left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies

Turns out they were never married - so no divorce settlement.

She never put a penny into the house. Not to buy it originally; not a single mortgage payment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Haunter - he has tried to deal with her before. But she has always said she wants 50%. He couldn't afford 50% then and ten years later that 50% has doubled and he still can't afford it. That's the issue.

They were common-law partners, she put nothing in - no mortgage or maintenance - and left to live with someone else 10y ago but still wants all the years of capital growth.

 

He is just a friend and this story makes me fuming mad. So I want to help figure out how he can come out smiling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, once she moved out 10 years ago, that was the end of any contract between them in contemplation of buying a house together (even though you say she never paid a penny).

 

 

So, she may be entitled to some money as at the date of her moving out, whether that would be 50% of the value of the house at that time is a matter for a court to decide.

 

 

However, she would not be entitled to 50% of the house at today's value, because for the last 10 years she has not contributed towards the mortgage, maintenance of the house and all the bills that come with it, and to award her with 50% would amount to unjust enrichment.

 

 

Maybe your friend can put these facts to her and make an offer based on 10 years ago?

 

 

Merry Christmas

 

 

Haunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hpmum

you said in your first post

the Title deeds being split 50/50
could it be a formal joint tenancy in common ownership specifying each share (rather than an outright joint ownership).

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OP states protagonists were marriied at time of purchase, but later states they were NEVER married, but as co-signatories they had has an enforceable Agreement until it can be legally be voided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hpmum

you said in your first postcould it be a formal joint tenancy in common ownership specifying each share (rather than an outright joint ownership).

 

The “beneficial” interest (& thus “how much needs to be paid”) might be a specified share.

The “legal” interest (& thus “the names on the legal title” / “title deeds” / Land Registry entry) is always held as a joint tenancy, and won’t state any specific proportion for the “legal title”.

 

The details of a change to tenancy in common for the beneficial interest (and, perhaps details of the share) can be held on the Land Registry, but the legal interest is always as a joint tenancy [with beneficial interests being shown as restriction(s)]

https://www.gov.uk/joint-property-ownership/change-from-joint-tenants-to-tenants-in-common

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BazzaS

I had a quick look at the gov webpage.

From what I can gather from friend - he just put her name on the title deeds with no specific proportion (no noted % for either).

 

So trying to understand this from the posts above:

- She has no right to the increase in value from date she moved out (apx 10y ago) - as that would be 'unjust enrichment' - This is very good news for him.

- friend can fill in the form on the gov site (form SEV) - to alter ownership from 'joint tenants' to 'tenants in common' - without his ex partner even co-operating!

 

So just so I understand better and can explain to friend - what is the difference between joint tenants and tenants in common?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also - is this right:

- Friend fills in Form SEV and submits to Land Registry

- does he need a solicitor / conveyancer to serve Notice on his ex?? Or can he serve Notice himself? is there a specific form to use to serve Notice on her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joint tenants, the title passes by survivorship, and can't be willed while there is a living joint tenant. So, there is a "cake", and the cake is undivided. if Person A and person B own the cake, it isn't "50/50" until it gets divided, and if one of them dies, the other has title 100% (even if they are then holding some on trust for a 3rd party). The 'legal' title is always held by joint tenancy, and can't be held as tenancy in common (which the beneficial interest can).

Tenancy in common: the 'cake' has been divided, and is held in shared proportions.

 

So, if Persons A and B hold the legal title as joint tenants, and the beneficial interest as A:60%, B:40%, and A dies, willing their beneficial interest to C, the situation becomes:

B holds 100% of the legal title (by survivorship). B still holds 40% of the beneficial interest, and C holds 60%, both as tenants in common. B holds the legal title on behalf of both themselves, and on trust for C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- friend can fill in the form on the gov site (form SEV) - to alter ownership from 'joint tenants' to 'tenants in common' - without his ex partner even co-operating!

 

Form SEV would be for when there is agreement, or notice has been served (and you have to complete the details of the agreement or notice).

Where it isn't by consent, or is without notice, form RX1 is used.

 

Given the complexities possible if they get it wrong, they might be wise to get it done by (or at least get advice from) a licensed conveyancer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Form SEV - fill in when there is an agreement with ex; or no agreement but Notice has been served

Form RX1 - fill in when no agreement and no Notice served on ex

 

Is this correct?

She wont even tell him where she lives. But the thinks he can probably find the address to serve notice.

What is the best route to take? RX1 or SEV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also - fees: I have done a quick check. Am I correct that there are no fees to pay for either form?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So just so I understand better and can explain to friend - what is the difference between joint tenants and tenants in common?

 

The Which explanation might be helpful too

 

https://www.which.co.uk/money/mortgages-and-property/first-time-buyers/guides/buying-a-home/tenants-in-common-vs-joint-tenancy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Bazza5

I will ask him what the set up was. That will make the next step easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

update:

they are 'joint tenants'.

And both names are registered on the bank mortgage.

So friend wants to follow the steps to remove ex from the title deeds and to remove ex from mortgage.

