thanks for that advice... to be honest i feel very vulnerable at the minute, even tho my solicitor has reassured me in the past... if he tries to ringfence the inheritance i will be financially screwed and will have to sell the house or accept a legal arrangement thingy,,, which i dont want. i have said that i only want the house, not interented in anything else, although a lump sum would offer me a much needed buffer. what really gets me is i think it is just a control issue... i want total independance from him, but cant stand the thought of going to court,,,, i want this over with quickly and hope that by being amicable that could happen..... so depresing....
My XH is an extreme example but he claimed he would be bankrupt if judge ordered him to pay more than 2/3 of csa amount (!!!) and any spousal maintanence . Tbf XH had large income and ridiculous spending habts all shown in his 6 months bank n credit card statements. Judge's reply was 'bankruptcy is no excuse for not paying maintanence Mr X' D
By the way, mortgage companies will take into account as income ctc cb and COURT ORDERED (only so get that piece if paper) maintanence as income so even if u r just working part time (I only earn £20k) you can get mortgage. Judge will expect you to mortgage house in your name- make sure u get order that house is signed over within 52 days if u get 100% and chase to make sure that happens. Don't let him lie that mortgage co won't let him as they do and have to follow court ordered instructions.
You have to fill out very detailed form - form E- which goes through all of this including pension and assets- for judge so s/he can work it out fairly if u do not agree before then. It's expensive using solicitors but is the one time barrister in court is worth the money - accuse him of with holding financial assets if he does not disclose inheritance (make sure your solicitor puts it in writing telling him he has not disclosed it and must) as judge will force him to disclose.
Don't accept legal agreement 'until kids are 18' it's a control thing. Also what he's not telling you is than he has to pay spousal support still until you remarry, well past kids 18th .. Also you get share of his pension so if is greater than yours you can get extra lump sum (I.e. he gets less from house) of its cash equivalent now.
Don't let XH bully you. I had inheritance before I married & yes it was included as joint assets. You also get more than 50% of house if he earns more & you have kids, courts usually start off 75:25 split- I ended up with 100% of house as he went on spending spree clearing out all our savings and put himself in debt. Judge would have ordered me additional lump sum on top of 100% of house had he not had £65k debts and no (alleged) means of paying it. Judge takes into account each of your abilities to raise a mortgage. I hope that helps. Your solicitor is right to pursue the line s/he is taking.
well basically if he is able to ringfence the inheritance we would have to sell the house and if i get 50% of what is left i couldnt buy a property (i'm not mortgage worthy at the moment). He is suggesting a legal agreement that enables me to stay in the house till the children are 18 or i remarry... which basicaly lets him control my life! in the meantime... he would be unable to buy a property, there would be no clean break settlement either....
It's a grey area. All the factors your solicitor says are relevant my mean that the inheritance is merely an historical fact rather than determinative, so I'd tend to agree with your solicitor. Also, if reasonable needs can't be met without splitting the inheritance then it should be split.
I am divorcing my husband and was hoping to end up with the equity in the house as financial settlement (there are assests to the same amount which he would then get) Having discussed this with him he says his solicitor has told him i am likely to end up with far less than 50% of our assets as he can ringfence the inheritance he received before we were married. I had anticipated this and mentioned it to my solicitor and she says that as the money has never been treated seperately to out joint finances, that we have had a 20 year relationship (married 17) and two young children it will not be a factor and the money will be included in financial settlement negotiations.