Hello,
I have a question regarding ownership rights. Both my partner and I are listed as debtors in the construction contract. Is there a way to officially record (in the land register or elsewhere) that I am the sole owner, while both of us remain debtors?
The background is this: In case of a separation, we want to avoid any complications. I am supposed to receive the house, and she is to be "bought out" (she agrees with this arrangement). But as often happens in life, after a separation, people tend to deny previous agreements.
So my question is: Are there options for this? If yes, what are they?
Thank you in advance.
I have a question regarding ownership rights. Both my partner and I are listed as debtors in the construction contract. Is there a way to officially record (in the land register or elsewhere) that I am the sole owner, while both of us remain debtors?
The background is this: In case of a separation, we want to avoid any complications. I am supposed to receive the house, and she is to be "bought out" (she agrees with this arrangement). But as often happens in life, after a separation, people tend to deny previous agreements.
So my question is: Are there options for this? If yes, what are they?
Thank you in advance.
Perhaps a factual summary now. Your question is a perfect topic for a lively forum like ours here 😉
No, if anything, you both appear as clients in the construction contract. And that’s a good thing: for a building permit / planning permission, both need to sign. If one of you is unavailable, the other can still be contacted.
You are both debtors with the lender, so both of you are fully responsible. This also applies in case of separation: if one refuses to pay their share, the bank can demand the full amount from the other. The bank doesn’t care who pays; as long as the money comes in. To put it bluntly: you stay in the house but don’t pay and are unreachable. Your partner is caught off guard but reachable for the bank, so they have to cover the debt... <- In short
The land register records the future owner regardless of the borrower or client in the contract. Ideally, this should be the same as the debtors on the loan. That way, there are no issues. How you settle things later is a different matter. Of course, you can agree differently, for example, if one party brings in the parents’ land or covers the entire financing alone. But even in my parents’ generation (probably your grandparents’ generation), it was common practice for both spouses to be registered owners in the land register, even if only the husband earned money and the wife took care of the children.
You can record that in a private agreement. Some recommend consulting a lawyer / notary for this – but I believe a private agreement is valid if properly drafted. Of course, both parties must sign.
DirtyNerdy schrieb:
Both my partner and I are listed as debtors in the construction contract.
No, if anything, you both appear as clients in the construction contract. And that’s a good thing: for a building permit / planning permission, both need to sign. If one of you is unavailable, the other can still be contacted.
DirtyNerdy schrieb:
but both are debtors
You are both debtors with the lender, so both of you are fully responsible. This also applies in case of separation: if one refuses to pay their share, the bank can demand the full amount from the other. The bank doesn’t care who pays; as long as the money comes in. To put it bluntly: you stay in the house but don’t pay and are unreachable. Your partner is caught off guard but reachable for the bank, so they have to cover the debt... <- In short
DirtyNerdy schrieb:
Is it possible to have something notarized (in the land register or elsewhere)
The land register records the future owner regardless of the borrower or client in the contract. Ideally, this should be the same as the debtors on the loan. That way, there are no issues. How you settle things later is a different matter. Of course, you can agree differently, for example, if one party brings in the parents’ land or covers the entire financing alone. But even in my parents’ generation (probably your grandparents’ generation), it was common practice for both spouses to be registered owners in the land register, even if only the husband earned money and the wife took care of the children.
DirtyNerdy schrieb:
In case of separation, we don’t want any drama. I should keep the house and she should be "bought out".
You can record that in a private agreement. Some recommend consulting a lawyer / notary for this – but I believe a private agreement is valid if properly drafted. Of course, both parties must sign.
ypg schrieb:
To put it bluntly: You stay in the house, but you don’t pay and are unreachable. Your girlfriend is caught off guard but accessible to the bank, so she has to cover the debts... <- Summary Exactly. Because this kind of division of roles, “he lives there – she pays,” is not uncommon in so-called "common-law marriages," I would insist on some form of security recorded in the land registry (I mean a land charge or mortgage; joint ownership is not necessary) to protect the girlfriend.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
B
Bieber081529 Jan 2018 15:20ypg schrieb:
No, if anything, you both stand as joint clients in the construction contract. If both enter into the construction contract, both owe the payment for the work. In this respect, calling them debtors was correct. The contractor can thus assert claims against both. Conversely, it is usually contractually agreed that each client can make decisions independently.
