How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Clare Your Own Question
Clare, Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 34903
Experience:  I have been a solicitor in High Street Practice since 1985 with a wide general experience.
Type Your Law Question Here...
Clare is online now

During a marriage, the lower income earner (F), has decided

Customer Question

During a marriage, the lower income earner (F), has decided that she will now take on the mortgage responsibility. She has approached the CAB and Bank, to obtain the relevant authorities to take on the mortgage by providing an income amount based not only on Salary but also Tax Credits. The Bank will ONLY provide the authority to the F, if she can obtain outside financial help, along the lines of a Large Cash Aid, £40,000.00 or help from her Fathers pensions amount.
Question. Can the F of the marriage therefore legally remove the M's name from the mortgage without his agreement, and what is to stop the M from doing the same? The M has the ability to transfer the mortgage to his name without the need for financial assistance, as he is paying it now anyway.
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  James Mather replied 4 years ago.
Has the mortgage lender agreed to her taking over the mortgage?
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

The mortgage lender has agreed, with the caveat, that she has a CASH injection of nearly £40,000 towards the outstanding balance, or, that her father provides an income from his pensions.

The mortgage lender has NOT made contact with me. OF COURSE, i am looking at my options here.

Expert:  James Mather replied 4 years ago.

We are going to need the full background please, children, incomes, etc.

We need as much detail as possible. Thank you

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Ok, thanks for the reply.

Male, 46, earning £31k basic per year.f/t

Femail, 39, earning £9330 basic per year p/t

One Child, age 13.

Currently, Male earnings go into his Bank Account, which then transfers the required monthly amount to cover direct debits etc, including mortgage of £599.00 + £60.00 loan on mortgage as well. Mortgate has 14 years left to run.

All outgoings financially, including Foodbill = £1850.00 per calendar month.

Outstanding amounts on mortgage = £101,000

It has been suggested, that taking into account Child Tax Credit, Working Tax Credit, Child Benefit, Council tax benefit etc, the femail WOULD have in theory a salary of £26k...which if a bank would provide a mortgage for this, in theory, she would only require a deposit of around £15 - £20k to allow her to do this.

My feeling on this, is that the Female, automatically assumes that I am prepared to go along with this for the welfare of our child, which is actually a form of blackmail. I have also suggested, that I take on the financial aspects of the seperation, (as I am doing currently), and therefore I remain in the property until our daughter leaves full time education, but this suggestion has fallen on deaf ears.

Please let me know, if I have missed anything.

Mortgage provider = HSBC

Expert:  James Mather replied 4 years ago.

Who has been the primary carer of the child until now?

Is it proposed that your wife has residence of the child?

Is the house in joint names?

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

My wife stayed at home for the first 5 years of our daughters life, and then proceeded to work part time, moving from 2 days, to now 3 days per week. Our child is in secondary education. I have been the sole financial earner in our family.

It is MY WIFE'S proposal that she takes over the property. If that means that she has residence with our child, as part of that particular process then that is part of that process. It is not my suggestion. I dont believe that my wife would consider that point, only that she is appearing to be moving this faster than I particular want to allow at this time, due to work committments.

The Mortgage and everything associated with the property has been in joint names since we got married.


Expert:  James Mather replied 4 years ago.

You need to step aside and back and forget what you both want and look at
this purely from a child welfare point of view.

You have a 13-year-old child and you are both under a duty to provide a
home for the child until aged 18

one parent will become the resident parent and the other one will have
contact although, it will be equally involved in a child's life, the court can
order joint residence.

On these facts, it appears that your wife has been the main carer until now
by virtue of the fact that she worked part-time and therefore she is likely to
get residence of the child until the child is 18.

It is highly likely therefore that she would be granted occupation of the
house until your child is 18 and then, it would be sold for you each to have
your money out.

Meanwhile, not be liable for the bills all the mortgage of the house if you
do not live in it.

Unless an immediate sale of the house would release enough money to give
you some and provide a home for your wife and child, an early sale does not
seem likely.

You are looking upon this from the point of view that you want to live in
the house and provide a home for the child and for your wife to move out. She
is looking for the same and provided she can afford to pay the mortgage
meanwhile she is likely to get occupation of the house for another five years.

At age 18, if you cannot agree finances with regard to the house, the court
will decide and ultimately, ordering to be sold and the proceeds divided

I appreciate this is not the answer you wanted there is no point in me

Can I help further?

Please bear with me today because I am online and off-line. Please don't
forget to positively rate my answer service (even if it was not what you want to
hear). If you don't rate it positively, then the site keep your deposit and I
get 0 for my time. It is imperative that you give my answer a positive rating.
It doesn't give me "a pat on the head", "good boy" (like ebay), it is my

If in ratings you feel that you expected more or it only helped a little,
please ask.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Thank you for this answer. I appreciate you are online/offline.

Disregarding the reasons for the marital breakdown, i appreciate that we are

Both looking to find a suitable and amicable solution to the property.

We realise that providing a roof over our daughters head is of paramount importance, however I wanted to make sure that there was not a law that just allowed one party

In a mortgage to simply get the other partys name removed.


I appreciate that providing evidence of a divorce/decree nisi would be sufficient evidence

To a mortgage lender, but as we are not divorced, or even discussing that aspect, of course I want to protect my financial interest in the property and subsequently, possibly my daughters inheritance from me.


So in there a law that allows this to happen? I am sorry if I missed it in an earlier point.

Expert:  James Mather replied 4 years ago.

There can be circumstances where the house is awarded completely to
one-party and the other person's name is removed by court order however that is
not likely on these facts.

The court however cannot order someone removed from the mortgage unless the
lender can send.

Does that answer? Don't worry about missing things, I am happy to clarify
if I have not made it clear.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Thank you for the quick response. You said....

"The court however cannot order someone removed from the mortgage unless the lender can send". Was this sentence unfinished?


Would I also be correct in assuming that a lender cannot just remove someones name from the mortgage liabilities as well?


The answers so far, lead me to thinking that, for as long as I remain in the property, continually talking and trying to work out the issues, then my wife cannot lawfully remove my name from the mortgage unless I agree to it. Would I be correct in this assumption?



Expert:  James Mather replied 4 years ago.

Ops, my voice type program heard "unless the lender consents" " as "unless
the lender can send".

It needs the lender's consent.

The liability to pay the mortgage remains provided the name is on the
mortgage however a person is liable for the mortgage of the bills of a property
that they do not live in although they do remain liable to the lender if the
person who is still living in the house stopped paying.

On these facts, she is most unlikely to get you removed from the title
deeds without your consent and it is most unlikely that she would get a court
order to do that.

In order to remove you from the mortgage, she would have to pay it off! You
would however remain on the deeds.

Please remember the title deeds and the mortgage are separate.

You can be removed from the deeds but can remain on the mortgage but you
cannot be removed from the mortgage and remain on the deeds.

Expert:  Clare replied 4 years ago.
For clarity and the avoidance of doubt - neither party can be removed from the mortgage without their knowledge and consent whether they are living in the property or not.
This remains the same even after a Decree Absolute
Enquires can be made as to what the mortgage options are available - but action can only be taken if both parties are in agreement and complete the necessary forms OR the Court makes an Order for the Transfer of the property - which will not be dome without the knowledge of the other party