Ex pissed off im changing childcare arrangements. AIBU?

But the only reason he doesn't pay maintenance is because the house was split 50/50 - that was their agreement.

What PP said is that her ex inherited a house which he sold, and with the proceeds, bought a family home with her on the deeds. It sounds like there was no mortgage to pay?

Inheritance is a red herring in divorce cases. They had a long marriage and it paid for the joint family home, so it might be seen indeed as a joint asset. However, the date it was bought vs date of separation could influence the outcome.

A short time between the purchase of the house and separation could very well see a judge decide that it was money intended for him, and it isn't being used as a family home. He did the right thing by staying there. Of OP only lived there a short time, it might not be as straight forward as she thinks. And that's without taking her potential pension into consideration.

The accusation of lack of morals isn't warranted? She cheated. I'd say the accusation was very warranted.

I didn’t say she had. I said it takes an average of five years to pluck up the courage to leave - longer if you’ve been in an abusive relationship. I didn’t say the OP had been abused.

Why do people keep incorrectly saying this?

If the arrangement mutually agreed that his time started when she dropped the child off after work, then the Friday until the agreed drop off time is her time, not his. She wasn't "doing him a favour", she was looking after her child on her mutually agreed time.

She wants to change the arrangement to suit her. He doesn't have to change his plans or agree to take the children during the time that is currently hers.

OP should not have taken on a job over her hours without having sorted out her childcare first.

Will have to disagree sorry.

Maintenance yes of course. Half equity no if the bulk came from his inheritance relatively recently. The fact that he was/is a low earner could actually work against her.

The inheritance didn’t wholly finance their house. Both were named on the deeds and OP paid the mortgage. Of course she was entitled to 50% - the house is a joint marital asset.if her ex wanted to protect his inheritance he should have kept it separate to joint finances.

OP says her DH was a low earner and she carried much more of the financial responsibility because he was more interested in job satisfaction than paying the bills. OP also says that the inherited house didn’t pay entirely for their joint marital home - the deeds are in joint name and she pays the mortgage. Inheritance has no protection unless it’s kept completely separate to joint finances and assets, and in the sole name of the person inheriting. OP has 90% of the custody of their children and he’s paid no maintenance. I don’t thik 50/50 is unreasonable.

The inheritance didn’t fully pay for the marital home. OP has already clarified that deeds and the mortgage were in joint names.

I've read the updates. I can't see specific figures?

All I can see is that it came out of his inheritance only a few years ago. So I think it's completely unreasonable to expect 50/50. Maintenance is a different issue.

Can the 19 year old pick up and care for the 6 year old for those couple of hours?

The inheritance was used for the purchase of the marital home, which is a joint marital asset. Inheritance is not exempted unless it’s kept in the sole name of the person inheriting, and totally separate from any joint finances. Read the updates. OP has carried the majority of the financial burden for years. Why should she be expected not to benefit, given that she has 90% of the responsibility for the children.

Why is OP not entitled to her share of the proceeds from the house ? She contributed to the mortgage and is on the deeds. And if you read her updates it sounds as though she’s carried the lions share of the financial load for years.

How exactly is it ‘his house’ proceedings ?

It wasn’t half of his inherited house. It was half of the joint marital property that the proceeds of the sale of the inherited house contributed to, and to which OP also contributed and was on the deeds and mortgage for.

But she wasn't doing him a favour. The arrangement was that he was responsible for the children after 6pm (or whatever time it is he finishes work). If they were waking up at his on the Friday morning and then she was picking them up it would be different. But they aren't. They are her responsibility until hand over time, which is after he finishes work.

Perhaps it isn’t “his day”. Perhaps it’s visitation starting at 5:30 on Fridays to whenever on Sundays?

No. She was doing him a big favour, picking up his child on his day to help him out. She doesn't have to continue doing it because he won't pick up his own child on his own day.

You can dress it up however you want. You had an agreement with him. You want to change it. The decent thing to do is to ask him and accept his answer. You are no longer married and don't have the right to use his time to suit you. He has full autonomy over his working hours, they are none of your business. If you change something it is up to you to sort out any difficulties that arise due to that change.
If you are unhappy with the current arrangement then you need to go to court for a CAO. But again, he doesn't have to agree to something just to make your life easier. He doesn't have to facilitate your working hours.

It sounds like you need to discuss changing contact but if it’s going to impact his income and he gave you a lump sum based on the arrangement you had it will likely need some getting used to.

You had an affair and now live with the other woman

you want him to give you half his inherited house instead of maintenance (which as he’s a low earner wouldn’t be much). That’s massively beneficial to you

you unilaterally want to change arrangements that will benefit you and be an inconvenience to him

if you were a man you’d be slaughtered on here.

Could you change that to free up some leave to use for Friday afternoons? Are there any holiday clubs around (check near work, not just near home)? Or a week staying at the grandparents? Or at home with older sibling (if old enough/not working)?

That first point you made stood out like a sore thumb to me. If he's a low earner, he wouldn't have given her much in child maintenance anyway but she found a way to rip off the bandage even harsher after the whole cheating fiasco by saying "give me 50% of your house proceedings and you never have to give childcare again". Sorry OP, i know the affair wasn't what you came here for but i can't help but feel for the guy. Anyway, in regards to childcare, discuss it and come up with a solution that works for both of you. These are both your children afterall and since he's self employed, he's more flexible. If, God forbid, something were to happen to you, would he not have to do it all alone? So, he shouldn't be complaining right now

Whatever you think abut it you can't make him do Friday afternoons.

You can go to court, you can refuse the job, you can ask yur employer for alternative hours or you can ask your partner or older child to help.

But you can't make him do Friday afternoons.

It looks like the thread has swerved to maintenance and the house - which is not up for debate.

OP, I agree your ex should pick up the kids on his days, but realistically, you can't rely on him (and it sounds like you never did before now).

Is your 19-year-old still at home? Could you pay them to do pick-up?