I want half in the divorce. Am I likely to get it.

You have been with your husband for 15 years but married for 6 years and have no children together. How long had your husband owned the flat before you moved in? How long were you living in the flat before you married? How long were you living in the flat after you married?

Did you contribute towards the mortgage or pay your husband rent, whilst living in the flat? Did you contribute towards bills whilst living there? If so, can you prove it? Eg. Bank statements. If you financially contributed whilst living in the flat, it's possible you may be awarded some of the £200K but certainly not half and being awarded anything at all isn't guaranteed.

The savings your husband has is a martial asset, and in theory you might be awarded half. The fact you don't have savings isn't your husband's fault. By admission you admit you earn a decent salary and have chosen to spend rather than save.

However, if your husband is older than you, and closer to retirement, his earning potential will be significantly reduced. You are younger, have working years ahead of you and earn a decent salary, so your needed may be deemed lower.

Your are on the mortgage for your current home as it's jointly owned with your husband. You are liable for half the mortgage, and if your husband stopped paying his half, the full amount! Of course, you will have to pay your half of the mortgage and any rent you are now occuring. Assuming you did receive £475K for the property, it's only made £10K since it was purchased. You would receive half of the £10K. The property market at the moment is dreadful, nothing much is selling, unless it's priced to sell.

You need proper legal advice. You will be asked the questions by your solicitor, as I have asked. So make sure you take any evidence of money you contributed whilst living in the flat. My honest opinion is, you will need to lower your expectations considerably.

It’s a bit like the common law marriage myth

When I got divorced 5 years ago, it didn’t occur to me to include anything from prior to our living together.
neither did the mediator, or either of our solicitors, none of whom raised it.

I'm in a similar postion (although not married or spiltting up). I am the higher earner but Mr Monkey put down a £200k deposit for our flat and is 9 years older. We too have no children. We pay bills proportionate to our incomes nd have our own savings and pensions. I think you are being a massive dickhead.

This is nonsense. There is no “10 year rule” in law. Every case is fact-specific.

I was married for about the same time as OP. I put the house deposit down and as my solicitor and my exH's solicitor advised house deposits are normally returned to the person who put it in. My ex was advised he could take me to court but the outcome would likely be that my deposit was returned to me. I believe even loaned money from parents is now taken in to account.

Lots of women on MN have no idea how little protection you get in a marriage under 10yrs.

I don't know what the legal position would be. But morally if this is a person you loved how can you leave him in a position where he won't be able to get a proper home because his age means he won't be able to get much of a mortgage? If you take half of everything - which you didn't earn - he will be in a much poorer position than you. You have many years left to earn yourself a bigger place again, he doesn't. If it were me, especially given the circumstances are that you are leaving him, I would absolutely not be going for half. You made this decision, not him, along with the decision to never save. It isn't his fault you didn't plan for the future properly.

Well this really.

If you were paying towards the mortgage of the property that was used as a deposit, and you were paying towards it for a substantial amount of time, then yes, you should be entitled to a portion of that back.

You shouldn’t be entitled to his pension or his savings though.

Jesus, this is hard faced.

Yeah and i’d be worried about bad karma for doing something some morally wrong. Someone I know did something that many people judged her hugely on (and deservedly so) and she had nothing but terrible things happen to her since that day over 15yrs ago.

The morality police? No, people who have some ethics and integrity.

She asked on AIBU and we’ve got every right to respond.

There are so many women on here in dire circumstances who deserve all our sympathy and support. The OP isn’t one of them. I rarely slam people on MN. This one truly deserves it.

She likes nice things, thinks saving money is for saps. Hope she reaps what she sows.

‘I’ve spunked all my own money up the wall my whole life. I now find myself in my forties with no assets and I’m panicking. I want this bloke I was married to for a bit in my late thirties who has saved his whole life to give me half of his savings. Aibu?’
yes, of course you are. You’ve made your bed.

You sound like Violet Beauregarde.

No they are not.
You aren’t legally entitled to anything.
He can prove he had them BEFORE you. He can prove he paid half the mortgage. He is older than you so likewise his pension the bulk of it accumulated BEFORE he met you.

No Children.

The starting point is 50/50 as long as you are both equal contributors / you aren’t.

I would say 6 years you have little right to his pension and vice versa.

I would say this
let’s say your house is worth 500 K he put 200 K in and took out a joint mortgage for 200 K and it has risen 100 K.
let’s say the mortgage is now 100 K so there is 400 K in the house. As a judge I would divide it 200 K (his original back to him) 100 K each to both of you providing you have both equally paid for mortgage and bills.

