Hope this question is in the right section - 1st post.
Ok: I have a very keen buyer for my house. The place I want is perfect and is almost the same price as the one I’m selling give or take 10k. Everyone is happy with the offer prices. My buyer is a cash buyer and I need a mortgage 30k less that the one I currently pay with a perfect payment history. However, just heard mortgage company is getting cold feet as the company my husband works for was restructured in 2009/2010 and a lot of jobs lost. The profitable side was seperated and is going fine. I have been asked to produce extra documentation but I get the feeling even that isn’t going to do it.
So my question (kinda naiively) is: Can my buyer buy the house I want and I continue to pay the mortgage I have and we have some kind of legal arrangement stating our positions. I know my mortgage would be secured on the house I’m leaving and I don’t know if there is any wording for a contract to buy down the line or mutual leasing from each other or is there any way.
I know people will probably say: you’re mad, it’s a mess, it’s a disaster waiting to happen but I want to know if it’s possible, and if so by what means.
The alternative is I stay in a house I no longer want, with no prospects of obtaining a mortgage in the forseeable future and my buyer loses his dream home (mine).
They are aware of that and my application is very strong, they are just iffy over the status of my husbands company. I get the feeling the shades of grey, like reducing their exposure is not considered, there are criteria they have to fulfill and that’s it.
No, there is no scam. I am looking for a practical and legal avenue for both of us to get and live in the houses we want. I am resposible for the mortgage I currently pay and have no intention of defaulting.
I am trying to establish whether my buyer can use his cash status to buy for me and for there to be some method of exchange or of mutual leasing with an option to buy later.
Legally it couldn’t/wouldn’t be done.
Your buyer would buy your new house for you with cash - all fine - but what if…then you pulled out of the deal, there was an unexpected accident or death on either side - whatever…your buyer is stuck owning a house they don’t want! Their solicitor would never agree to it and rightly so.
Just press ahead with mortgage application. As you say, all they want to do is tick the boxes. So if your husband’s company has signed a salary cert to say he’s employed there permanently, then what’s the problem?
Anyone, bar civil servants, can lose their jobs unexpectedly at any time.
Do you have a mortgage broker?
No, no broker. Dealing with the girl in branch who organised original mortgage, and several top ups, over the phone. Actually very efficient. The issue seems to be that part of the business went into liquidation and the profitable part was separated off and moved to new premises and is going very well. But a company search done by mortgage company shows the liquidated references and they’re looking for clarification regarding liabilities, accounts filed dates, company numbers etc. My husband can probably get a letter on headed paper stating things are hunky dory but I just get the feeling they are very iffy about the whole thing and it may be a big stumbling block.
Pain in the bum as we have a very long perfect payment history, clear ICB healthy statements etc.
I am not an expert in company law and neither is that girl in the bank who organised your original mortgage , and several top ups , over the phone .
I am not trying to insult you or surggesting that you are trying to scam the bank / mortgage provider . But your husbands company is in trouble . If the profitable part had been seperated then it would have a new name as it would be trying to remove itself from the bad name of the ’ unprofitable ’ part of the company .
They would do this because your mortgage application started some red lights flashing for a simple mortgage appilcation for one of their employees . What would happen if some potential creditor did a simple check on your husbands profitable new company , which is or was part of a unprofitable company ?
As it stands , there is no way a buyer would agree to such a situation and even if they did their solicitor would torpedo it .
I know its wrong and you know that it is wrong . You are trying to circumnavigate the banks / mortgage company because you think that everything will be ok . But it won’t , because your husbands company is in dodgeville , because a simple mortgage application revealed this to the mortgage company .
No , I read at as he worked there aswell . Which seems to be how the bank / mortgage company are reading it
He works there . Was or is part of a unprofitable company . When did banks start researching the finer details or the balance sheets of companies ? So it must be a household name ? And a household name which must be trouble for the banks to pick up on it on a simple mortgage application where debt / negitive equity would not be a issue .
If it were a normal run of the mill company which had seperated a good part / bad part and had continued trading it would do so under a new name to totally seperate itself from its former identity and its negitive past . Yet the bank has picked up on it , so to me it must be a big company , maybe even semi state which the banks have a fear of going under .
Otherwise why would the OP be trying to tie themselves up in all kinds of legal knots which I doubt the banks would even consider entering into in the first place ?
I may be completly wrong and there is finer minds on the Pin who can advise . I have pointed out that I am not an expert .
To answer a couple of questions, yes my husband is an employee of this company and has been since 1998. Not a household name by any means. Recession hit part of the business which has been established since the 60’s. However part of the business is absolutely flying and looks set to continue to do so. Part of the business was shut down and redundancies offered. This happened about 2 years ago. My husband opted to stay and the new sector moved premises and does have a slightly different name. Same original people though. Say company was Jim Smith ltd and now trading as J. Smith for example.
The bank did a company search and this showed the winding down of the company in it’s previous incarnation and asked me if it was the same one. I answered honestly that it was and that they had moved and are concentrating on this very lucrative area of their previously non performing business. I think they are worried about potential job security and maybe cross liability for the debts of the wound down business. I think we can provide documentation from the company to deal with these points but just the way banks are today, I think anything which raises an issue is liable to be a reason for a refusal.
I’ll know more after the weekend to see what my husbands employer can supply him with in terms of evidence of the company’s status.
Hence my question about whether there was another avenue to complete the deals without a new mortgage application.