ypg schrieb:
You can record this in a private agreement. Some advise going to a lawyer/notary for this – I believe that a private agreement is also valid if it is properly drafted. With all due respect: anyone asking this will not be able to draft a contract of this magnitude (worth hundreds of thousands of euros) on their own. That is what professionals are for (certainly some better, some less so), and it is not that expensive. Therefore, I strongly advise against self-drafted arrangements. If you really need them, generally "stricter conditions" apply. This should be taken into account when drafting, meaning it should be watertight. Beforehand, of course, there must be substantive agreement between both parties. Only when they both know what they want can it be fixed in writing (or a standard agreement can be applied, e.g., marriage).
H
HilfeHilfe29 Jan 2018 17:40Alex85 schrieb:
What right can she really be fighting for?
Month after month, it’s nothing but a gift.
I know a similar situation in my circle of acquaintances where a separation happened. He had built the house with his previous partner, and the new partner joined in the financing directly – and now has to exit again. She actually doesn’t care and looks back on it as if it were rent. Sorry, then your acquaintance was naïve. The loan was being repaid, right? Or did she receive any money for the principal repayment portion or for her work like gardening, landscaping, etc.? Did she benefit from any increase in property value? Another problem is the bank. The bank is under no obligation to release a borrower from liability or approve a change of borrower.
11ant schrieb:
Because of this type of division of roles, not uncommon in "common-law marriages": "he lives there – she pays"Bieber0815 schrieb:
With all due respect: Anyone asking questions like this isn’t able to handle a contract of this magnitude (hundreds of thousands of euros) on their own. That’s what professionals are for (certainly some better, some worse), and it’s not even that expensive. For that reason, I strongly advise against drafting such agreements yourself. If they are truly needed, there are usually "stricter conditions" involved. That should be taken into account in the wording, meaning it should be watertight.
Before that, of course, both parties need to agree on the content. Only when they know what they want (both of them) can it be put in writing (or else rely on a standard agreement, such as marriage).That is completely irrelevant, whether married or not. These scenarios can happen in either case.
@Bieber0815
I’m not talking about contracts involving thousands of euros.
I’m referring to agreements that provide contractual protection in cases such as a separation within five years, where one party takes over the house including all associated costs (land registry, etc.), while the other party treats their contributions until then as rent-like payments and waives any further claims or payouts related to the house. From the sixth year onward, or once the mortgage repayment reaches a significant positive balance (a five-figure sum), appropriate payouts are made, and so on... all just examples.
I have personally signed, filed, and let expire several such agreements—and once even executed one—and thus found them to be solid and practical.
You just have to agree on it and put it together objectively. And seriously: criminal intent, rental nomadism, faking financial conditions, and the like—dishonest character doesn’t suddenly appear; it’s ingrained. You can already recognize it in early relationship stages.
HilfeHilfe schrieb:
Sorry, then your acquaintance was just being foolish. The loan was repaid, right? Or did she receive any money for the repayment portion or her work in setting up the garden, etc.? Did she benefit from any increase in value? The second problem is the bank. The bank neither has to release a borrower from liability nor agree to a debtor substitution.My friend is the "he" who still lives there. 😉
I want to be clear again: I wouldn’t do it that way myself, nor would I advise these ladies to do something like this.
By the way, the lady is actually on the smart side. And also pragmatic.
Ultimately, she’s financially comfortable enough not to have to chase after every penny. Because you have to consider what kind of value would even need to be compensated. You’re talking about an increase in value. Well, she lived there 3–4 years, paying a few hundred per month. Much less than it would have cost to rent an apartment or a house with a garden. The place is on his parents’ land, which has been in the family for over 100 years. Ordinary people can’t just buy or rent there.
Nobody pays you for garden work in a rental; you do it for yourself and enjoy it, and the next person enjoys it if it lasts.
Return on investment? Sure, maybe hypothetically, but it’s not realizable. And if she has the mindset of a tenant, so what? She probably put in about €20,000–25,000 (say 22,000 pounds), so with a 5% return over time — should he now honorably pay her €1,000 (about 880 pounds)? Neither he nor she cares.
They’re not even arguing about it because it’s not worth the sum.
Similar topics