If you have moved out and are paying 1/2 mortgage you should get the mortgage back but you have also proved to me the judge that you can afford to support yourself and pay half a mortgage whilst renting something ergo you have plenty to live on

You are single and have no kids. Were you renting before you met him? Yes - I would be looking to put you back in the same position. In your case given the amounts above eg equity in the house of 400 K I would give you half of the equity AFTER his money goes back to him. You don’t need to buy a house for your accommodation needs a one bedroom shared ownership flat would put you in a better position that the one you joined the marriage in.

seeking his 200K isn’t moral or ethical or normal.

If you had two children maybe but you need actually get out there and earning and stand on your own two feet. His career he got before you, his pension everything. It’s a relatively short marriage. If you come across unreasonable with the judge or court then you can say goodbye to any equity and might even end up paying costs.

be careful. You aren’t thinking reasonably.

In his position I would be saying I’m older I had a flat paid off and a decent pension before I met her. She moved into my flat and didn’t pay any rent and minimal bills (if any) she was saving on rent (she could of saved this and bought her own place whilst I was subsidising her life style but didn’t). I haven’t spent as much as her and am trying to save she is just spend spend spend her own money (and marital money) and now wants half of my savings too - this is my money I earnt it. I want to retire next year or have emergency money if I am unwell etc she has no assets the half of the mortgage she paid was less than the rent she should of been paying so she saved money. Since she left I have been paying all bills etc and saving to pay these legal costs as a divorce and going without holidays etc

I did know a woman who married a wealthy guy (had his own house) she persuaded him to buy a house with a pool he worked every hour to pay the mortgage on the new place. 5 years later she wanted a divorce. He got his original money back and 75% of equity in the new one as he could prove she hadn’t paid for refurbishments etc, she hadn’t paid for cleaners etc she had been on nice holidays etc with her income and upped her lifestyle. She like you was like I pay half the mortgage judge wasn’t having it.

Married doesn’t mean 50/50 that is the starting point but then that changes according to who put in what and contribution after marriage.

My DH put in far more than me into this house. He has retired now and I’m still earning. If we ever split up I would ensure he got his money back out of this house. Every penny we have is joint. But actually he is entitled to it. I couldn’t take his money.

OP can work. Why does she need to take whats not morally hers to set herself up for life? I’m not claiming a victory, just saying if someone has pre-marital assets then morally they should stay with that person. OP’s ex was naive not to protect his 200k and now he could face losing half. Wrong in my book.

Why is this a thread full of terrible advice for women. Sex is irrelevant here. No one has given up a career, and in this case the woman is the higher earner. The man sounds like the one being treated unfairly here.

Have you met someone else?

You do realise it can take months to divorce and he can refuse or drag it out.

You earn more than him, are younger than him so have more potential for earning, you haven't sacrificed your career to raise children but you want to take half of what you didn't earn? If I've got that right, you're greedy.

Christ was he stupid, he should never have married.

@Divorcein40swoman And so does he with less capacity to do so. The courts take this into account. Both sets of needs are taken into account.

Marital assets aren't 50:50. It's according to need. You earn more and are younger so you can raise a higher mortgage. He will get more.

Fuck me, this is one of the grabbiest threads I've read. He's been sensible with savings whilst you've merrily spent living in the moment and you want half?

I hope he shells out for an amazing solicitor!

This kind of stuff is what can give women a bad name in divorces where there nobody has been at fault and there are no children.

It sounds like your had a good marriage - why do you want to effectively steal from this man? He acquired his flat before he married you. Presumably you had no property asset at that point and were only able to buy one because of the £200k of his that he contributed to your joint purchase. If he was ONLY able to acquire the £200k and his savings because of you (eg if he saved whilst you didn't earn because you were off raising children, for example, or it you sacrificed your career for his, enabling him to save in the belief that this saving would be joint and benefit both of you) perhaps there would be an argument for a more even split but it doesn't sound as though this is the case.

Your marriage to him isn't your ticket to be able to purchase somewhere to live. Why should the he lose out so that you can gain? I hope your solicitor tells you to expect that he will have his contribution returned and the equity split equally. I also suspect you won't be able to go after his pension. You're not supporting joint dependents, which is where things can get messier.

Another thread full of terrible financial advice for women.

Once you get married, joints, particuarly those acquired during the marriage, which the house was, become joint. If you don't want them to become marital assets, don't acquire them during the marriage or don't get married.

The house will be deemed a marital asset, though you won't necessarily get 50:50. The savings are definitely a marital asset. The concept of pensions were set up with beneficiaries assumed.

Same, you’ll easily spend £20-£30k each if you fight this out.
if you had kids it would be different but as you’re younger you have longer earning potential and it was a relatively short marriage.
how much equity is in the house?