House repossession

[des8]

Re: House repossession

Mortgage £315,000 plus arrears £44,000 =£359,000
Anyone like to hazard the odds of a repossessed property selling at Zoopla's valuation?

IMO there will be a substantial shortfall, and as already commented, the bank may well pursue either party for full shortage.

[Amethyst]

Re: House repossession

When you sever a joint tenancy and become tenants in common how does that work with regards mortgage liability ? or does it hae no effect ? Does it automatically create a 50/50 split on equity ( which doesn't seem fair to happen automatically if it can be severed by a single party ) ? So I'm thinking I've misunderstood.

[Elsieb]

Re: House repossession

I fear you are right des8 regarding a shortfall! The only estimate I have about the house value is by zoopla.

[Elsieb]

Re: House repossession

Thank you Openlaw15.

[wales01man]

Re: House repossession

Zoopla values mean nothing on a repo sale a friends house was valued at 720k by them and several agents it went for 495k .
As for shortfall ours was 9k they chased wife for 9k not 4.5 so the theory of only half of debt being assigned to OP goes out of window

[Openlaw15]

Re: House repossession

When you sever a joint tenancy and become tenants in common how does that work with regards mortgage liability ? or does it hae no effect ? Does it automatically create a 50/50 split on equity ( which doesn't seem fair to happen automatically if it can be severed by a single party ) ? So I'm thinking I've misunderstood.

Mortgage liability is 50/ 50 as it's joint. JT when it converts to Ten. Common realises equal shares as JT interests in the property (legal and equitable interest) are held together for the joint tenants. So if one person (JT) dies the other's rights is automatic and withstands any wills. It's analogous to two people in a physical 3 dimensional object and when one disappears the other has entitlement to it.

[Openlaw15]

Re: House repossession

Zoopla values mean nothing on a repo sale a friends house was valued at 720k by them and several agents it went for 495k .
As for shortfall ours was 9k they chased wife for 9k not 4.5 so the theory of only half of debt being assigned to OP goes out of window

Mortgage debt is different until the bank (mortgagee) assigns the rights to claim the debt to a third party, at which point the new creditor can go after any of the joint debtors' shortfall from the original mortgage amount. Until the debt is transferred the mortgagee will first sell its assets (property) and mortgagors (borrowers) have what left between them after all debts are settled.

[Amethyst]

Re: House repossession

Mortgage liability is 50/ 50 as it's joint. JT when it converts to Ten. Common realises equal shares as JT interests in the property (legal and equitable interest) are held together for the joint tenants. So if one person (JT) dies the other's rights is automatic and withstands any wills. It's analogous to two people in a physical 3 dimensional object and when one disappears the other has entitlement to it.

Thanks. Wouldn't mortgage liability be joint and severally ? ( ie if one party vanishes/dies/gives up the bank can call on the other for the full sum)

[wales01man]

Re: House repossession

Openlaw
With our Mortgage it was never assigned to a third party it was the mortgagee who came after the wife for the whole amount I would presume they just want all the money not half.
In the OPs case there is at the moment no shortfall to chase so we have no idea who will chase oe who will be chased

[Debt Camel]

Re: House repossession

As far as I am aware (and I am not a lawyer) severing a joint tenancy changes the basis on which the property is owned. This would affect who inherited if one of the owners dies. But it has no effect at all on the mortgage debt which is joint & several, so the mortgage company may pursue either party for the full amount. I can't agree with most of what [MENTION=77627]Openlaw15[/MENTION] has written here.

I agree with [MENTION=39710]des8[/MENTION] and [MENTION=30456]wales01man[/MENTION] that there is likely to be a significant shortfall. Not only is the price likely to be a lot lower that Zoopla valuation suggest but once the house is repossessed, it can take a surprising length of time for it to be sold and the banks fees for the repossession and sale can also be high. During this time mortgage arrears continue to accrue.

[Amethyst]

Re: House repossession

But it has no effect at all on the mortgage debt which is joint & several, so the mortgage company may pursue either party for the full amount.

That's how I understood it too. Thanks DC.

[Elsieb]

Re: House repossession

I can't thank you enough for your responses. I am going to apply further pressure on the bank this next week to push for the repossession. I need an end to this mess whatever that may be I feel I am somewhat prepared. I update when/ if I hear from the bank.

[des8]

Re: House repossession

Wrong thread .. sorry

[Openlaw15]

Re: House repossession

Openlaw
With our Mortgage it was never assigned to a third party it was the mortgagee who came after the wife for the whole amount I would presume they just want all the money not half.
In the OPs case there is at the moment no shortfall to chase so we have no idea who will chase oe who will be chased

the mortgagee use a receiver for convenience ie Barclays seems to. Oh yes the mortgagee could come after any for shortfall as this the law in that all are liable if there were shortfalls.

[Openlaw15]

Re: House repossession

Thanks. Wouldn't mortgage liability be joint and severally ? ( ie if one party vanishes/dies/gives up the bank can call on the other for the full sum)

There's likely to be a clause in the estate's contract to that effect yes, if it were to relate to any shortfalls. If it were commercial ownership it would likely be tenancy in commons so the survivor rules will not apply in that any wills will be effective.