The woman owes 2 million yuan to find someone to pretend to be her husband and mortgage the marriage room. The husband is in a hurry to divorce

 The woman owes 2 million yuan to find someone to pretend to be her husband and mortgage the marriage room. The husband is in a hurry to divorce

Liu Li, a reporter from, reported on January 3 that marriage house is not only the harbor of home, but also an important real estate for every couple. Recently, Mr. Liu met with a headache. He and his wife shared a marriage house, but he was secretly mortgaged by his wife without his knowledge.

Mr. Liu, who was informed of the truth, took his wife and the small loan company to court and asked for invalidation of the mortgage contract, and for the small loan company to cancel the registration of mortgage on the property. Recently, the Shanghai Hongkou court heard the case in public, and the judgment supported Mr. Lius application.

A few years ago, Mr. Liu and his wife, Ms. Li, bought a house on the water circuit in Hongkou District (hereinafter referred to as the house involved) as the marriage house and registered their names.

In February last year, his wife suddenly told Mr. Liu that he owed a large amount of debt to speculate on futures, but he had no choice but to mortgage more than 2 million yuan to the small loan company with the co owned marriage house as the guarantee, to repay the debt and speculate on the return of futures. However, the futures will compensate again and again until they are unable to repay the loan, which is a confession to Mr. Liu.

Knowing the truth, Mr. Liu was very anxious and angry. At the same time, he decided to divorce his wife who cheated him. At the same time, he sued the small loan company and his wife to the court and asked for a verdict as above.

In the court, Ms. Li told the whole process of house mortgage: at that time, Ms. Li, who suffered losses repeatedly, wanted to make money back, so she went to Yilong loan company to apply for a loan, wanted to gamble again, and said she didnt want her husband to know. Yilong loan company claimed that as long as the husbands ID card can be brought out, then Ms. Li contacted the defendant small loan company.

Taking advantage of her husbands bath, Ms. Li stealthily took her husbands ID card and found her friend Xu Mou who pretended to be her husband to sign a mortgage contract with the small loan company. During the audit, the small loan company only inquired about the main borrower and the part of the house, and then went through the relevant procedures. Then Ms. Li and Xu went to the real estate transaction center to register the mortgage, accompanied by Yang, an employee of the small loan company. It was not until the deficit was irreparable that things came to light.

At the court, the small loan company disagreed with Mr. Lius application, believing that Mr. Liu should know or acquiesce to Ms. Lis loan, and that the mortgage requires an ID card. Mr. Liu has fault in the custody of the ID card, and should bear the consequences on his own. According to Article 15 of judicial interpretation of property law, if Mr. Liu believes that the company does not constitute acquisition in good faith, he shall bear the burden of proof to prove that the company has gross negligence, but Mr. Liu does not have any evidence to prove it; and the real estate transaction center, as a special registration authority, has not audited the act of anonymity, so he shall not set up a higher Duty of care.

In view of the dispute between the two parties over whether Mr. Liu was informed, the court entrusted a judicial appraisal institution to appraise the above signature of Mr. Liu. The result is that the signature is not signed by Mr. Liu himself. In view of this, the court asked the small loan company to produce the on-site video or audio-visual materials when Mr. Liu and Ms. Li signed the loan contract, and the small loan company said it did not retain the evidence.

So, is the mortgage contract effective? What is the impact of the act of disposing under false name on the mortgage?

After the trial, the court held that, according to the judicial appraisal opinion, the signatures of the two documents were not Mr. Liu himself. Mr. Liu did not participate in the conclusion of the contract. It is not his intention to provide mortgage guarantee for Ms. Lis debt with the house involved in the case, nor his subsequent approval. Therefore, the mortgage contract has no legal effect on Mr. Liu and should be deemed invalid according to law.

In this case, the impostor signed the mortgage contract and went through the mortgage registration formalities with the real estate management department, which is to set the mortgage right on other peoples houses, which constitutes a disciplinary action under the name of impostor. As a professional loan company, the small loan company should strengthen the management of identity verification, ensure that the salesperson implements the appearance comparison, and fix the comparison process in a timely manner in the form of image data and other forms, and take inquiry and other ways to eliminate suspicious situations for those with large differences in appearance. However, the small loan company has major fault in the review process, which does not constitute acquisition in good faith, and the mortgage should be removed.

To sum up, the court ruled that the mortgage contract was invalid, and the small loan company should cancel the mortgage registration of the real estate involved in the case within 10 days from the effective date of the judgment. (the names of the above persons and companies are pseudonyms)

(function() {(window. Slotbydup = window. Slotbydup| []). Push ({ID: u5811557, container: ssp_, async: true});}) (); source of this paper: responsibility editor of Yu changzong j11145