Separation with 50/50 residence: how much should H contribute to mortgage and other expenses?

[desanto]

H and I are soon to separate (after a bolt from the blue delivered to me 3 weeks ago). He’s found a flat nearby and DD5 and I will stay in the family home, which we own (mortgage £1000/month).

We must now decide how much he should pay towards DD and his other domestic financial obligations after he moves out. We both work full time, and he wants to have 50/50 residency (the prospect of which kills me, but that’s another story) , in which case there will be no maintenance to pay. So, I’d propose that he continues to pay his liabilities, i.e. half the mortgage and house insurance. Presumably this is OK since he’ll continue accruing equity. But what about utilities, after school childcare fees, and other expenses relating to DD, e.g. clothes, clubs, etc.? Lots of this is the wifework that I’ve always managed from our joint account, so will probably continue to do so, though not from a joint account any longer.

As he’s going to be significantly poorer than before after £900/month flat rental, he also wants to reduce our mortgage to interest-only until we decide what we’re doing long term (I’d like to buy him out ultimately). Is this wise?

As things are so raw, I don’t yet want to do a formal separation agreement where the division of assets is decided. I want to be fair but I’m also extremely angry that he’s put us in this position without warning, so am not willing to make things easy for him at the risk of disadvantaging me and DD. Or AIBU to ask for contributions beyond the mortgage when we're going 50/50 residency?

[ZigZagZebras]

If he wants 50/50 then he needs to be buying 50% of her clothes, paying for 50% of childcare for his half of the weekdays and paying for clubs on his days.

[xzcvbnm]

Perhaps we could flip your proposal on its head --- as it's a 50:50 residency you'd have no issue moving into the flat yourself, paying your own rend, with him staying in the FMH and you paying half his mortgage?

[Alfie19]

I think he should pay half of all the incidentals that you mention. What I am struggling with is why he should pay half the mortgage without the benefit of living there, when there is 50:50 residency, unless you mean for a very short period of time. I wouldn't be surprised if that dried up very quickly, so maybe need to think about what to do about house sooner rather than later.

[desanto]

@Alfie , my thinking was because the house is an investment which he will take half the equity of at some point. But I see what you mean about funds running out, hence his suggestion to go interest-only for a while. Wondering if that option would disadvantage me though in the medium/longer term.

[NorthernSpirit]

If you have 50:50 contact then no child maintenance is payable.

If you are living in the house, enjoying all the benefits of living there then you need to pay for it. And no - he doesn’t have to contribute to the utilities you use and insurance.

Women are expected to find themselves nowadays.

My now OH’s EW wanted him to pay the mortgage in full and then ‘kindly’ reduced it to 50% (for 11 years, until the youngest was 18). When she tried to claim the same during their consent order, it was thrown out by the judge. She pays the mortgage and the house was to be sold in 2 years (with a 62:38% split of equity in her favour.

You are expected to pay for where you live.

If you can’t afford the mortgage the house will need to be sold.

[LadyLapsang]

The house is not necessarily a great investment for him atm. How do your salaries compare?

[Xenia]

Teh house might drop in value as most London houses currently are so his "investment" might be getting less and less not neecessarily increasing.

What a divorce lawyer would probably say is first look your total assets and liabilities of both of you any savings (ignore pensions for now). It says husband so assume you are married. In our case I earned 10x my husband so he got more than half so it is really hard to generalise (and he also chose never to have the children whcih is another long story).

Then look at how long until the youngest is 18 and perhaps agree you stay in the family home until then or until you cohabit or remarry.

if you have 50/50 whislt it is try the CMS might say no maintenance in practicei f one is a higher earner it could be different eg our court order said I had to pay school and university costs no matter who the children live with (vast amount).

Assuming you and he work full time and earn about the same (which of course may not be so) then typically neither would pay the other maintenance nor for the child and you could split child benefit if you get it 50/50 and you remortgage to get him off the loan so he can get a new mortgage somewhere else. Then you could have a clean break divorce with no spousal support. You might have a parent able to remortgage with you to get your husband off the mortgage and pay him half the equity in the house.

It is best you see a solicitor as they can advise you if you earn less than your husband on getting interim maintenance eg if he earns more (or you pay it to him of course if you earn more)

[larrygrylls]

You need to find a system where you are both roughly equally well off while you are sorting out a final settlement.

