Advice! - separation, conveyancing, costs

[JuneBug]

Hi all,

Really at a loss where else to ask this, several Google searches have yielded nothing!

Currently going through court, left joint house with the ex 15 months ago. On splitting up it was decided she would keep the house, buy me out for (just under) 1/2 the equity and she would continue to make payments on a joint loan until it was all sorted, and I'd credit her half those payments afterwards. After I'd moved out, she claimed to have been declined a mortgage, and also refused to sell the house saying I'd have to remain on the mortgage indefinitely (which meant I have had to procure an expensive rental as I can't buy another property) and when she did finally produce a mortgage in principle, it was only for the amount outstanding on the house with £0 to account for my part of the equity. Things became rapidly hostile and she repeatedly told me I wouldn't get anything.

So... To court. Having just had a meeting with my solicitor, solicitor claims that even if ex does buy my share of the house, I still have to pay ex half of "selling costs". I queried why, as if we undertake a transfer of equity there are no estate agent or conveyancing costs, just the legal cost for transfer of equity. Solicitor claimed "it always works like this in every case, 3% of value calculated as selling costs and half credited to the person remaining in the house"

I left the meeting really confused, and not sure where to find this information online? Why would I have to pay half of selling costs for a house that isn't being sold? Solicitor said she could decide to sell the house after the case is finished and the property is in her sole name, but surely what ex does with (what will be) her own house is none of my business? I thought once you buy a house thats it it's yours, and she would have no right to ask me for her selling costs than I would have right to ask the previous owners we bought it from in the first place?

Thanks for any replies, solicitor has got a few things wrong so far in this case and I really never know whether to trust their advice or not. A lot of googling has been happening!

[jaguarsuk]

So in the new mortgage there will be conveyancing fees as solicitor still has to do all the relevant work they would if she was buying a completely different house and it sounds as though those are the fees your solicitor is referring to not if you ex decides to sell on.

At the point of your ex exchanging contracts to complete the new mortgage then it's her house and if she sells in the future she'll pay her own conveyancing fees.

[JuneBug]

Thank you for your reply!

It was exactly what I thought, however the solicitor is adamant I need to calculate in my offer before the hearing, 1.5% to cover her future selling costs if she decides to sell after completion. This solicitor has got so many things wrong she could tell us the sky is blue and I'd have to Google it lol. It's extra frustrating as the true value of the house is 35k higher than the valuation we have to use in court, as ex has obstructed any independent valuations I've paid to have done and insists we use her valuations *facepalm*

[jaguarsuk]

Thank you for your reply!

It was exactly what I thought, however the solicitor is adamant I need to calculate in my offer before the hearing, 1.5% to cover her future selling costs if she decides to sell after completion. This solicitor has got so many things wrong she could tell us the sky is blue and I'd have to Google it lol. It's extra frustrating as the true value of the house is 35k higher than the valuation we have to use in court, as ex has obstructed any independent valuations I've paid to have done and insists we use her valuations *facepalm*

No that can't be right, why should you be liable for her future sale costs, by that logic you should then after it decrease the offer by 3% to cover the costs of your purchase after the sale and then any future costs of you selling on. Peridot do you know if this is right or wrong?

You are the joint owner of the property and so you should still be given a key unless the court has ordered otherwise. You could have an independent valuation done where you attend the property and then she can't obstruct it.

That said, you say she struggled to source a mortgage and if she couldn't get one with a higher amount then you would get nothing, so perhaps the lower valuation facilitates you actually getting something.

[JuneBug]

That's a good point re: getting something. However if she can't afford it, I just want to sell it and split everything evenly which seems the fairest way to me. I wish I could get a key to get my own valuation, but she changed all the locks(solicitor reckons there's nothing I can do about this?) , and when we ask about a time to be let in with a surveyor, she obstructs. Never outright says no, but lays down such strict conditions as to make it impossible - we think because she knows the house is worth more (she told the bank for her mortgage in principle that it was worth 30k more than the valuation she's submitted to court. She could be lying to reduce her LTV for approval purposes, but doubtful). The one time I did go round with an estate agent, she assaulted my dad. Solicitor also thinks this is irrelevant and we shouldn't pursue it. This left a window for her to get in writing first that we had "intimidated" her upon arrival to the property. Now of course anything we submit, even if dad goes to the police about it, looks like we're just covering ourselves.

Sorry for tmi! Basically I've got massive reservations about this solicitor. Is it worth seeing another one to get a second opinion on it all? Worried a new solicitor would promise the earth to get the business then just be more of the same.

[jaguarsuk]

That's a good point re: getting something. However if she can't afford it, I just want to sell it and split everything evenly which seems the fairest way to me. I wish I could get a key to get my own valuation, but she changed all the locks(solicitor reckons there's nothing I can do about this?) , and when we ask about a time to be let in with a surveyor, she obstructs. Never outright says no, but lays down such strict conditions as to make it impossible - we think because she knows the house is worth more (she told the bank for her mortgage in principle that it was worth 30k more than the valuation she's submitted to court. She could be lying to reduce her LTV for approval purposes, but doubtful). The one time I did go round with an estate agent, she assaulted my dad. Solicitor also thinks this is irrelevant and we shouldn't pursue it. This left a window for her to get in writing first that we had "intimidated" her upon arrival to the property. Now of course anything we submit, even if dad goes to the police about it, looks like we're just covering ourselves.

Sorry for tmi! Basically I've got massive reservations about this solicitor. Is it worth seeing another one to get a second opinion on it all? Worried a new solicitor would promise the earth to get the business then just be more of the same.

