Any legal brains on here

[Cyclone]

Sorry but that's wrong.

You're confusing two different things:

1. LEGAL ownership (= names on title to property).

2. EQUITABLE/BENEFICIAL ownership (= who's entitled to the property's value and in what proportions).

...

 

That's how.

 

So if it's a joint mortgage, and he's been paying half the bill, then what is the situation as per the OPs question?

If you're saying that he has no ownership, then presumably the same argument applies to the other party, and then nobody owns it...

Edit - I'm not arguing that you're wrong, I just want to understand what you're telling me.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Cyclone

[Jeffrey Shaw]

So if it's a joint mortgage, and he's been paying half the bill, then what is the situation as per the OPs question? If you're saying that he has no ownership, then presumably the same argument applies to the other party, and then nobody owns it.

There's no such thing as 'unowned property'.

 

Again:

1. Legal ownership= in whose name the property's held (e.g. registered at HMLR).

2. Equitable/beneficial ownership= who has what shares in the value of the property.

 

I'm not arguing that you're wrong

Gee, thanks.

[Cyclone]

Yes, there's no such things as "unowned" property, and when it's jointly owned, both parties own it.

 

Can you explain how somebody who has 1 (legal ownership) and is paying (at least) half the mortgage, cannot then have 2, ie a share in the equitable ownership of the property.

 

And Gee Thanks, there's no reason to be arsy all the time