How should we divide equity?(33 Posts)
Join the discussion
Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.
Ex and I purchased house. After split, ex moved out and I’ve lived in house with DC. Never married.
Ex and I both put in same initial deposit. Joint mortgage but ex has paid 20% mortgage, I have paid 80% of mortgage.
I have maintained house - nothing major but kept house in good condition, taken care of all minor repairs/garden work etc. Ex has done nothing.
Equity from house = £200K. Who should get what?
What was the intention when you bought the house? Is it held as tenants in common or joint tenants?
Intention was to live in house together and split mortgage equally. Joint tenants, repayment mortgage.
You have answered your own question. If the intention was to own equally, and the presumption is there because you hold as joint tenants, the proceeds would be divided equally. There isn't anything stopping you negotiating though. I would offer his deposit back, plus 20% of the remaining equity. He may take it.
Another vote for each getting own deposit back and then him getting 20% of the remaining equity
I think you need to consider that you lived in the house whilst he paid rent elsewhere presumably.
Yes that's right Strictly1 - he paid rent elsewhere.
What has he paid to accommodate himself? Has he managed to buy another home?
If has had to rent and couldn't get a mortgage cos he was on this one then I would say 50/50
If he had to pay rent elsewhere I think he's entitled to more than 20%.
How did 60% of the mortgage compare to his rent? 20% each to the mortgage and you've paid an additional 60% and he's paid rent.
Refund each of your mortgages payments split equity 50:50
Strictly1 - roughly the same. However, I have struggled with the majority of large mortgage (spent a lot of savings) and had DC living with me. Ex earns 5x my salary if it makes any difference.
I think that does - he needs to help house his children.
Ah if DC involved that's different kettle of fish!
But presumably he’ll be paying maintenance for the kids?
He is entitled to 50%. Any offer for less than that is just trying it on. There's a mechanism whereby the court can delay sale if you can't rehouse the children on your share of the proceeds. You get no enhanced share just because you've been paying more than him either since separation or before.
@Collaborate making an offer and negotiating isn't trying it on. It's making an offer and negotiating. If op's ex is happy to take less equity on the basis their children are adequately housed or for any other reason isn't that up to them?
think 50 50 would be fair as he's paying part mortgage and also presume paying to live else where.
I too would offer return of deposits and then 20:80 split
How would leave you both? How old are DC now? Would you each be able to house any under age DC?
Thanks @Jon65 I agree, all about negotiating as lots of factors to consider.
@FinallyHere The bigger % of equity I receive the more likely I can buy somewhere else. DC both below 10 years old & they are with me majority of time.
Again ex is earning 5 x more than me and could get another big mortgage himself. I work part-time around caring for DC so will not be able to get a big mortgage alone. This equity calculation makes a big difference to what I can afford in the future (if I can afford anything at all. House prices high where I live).
It is trying it on, as there is no legal basis upon which OP can force the ex to gift a share of the property. The best that can happen, in law, is that some of the ex’s interest in the property is placed in trust for OP to use to house the children, reverting to the ex when the children have reached majority. It is proposed that the ex gives her £60k. Then pays full child maintenance.
What a strange opinion to have @Collaborate No-one is 'trying it on' If this went to court they would look at exactly where the mortgage contributions have come from plus all the other factors I've already mentioned.
No they wouldn't. That's the law. This thread is in Legal.
If he were to suggest he gets more than half because he's paid 20% of the mortgage since moving out how would you think about that? There is something called occupation rent, and a doctrine of equitable accounting, which would apply to post-separation contributions. There would be at least some basis in law for him claiming a little more than half. There is no basis on law for you to claim more than half. You might not like it, and some who have responded to your post (who I strongly suspect have no knowledge of the law) may say differently, but they're wrong.
Anyway, I've said what I have to say. Whether you believe me or not is neither here nor there. Hopefully others reading this thread don't look at the contrary advice you've received and believe that to be either informed or correct.
Collaborate's opinion is not "strange". Legally, he is, of course, spot on. The court would NOT look at the factors you mention.
For an unmarried couple jointly owned assets are split 50/50 unless it is clear this was not the intention of the parties. As you are joint tenants you clearly own the house equally. If you had been married you would be entitled to a fair share and some of the factors you mention would come into play. As you were not married, he is entitled to 50%. If this goes to court that is what he will get. And, as Collaborate indicates, he may even be able to get a little more than 50%.
You can delay things as Collaborate suggests. But that really is the best you can do.
Join the discussion
Please login first.