Advertisement

loader

Talk

Advanced search

I just think it's so blinkin' unfair

(26 Posts)
Carla Tue 21-Jun-05 14:14:24

That if H and I split up I'll have to sell my home and buy him a place. Rant over. Sorry.

lunavix Tue 21-Jun-05 14:16:17

I agree.

{{{hugs}}}

Caligula Tue 21-Jun-05 14:19:39

Why will you have to?

Carla Tue 21-Jun-05 14:23:55

To provide him with a home where dds can go and see him.

SoupDragon Tue 21-Jun-05 14:24:28

um... but wouldn't it work the other way round too in different circumstances?

Caligula Tue 21-Jun-05 14:26:48

Why can't he provide his own home? Is he a SAHD?

handlemecarefully Tue 21-Jun-05 14:26:55

Fair point ?

Twiglett Tue 21-Jun-05 14:27:33

why is that unfair? why should he be unhomed?

that is the nature of marriage

Caligula Tue 21-Jun-05 14:27:44

What are the circumstances (sorry, I remember you posting about problems with him, but cant remember the details)?

Carla Tue 21-Jun-05 14:28:52

Soupy, do you mean if he got custordy? I'd still have to buy a place to accommodate them all.

sparklymieow Tue 21-Jun-05 14:34:40

But if he was having the house you would want him to sell it so you could have a house too, wouldn't you??

beetroot Tue 21-Jun-05 14:37:23

Message withdrawn

NomDePlume Tue 21-Jun-05 14:40:52

Sorry Carla, but that's the name of the game. If you own a house and then marry, it becomes a joint asset (so I understand), regardless of who it belonged to in the first place. You will have to sell the house unless you can afford to buy him out of his half.

NomDePlume Tue 21-Jun-05 14:42:36

SD means that if the shoe was on the other foot and your DH was the major breadwinner with assets, then they would have to be divided on divorce too. It's nothing personal, it's just the way the law works.

Carla Tue 21-Jun-05 14:43:33

The house is mine and was before we married.

Caligula Tue 21-Jun-05 14:44:33

But is he working in the cash economy? Does he have independent mortgage potential? Are you assuming he will have care and control of the kids?

Carla Tue 21-Jun-05 14:44:37

I know you're right, NDP, but it still strikes me as unfair.

Carla Tue 21-Jun-05 14:45:44

Caligula, he's just short of 70, so doesn't have to work at all. Although he is.

NomDePlume Tue 21-Jun-05 14:48:20

Carla, I suppose it is unfair, to a fashion, that property you owned pre-relationship should have to be divided upon breakdown. I know I'd be riled if i was in that situation, but unless you set up a water-tight document pre-marriage which stated that H would be unable to stake any claim on your pre-marital asset (ie the house), then I fear you have no choice.

Carla Tue 21-Jun-05 14:52:29

NDP, I do think it's time someone changed those archaic laws.

Caligula Tue 21-Jun-05 16:50:52

But for someone to change the archaic laws, they would have to change the whole archaic institution of marriage.

Twiglett Tue 21-Jun-05 16:52:29

I thought pre-nuptial agreements were not binding in the UK?

handlemecarefully Tue 21-Jun-05 22:06:30

I think the law is 'right' if looked at objectively, but I do sympathise with your situation Carla given that it was your house before the marraige. It's rough....

Pixiefish Tue 21-Jun-05 22:16:00

When dh and I were going through a rough patch his solicitor told him that he'd only have to give me half the equity of the time we'd been married IYSWIM.

Caligula Tue 21-Jun-05 22:46:25

Really Pixiefish? That's one bejasus solicitor, give me his number. In fact, give Carla his number.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now