I am still confused by the whole process.

 

 

Form SEV is the application to enter Form A restriction on severance of joint tenancy by agreement or notice.

The Gov website says "You can make this change without the other owners’ agreement" - which is what is confusing me.

What exactly does this restriction do/ mean?

Does SEV remove the ex name from the title?

 

 

And same for RX1 - what exactly does filling in this form do?

 

 

In essence friend wants to take control of the property just in his name. Does friend fill in AP1 form to swap title to be just in his name? Or cant he do that?

 

 

I also read that the bank has to agree to remove ex name from mortgage and very confusingly that the Form A restriction needs to be removed:

"Where a property is owned by two or more people as tenants in common and there is a transfer of equity which leaves one remaining owner, and no money is paid by the remaining owner to the outgoing owners, the form A restriction (which prevents a transfer by a sole proprietor from being registered) will need to be removed. This can be done by the remaining owner signing a “Statutory Declaration as to Equitable Title”. This is a declaration to confirm that he is solely entitled to the equity in the property. If this is not done now it can be done when the property is sold on."

 

 

So one process seems to need the form A and the other seems to need to remove it. Confused!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you mention 'joint tenants' but then refer to in common

have you checked the registry title, and bazzas link for eg

https://www.gov.uk/joint-property-ownership/check-your-ownership-details

anyway, if there is a registered mortgage interest, they would need to agree afaik (not object) re any change (maybe unlikely imo).


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friend recently advised 'joint tenants'.

 

Just trying to work out best route to remove ex from property title.

 

An earlier suggestion was to transfer title from joint tenants to tenants-in-common. But that seems to only alter title so that friend can choose to whom he leaves his share of property. It doesn't resolve the issue that he wants to remove her name from title - to renovate it/ to rent it out / or maybe sell it. Ex left 10y ago and never financially contributed - so he wants to move on with his life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's best to approach a solicitor and ask for professional advice in my opinion.

 

The ex could claim that she kept her name on the deeds in view of price growth so she basically made an investment.

 

It is difficult to prove that she didn't contribute to the house while they were together.

Even if she was unemployed, staying at home and keeping the house clean is considered a contribution.

Easier to prove that since she left she didn't contribute, but she's still got an invested interest in the property, so having not sorted this out at the time of separation could mean that she's due a capital profit.

Also there's the mortgage matter to deal with.

 

Mortgage lenders are usually reluctant to delete a name from the account because there's more risk for them should they default, so until her name is on the deeds, i doubt they'll let your friend take over.

I think she's viewing this as a long term treasure in case your friend dies before her or he finds himself forced to sell.

 

Morally wrong, but perfectly legal, that's why it is wise to not put names of non contributing individuals on the deeds.

 

My advice is to seek professional help and your friend will be probably told to try and buy her out.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Friend recently advised 'joint tenants'.

 

Just trying to work out best route to remove ex from property title.

 

.....

ah ok, i see back yr previous post

they are 'joint tenants'.

And both names are registered on the bank mortgagelink3.gif.

So friend wants to follow the steps to remove ex from the title deeds and to remove ex from mortgage


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ps

on the title, the mortgage co will be a registered proprietor under the titles' charges and have a restriction requiring their consent re any disposition?


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi King - I think (hope) we've already established she can not benefit from 'unjust enrichment' since moving out. So any amount due would be from start to 10years ago.

In terms of housewife at home etc - friend worked, gave ex money for the kids/food etc, and he paid the mortgage and all maintenance - she never put a penny in. She moved out and had mental health issues, to the point of being sectioned. Friend then did everything: worked, paid mortgage and raised the kids.

I am thinking the first best step would be for him to change the type or ownership - from joint tenants to tenants in common. This safeguards his share of ownership.

Does he then have the ability to outline what size the share was/is? Or is it automatically 50/50?

 

Secondly, there is the issue of both names being on the mortgage. I now understand that it is hard to remove ex name from the title deeds whilst there is a loan. There is not much left on the mortgage - maybe 2y worth of payments. Might it be within his interest to redeem the mortgage?? if he can. Borrow the money from somewhere else and repay the loan that has both their names on. I am thinking that may resolve that issue. Then it is just a Land Registry issue to remove ex name.

 

I have suggested friend works out exactly his expenditure from purchase to date she moved out - ie deposit paid, all mortgage payments and maintenance/refurb costs. And I have suggested he researches the sale prices of similar properties in his neighbourhood 10y ago. That should give him an apx value of the property 10y ago, less all his expenses. I assume he will have to pay ex something. But with research on values 10y ago and a long list of money and time (which equals money) he invested in the property, surely he would be able to come up with a figure to give ex - albeit lower than she expects??

 

The sort of figures talking about are: purchase at 75k / apx value 10y ago at 325k. Deposit was apx 8k; 10y of mortgage payments apx 10k/pa (he paid all); plus renovation costs. Friend has continued to pay a further 10y of mortgage payments and property maintenance expenses. (apx 20y total ownership)

What would be a normal acceptable figure to offer ex?? Based on all the above.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...