Question about buying a house and garage

[IGBT]

Hi all, I would like to have an opinion from you guys whom have bought a house recently or even a long time ago as long this that I am going to ask existed at that time.

Basically in the process there is something that the solicitor gave us as an option in the platform we are using, to protect our interest and that is fraud protection service that consists in preventing against identity theft and fraud in relation to property transactions. Using this service they will register a restriction on the HM land registry that prevents transactions such as transfer or mortgage being registered without lawyers certificate. This is to confirm identification of the person selling or borrowing to be verified. Additionally register up to 3 contact addresses for myself etc.

Now the thing is they charge 75 pounds and in principle when the time comes to sell the house to move to a bigger one for example, I would guess that we would be required to pay additional fee to get ourselves verified in order to proceed with the selling or whatever.

In your opinion is this something that you guys have considered doing or are considering doing? Would you guys apply for this extra step? Is it worth it? I can't imagine someone selling our property passing all the security checks that for example we have experienced. I don't know. Thanks in advance.

 

[happy_2008]

Never heard of this

 

[Russinating]

What's with all the people thinking life insurance is mandatory?

 

[ik9000]

What's with all the people thinking life insurance is mandatory?

some mortgage companies make it a condition of granting the loan.

 

[BinnsY]

What's with all the people thinking life insurance is mandatory?

Even if legally it isn't I can't imagine there are a huge number of people that should be managing without it?

Thinking of my circumstances, if I were to die leaving my wife with the outstanding mortgage, and sole responsibility of looking after my kid I really don't see how she could afford it on the salary she makes, as we set our house purchase / mortgage etc on our combined income. Even though mine is the larger bulk of the income, thinking of my circumstances, I think I would struggle to afford all the bills, then the whopping child care costs I would have to pay to keep my son in childcare for the hours I work. Realsitically I'd probably have to change my job to something I could work around child care dramatically reducing my income and putting myself into a similiar boat to the one my wife would be in if I died.

I imagine we would both make it work somehow if the worst happened and there were no insurance, but it would certainly be a massive challenge and a huge reduction in our quality of life compared to what we have now.

Now factor in the piece of mind the £60 or so a month I pay for my rather convulated amount of cover offers, I just can't fathom why I would be without it. It ultaimtely means that if one of us goes, there's no mortgage to worry about, the house is paid, and any job would only need to cover basic costs for things like gas/electricity etc with a decent amount of savings left over for big purchases as car goes on (university costs / first cars / house deposite help etc for my kid).

If that sounds too expensvie I think when I rang the numbers originally a basic decreasing term policy for joint life only for the both of us would have been about £15-£20 a month. Whilst that wouldnt have the kind of benefits my curent setup does, it would at least mean the survivor has a fully paid of house to live in for the rest of there days. Being mortgage free is a huge load / weight off and basically means the other could survive on apart time wage relatively easily.

Whilst it's not mandatory, other than a very select few who have huge earning potential, wealthy familys, or are already so rich this kind of stuff doesn't matter, I can't imagine there are many who would want to be in the circumstances left if the worst happesn and you didnt have it!

 

[Russinating]

Obviously it depends on your circumstances but I don't really subscribe to any insurances that aren't a legal obligation. Being a requirement of a mortgage just sounds like another way to eek cash out of the buyer as most people won't - or not understand that they can - shop around.

The lender has insurance, and the funds from the interest you're already paying, that someone dieing shouldn't form part of the risk, imo.

What's next, being required to have job loss insurance? Disability insurance? There's a tonne of factors that may mean you can't keep up your payments.