What is a fair house split after divorce and years apart?

It's only pension accrued during marriage that counts as a marital asset. It sounds like OP has been divorced for some time.

But nevertheless, there is still a case for OP to be entitled to some sort of pension sharing or offsetting based on pension assets built up when they were married.

His pension is likely to be a lot. As it’s defined benefit, you’d need to find out the cash equivalent transfer value and throw that amount into the pot. If he’s worked for the LA for 40 years (even at a lower grade) this will be circa £500K-£600k equivalent value at state retirement age (probably more). It’s really important this is considered in any negotiations, particularly as you’ve raised the kids and worked part time.

@caringcarer I think they need to go to a mediator because it’s not straightforward. The op resists this and a court order so it’s all a moot point - none of it will be a legal agreement with professional oversight.

@CrumbocalypseNow did you say if he has continued to pay towards upkeep of the house and mortgage?

It is but it was 15 years ago so there would be far less in there then plus OP managed to get 60 percent so her exh is only getting 40 percent.

@caringcarerThey cannot agree on a current or former valuation. Current is obviously the way to go. An endowment might be very low compensation for not splitting a pension!

I think you should stick to agreement made all those years ago that when house is sold it will be split 60/40. That would be at current valuation. Even though you paid mortgage he had to pay rent to enable you to live in house which was probably nicer for you than for him. He's had to wait many years for his share of equity. I think current value reflects the long time he's had to wait for his share as he was renting he was not able to build equity. You waived your right to pension share presumably because you got endowment policy of £10k.

If he is insisting on current valuation, then his pension and all other assets must go into the pot. He can’t have it both ways.

that’s what I was thinking. In future years the house may go up in value again.

My nana did this with her 3rd husband but they were separated and owned a business together too and had 2 houses side by side. When she got to 70 she wanted to close the business and divorce and sell the properties but they lived as a separated couple for at least 20 years. Quite amicably. I have no idea why they didn’t divorce sooner, she did have a new partner who lived with her and he had a girlfriend (didn’t live with him). He wasn’t very good at looking after himself though, she (my nana) cooked for him.

I would have thought the 60/40 split in your favour was based on current value when sold and that the extra 20% was to compensate for the loss of pension.

It sounds like he hasn’t been in a position to buy with his equity being tied up and has been renting and as a result won’t have otherwise benefited from the rise in house prices.

@3luckystars If a financial order is not signed off by the court, it’s not legally binding. If someone makes many millions and the ex is living in poverty with dc, then there can be a claim on the big earner.

Was his pension back then equivalent to 10% of the house value? If so then you could suggest either you take value of the house from then as well OR you take current valuations but revisit the pension split as well when determining what is fair. You could also factor in mortgage payments/rent payments that way as well.

this is an eye opener.

@millymollymoomoo Well they have differing views and it’s clearly not straightforward. Often getting someone to talk you through the options is better as it can lead to a quicker resolution. I always think assistance when people are not agreeing but seek fairness is the best way. I don’t see the solicitor as necessary but talking to a mediator is beneficial.

There are cases where courts won’t entertain huge changes from an original agreement on finance but here, recollections differ. Plus I assume no vast sums have been accumulated. However each party needs to move on financially and not live in a house partly owned by the ex. What they should do to even up the finances does need discussion with a person who has professional experience.

The pensions up to when they split would be a matrimonial asset. After that it would probably be non-mat asset but the court can still invade those if there is a need for a fair settlement. equalising retirement income is much more in judges minds now than it was 20 years ago. But after 20 years or especially once op was working and contributing to own pension it’s likely he would keep that. My post separation pension wasn’t touched although ex tried to get it included - he had his own pension but earned less and contributed less - largely his choice as I had main care dc
My guess if he is a modest earner is the difference between their 60:40 no pension but £10k endowment to OP original agreement - and a 50:50 with his pension included - may have roughly the same outcome. OP can ask him to provide the breakdown from his online pension account which is the missing info.

@MeetMeOnTheCorner im not saying it might not be beneficial. I’m stating op doesn’t HAVE to have mediation, they also do t HAVE to use solicitors or go to court.

as they are amicable they SHOULD be able to diy it.

but that of course means perhaps they both need to compromise. If they cannot do so to reach agreement then a more formal route Might be necessary

This is the problem. Unless you have a clearly detailed legal statement then a spouse can come after you years later. I recall my solicitor saying this.

@LittleGreenDragons It is difficult as the op won’t read about the legal position and other posters say diy is ok. There’s not much point in continuing in the face of such poor advice and a poorly informed and rather deluded op.

So it's 60% of 280k plus 100% of 100k = 338k (obviously I'd need to buy a flat with this so a small retirement flat plus a bit for my pension)
or 60% of 380k = 228k

60% of 280k is 168k, plus 100% of 100k = 268k

It is only a 40k difference you are talking about.

I'm out. You are confusing too many legal things and just not understanding that you need a courts approval of your asset split for it to be legally binding.

You can agree all you want but in the end it still needs a judge to sign it off. You are just muddying the waters even more.

My immediate reaction is that you cannot use the value from 20 years ago, as that is completely unfair. You were able to remain in the house and that’s the only solution that was available at the time.

However this pension thing has me thinking that, can you really come after someone’s pension after being divorced 20 years? I thought once the divorce went through then it was final.

was there nothing at all written up at the time regarding finances ?

A lot of people have mentioned that you had the benefit of living in the house for the last 20 years. But it was also housing his kids, which was his responsibility too, as he didn’t want them living with him.

He had them 2 days a month, and paid a pittance in child support. Your family provided the free childcare.

This should be counted as housing the children, not as a benefit to you.

It certainly would be best to keep this amicable, but the compromise has to come from both sides, not just you.

@millymollymoomoo It’s a better route to have mediation because they cannot agree! Plus the draft order should be fair and that’s what mediation will assist with. It’s a better idea for the Op who doesn’t even think she needs a court order! They need professional assistance.