It doesn't seem to me that your Solicitor is acting in your best interests from what you have said.

Regarding not pursuing the assault you haven't mentioned whether you have children and if you do it might be very upsetting for them to see their mother taken away by Old Bill. It doesn't mean they should be witnessing her assaulting their grand parent either.

You solicitor should have advised you to ask the police to record the incident, but you do not want to press charges or take things further. You would have been given a crime reference number to counter her claims then. If her solicitor wanted to up the ante on that incident they could apply for a non-molestation order against you which would mean you'd have to have zero contact with the ex, your solicitor should know this and that's why her advice was poor.

As the owner of the property you could get a locksmith to force entry and fit a new lock for you to have a key, but she'd just get them changed back before you could book the valuation.

If you believe she has a mortgage offer for the true value of the property then your solicitor should be writing to her to demand that you are given a key or that she allows access without any restrictions to have a market value valuation done. She should also be stating that if the ex doesn't then she'll make an application to the court for you to have unrestricted access to the property and if successful you ex will be liable for the costs of that application.

I think you need to talk to another solicitor or possibly 2, tell them what your current one has advised thus far and got wrong. Ask them what they would have done in those situations, about the ludicrous 1.5% rubbish and ask them what they will do to ensure a proper valuation is done to ensure you get what is rightfully yours.

See what they say and then make a decision about who you think will represent your interests best.

[JuneBug]

This seems like good solid advice and is exactly what I'll be doing on Monday - thank you very much for your help!

[Peridot]

Hi Junebug,
Sorry not been around. I would say you may struggle getting advice from another solicitor without disinstructing the other first. Professional courtesy and all that.
Is the % suggested a ‘negotiable’ figure so to speak, maybe a suggestion of the max you should be able to agree, or an outright settlement amount?
When calculating the equity in the property to be divided between the parties, you would of course deduct the outstanding mortgage and other costs involved in a sale to arrive at the figure to be divided. Maybe this is what they are getting at? I would suggest 3% May be a higher figure than would be expected although I am unsure what estate agents are currently charging.
i will have a look on Monday and see if I can find any further info for you and post back here.

[JuneBug]

Thank you that would be really helpful

To arrive at the equity figure, we took the value of the house, minus the outstanding mortgage balance, minus fees for the transfer of equity, then divided by two. As ex is insisting we will *not* be selling the house and she *will* take it over (eventually...), we haven't counted any estate agent fees as they won't be applicable. The bank also confirmed they will not charge an early repayment figure in the event of a transfer of equity if ex keeps the mortgage with them, which she has agreed to do - so that's another cost not to worry about

[jaguarsuk]

The 1.5% for future fees would be top end rate from an estate agent and it's usually between 1.1-3%. I suppose the other 0.2% could be accounting for Solicitor fees of the sale.

It just doesn't seem right to me that you pay for her selling the house in future.

[JuneBug]

Yes, agreed. We thought the calculation as described above would be enough, but solicitor is still insisting I give ex half of 3% of value in case property gets sold "at some point in the future". Had a rather cross email from solicitor this morning stating it didn't matter if I understand why or not, I need to pay this figure and she's "never" had a case where it hasn't been payable. She also said when I first instructed her that she had "never" had a case where the other side didn't pay costs, but she's now refusing to claim costs and just wants me to pay (which I have done, but still... I'd like to at least put a claim in to get them back!)

[Peridot]

Hi Junebug,
Just re-reading and need some clarification. Has your ex now managed to find a mortgage that will allow her to take over the property herself and also raise enough funds to pay out your share now? If not, how is it proposed the equity is released to you at this stage?

[JuneBug]

Hi Peridot,

Not as far as we know. We don't know whether this is because she is unable, or unwilling - she has had her step-mom go in with her on it as she can't get one alone, so I imagine she could now obtain finance for my share but just doesn't want to? . I also paid all the deposit (and fees) when purchasing the property in the first place if this is relevant?

My suggestion to her has been that if she can't raise the funds, the property should go on the market. This went down like a cup of cold sick lol. I also think the reason she is so adamant to not sell now, is because she knows there's c. 30k in the house than she's admitting to (see earlier post re: mortgage in principle / LTV) and would like to sell after I'm off the property to keep this money to herself. We have been given to understand that this is how she convinced her step-mom to go on the new mortgage with her (I.e, if you come in to get the house off ex, we will sell and split the money)

Thanks for your help,

JB

[JuneBug]

Sorry that should say 30k *more* than she is admitting to. We are currently arguing over 30k equity, but the value she's given to the bank is 60k equity. We assume she got the lower estate agent figure by just asking for the lowest "clearance" amount for a quick sale, and is obstructing a surveyors valuation because its higher. The last time I visited the property it was also in a horrendous state (literal animal waste on the floors etc) and my estate agent said this would put off buyers, and whilst he agrees with the higher valuation (the one with 60k equity) said it would be unlikely to get a regular buyer to agree to it (also, all valuations ex has done have included the property without a kitchen or bathroom, as she claims if forced to sell, she will rip these out as "she" paid for them)

Sorry if none of this is relevant, really appreciate the help

JB

[Peridot]

Hi,
So it seems that she may not even be in a position to 'pay' you the equity due. There are a number of other orders the Court can make including orders for sale and transfer of the property to your ex with you retaining a charge over it or for both of you to remain on the mortgage with your ex providing an undertaking that she will be responsible for payments until a certain point, for example once the children turn 18 or she is able to raise the funds. I wonder whether this is what your solicitor is considering. If that were the case then the costs of sale would be included in the calculation?
I wonder if there has been some confusion over what Order can actually be sought?