Family & de facto law, financial agreements, consent orders
1)... Why on earth would you want to remain jointly responsible for a property that you no longer will have an equitable interest in after consent orders are stamped?... (which the court may well not approve anyway if they are aware of that arrangement)
2) Why are you happy to continue helping the loan repayments?
The court expects your financial relationship is ended, & the consent orders are there to formalise that..
The process is that the title is transferred & the party taking over sole title buys out the others interest. BUT, that MUST include refinancing in their own name..
Thanks for your response. The reason being is that otherwise the ex might might not be approved for the loan amount in her own right due to serviceability issues. If the existing loan could be kept in place then that issue would be resolved.
Secondly, we both just want to get everything paid up as quickly as possible so there are no existing debts. Peace of mind for everyone concerned including the children. Weâ€™d rather see our money go towards the children than go into paying bank interest on a loan.
spirax77 2019-04-25 17:40:43
You do realise that when you have stamped consent orders dealing with property division, that is THE END of your financial interest in that title... There can be no further orders relating to it..
Now consider perhaps at some point in the future, your ex continues to default on the loan & can not pay the mortgage, for whatever reason, & there can be many..
The banks will be coming to you to pay that mortgage... On a place that you can not live in, nor have any financial claim to..
I understand the serviceability issues, BUT.... you asked if there is any potential pitfalls with this scenario... YES, a huge pitall
Perhaps instead of consent orders, you should look at some sort of binding financial agreement whereby you both remain on the title & contribute towards the mortgage for a set amount of time, or until your ex is able to refinance in her own name, whichever comes first..
yup - do this stuff by the book. Sure things are all nice now - all agreeable etc etc. So you spend 20 yrs contributing towards the mortgage of a property that you have no legal ownership of... In 20 yrs it is paid of and the ex chooses to sell. The thing has gone up in value. GREAT. But when the $$$ goes into HER bank and she chooses that you only deserve 5% BECAUSE you didn't pay the rates, or she decides to give you 0% because she doesn't have to... Guess what? you're screwed. There isn't a court in the land that will care.
Do it legally, to it by the book. A binding agreement is a good idea - but a better idea is to go your separate ways, that is why it is called DIVORCE. If that means the place needs to be sold, then sell it.