The transfer can only have been made with the consent of the mortgage lender who would have wished to be assured that the payments would continue before agreeing. What was agreed between them?
The regualtions say basically that you get housing costs if you are liable for them , or if the person who is liable for them is not paying them and it is the only way you can stay there (or another which does not apply). They are not liable for the mortgage under the first head as they are no longer parties (I assume - just what was the deal with the lender?). The second is meant to be for deserted wives/women with children, not people who have for no good reason given their house away.
The usual reason is to get rid of both the house and the mortgage.
What were they all thinking of? What a stupid thing to do and what will the mortgage lender say if they know the daughter is not paying the mortgage and why should we all pay it for her? It's her problem now. I feel sorry for your clients - I imagine their daughter walked all over them on this one - but I really don't like it a bit.
|