Interest only makes sense. Ultimately you will probably have to sell the house to fund two equal properties and, as there is cash flow pressure now, it makes sense to reduce your outgoings.

He should pay towards mortgage, utilities etc as much as he can afford while allowing himself equal spare cash (even if that is not much).

[titchy]

Going interest only while your house is on the market will almost certainly be acceptable to your lender. But
no lender will allow interest only for anything more than a few months.

[DrCoconut]

I completely disagree that equality means one partner pays in full for a joint property post divorce because they live there and then the other gets to walk away with 50% equity in 10, 15 whatever years time. I'm having this issue at the moment and as far as I'm concerned, he is only entitled to equity that he's contributed to. My money post divorce is mine not joint and therefore what I buy with it is mine too.

[HellenaHandbasket]

Of course his equity share should be adjusted for the proportion of time he has lived there, but he shouldn't be liable for half the mortgage IMO

[Xenia]

it is whatever the law says - so higher earners have to pay spousal maintenance which mgith well be many times the mortgage cost or not as much as it depending on the income levels. It is hard to generalise for that reason.

If his equity share is adjusted because any increase in value since separation and after he stopped paying capital back yet he is not able to put his share of the equity into another house that similarly rises is a bit unfair.

[ClaireAngelaReid]

50/50 usually means no child support reduced equity and you puckingbup the child care ie doing the lot when he has a work emergency.... I would recommend fighting it.

[ClaireAngelaReid]

Also why does he get a £900 a month flat ? He is still liable for the mortgage until the day it’s sold one way or another so how did he expect to be able to afford that. Pillock is in for a shock.

[desanto]

@Claire because he's cocky and assumed I'd say yes to releasing some equity and going interest only on the mortgage. Have just made an appt with an IFA.

[ClaireAngelaReid]

Good stuff, honestly fight the 50/50, he won’t get it unless you allow it and you’ll end up picking up the slack

[larrygrylls]

You need to separate your feet around him doing a shitty thing (leaving you) from the finances.

There is not much info in your op about who works, earns what etc. However, if 50/50 really is tenable and the result, he should have an equally nice property to you to bring the children up in (assuming you don’t live in a mansion). A £900 a month flat is probably worth a long way less than half of the marital home. How is that cocky?! Remember there is no reason that it has to be him moving out and, were it you, what would you expect to be renting?

You have to get your head around the fact the family home will have to be sold to fund two homes for your children. In the interim, if funds are tight, interest only is very sensible. There is no reason to continue to increase equity unless you can actually afford to live decently.

An IFA cannot help you here until you have had a discussion with a decent divorce lawyer, who can at least give you parameters around which to negotiate given all your circumstances. I would not delay seeing one.

[larrygrylls]

That was feelings, not feet!

[Toofle]

Although separating your feet is helpful when it comes to moving on.

[ClaireAngelaReid]

Also easier said than done.
He moved out, he left his choice to create this chaos.... from the comfort of his £900 a month flat. Fuck that.

[greenlanes]

Do watch the child benefit and impact to tax credits if 50:50. My ex who is in the higher tax band has just tried a claim for CB. He wont get it but wants to deprive me. 50:50 really has all sorts of implications, including as pp said above wifework (which the courts dont choose to accept but actually does exist). 50:50 also impacts a child's life quite badly including possible impact to attendance at their activities. So they may end up not being able to be on a sports team or dance/drama etc. Ex may be a perfect dad and none of this will happen. But if he is moving this quickly I would cherchez the femme and then watch the trouble start.

[HellenaHandbasket]

Depending on where you are a £900 a month flat may not be a palace, but a perfectly sensible option. There is no reason that he should have to live in penury, as much as I can fully understand that emotionally it feels unfair.

[Xenia]

..or husband work greenlanes too of course... we both worked full time and both did as much as each other at home as plenty of fair equitable feminist couples do.

[Ss770640]

Your only entitled to 50% of what was earned during marriage.

Anything else depends on length of marriage and what you brought before day of marriage.

I think you are being unreasonable.

Make a table of every asset including pensions. And go from there.

You cannot simply expect your ex to pay for your lifestyle just because you earn less.