Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

AIBU sorting out mortgage with ex

48 replies

sitdownabcheck · 26/05/2015 14:10

i split from my ex last year after a 12 year relationship, we have 2 young children. i am remaining in the house and the divorce is going through due to unreasonable behavior on his part. We are in the process of trying to arrange a consent order and we both want certain terms writing up in this. he has agreed to child maintenance and to pay half the mortgage until either the children are 18 or i am ready to buy him out or sell up however my question is if i meet a new boyfriend how will this work? we have had hypothetical discussions on if i meet someone but how much say would he have on my new partner visiting the house/sleeping over ?? i have the children with me permanently as he doesnt really show an interest (although i do try to encourage him seeing them) so the only way i could establish a relationship is having somebody come to my house. ultimately i would love to buy him out but this isnt an option and i would not want to rush a relationship to moving in point if the relationship isnt ready.

understand that this is hypothetical im just wondering what my rights are, i hope ive explained myself properly.

Thanks

OP posts:

NameChange30 · 27/05/2015 10:10

FWIW I think the ex is being controlling by trying to dicate whether or not a new partner can stay over, and making financial support depend on that. If the new partner was moving in, yes financial arrangements should change, but until that point, the OP should be able to invite whoever she wants, it's her house FFS. As PP said the ex is paying to support his children. They will still need a house to live in, whether their mother has a new boyfriend or not.

NameChange30 · 27/05/2015 10:12

What's the unreasonable behaviour OP? Do you might telling us?

FlabulousChix · 27/05/2015 11:52

It isn't her house is it its half his. If she wants to live a new life and have boyfriends then sorry she has to support herself. What's to say the new bf won't stay 7 nights a week but not officially move in! Nothing.

Original poster

sitdownabcheck · 27/05/2015 11:59

For a start it's hypothetical and in trying to establish what I can and can't do.

OP posts:

Original poster

sitdownabcheck · 27/05/2015 12:04

Sent too soon sorry. Well he cheated twice but I stayed with him too long after to use that as my reason and he was showing no love attention or care for my self or the children choosing to spend money selfishly, I walked on egg shells the entire relationship and he showed no respect for my family. There is far more to it but it doesn't really have anything to do with my aibu

OP posts:

NeedsAsockamnesty · 27/05/2015 12:06

Anybody can have houseguests he is being pathetic

Original poster

sitdownabcheck · 27/05/2015 12:17

if someone was staying 7 nights they would be living with me and i would be looking at selling the house as previously mentioned...

OP posts:

Newbrummie · 27/05/2015 13:00

How do put a charge on the house ? I'm in the opposite position my martial home which was bought whilst we were married and I've paid the mortgage on and improved is in my ex's name and he's being a complete tit about it

BoneyBackJefferson · 27/05/2015 14:33

Newbrummie
"How do put a charge on the house?"

Paying rent?

Newbrummie · 27/05/2015 14:36

I'm sorry what do you mean ?

BoneyBackJefferson · 27/05/2015 17:24

charging someone to live in the house would be making them pay rent.

Newbrummie · 27/05/2015 17:44

That's not the same thing as putting a charge on a house.

Cabrinha · 27/05/2015 18:05

You can't unilaterally put a charge in a house.
I was on the mortgage and deeds of my FMH and paid 50% of the deposit /mortgage /bills.

I had the solicitor draw up the charge, which specifies the % (or absolute £) of value owed, and aby trigger points for payment.

For example, cohabitation is usually recommended but I left it off. I did add a date, and a clause that if I'm made redundant, it has to be paid at that earlier date.

The charge is the same as a mortgagor's charge - although it's secondary to theirs.

It had to be signed by my XH and his solicitor had to register my charge with Land Registry.

It is mentioned in my Consent Order, but it's a separate legal action.

There is a way of registering that you have an interest in a property - have you looked into that? It can stop your ex selling it from under you during negotiations!

LotusLight · 27/05/2015 18:13

It is very very common where there is not enough capital for a clean break, on divorce to have a mesher order (charge on the house). It is almost standard where there is not enough money to sell up and split the proceeds and one spouse earns nothing and looks after the children and the other does. In that situation the house is not sold until the youngest child is 18 or until the ex cohabits or remarries.

www.rainscourt.com/what-is-a-mesher-order/ This article on them says the trigger is often cohabitation or remarriage.

I suppose the idea is if you move a man in he will have a salary and all costs will be halved.

Newbrummie · 27/05/2015 18:20

I'm banging my head against a brick wall with stbex .... He won't sign a deed of trust so I doubt he'll sign a charge either .... Can a charge be a % or does it have to be a specific amount ?
Thanks and sorry for the high Jack op

Andrewofgg · 27/05/2015 18:23

It's one thing to say that a male NRP must house his dependent children, and their mother, while they are dependent, even if that means he cannot buy a home for himself; indeed he must.

It's quite another to expect him to house some random stranger. If a man moves in, with or without marriage, he should pay half the mortgage. It's a matter of financial morality - not sexual morality.

LotusLight · 27/05/2015 18:26

NB, I've not read your posts above so not sure what your situation is but if you and he agree then yes it can be whatever you both agree. I think the traditional mesher order tends to be on sale of house when youngest child is 18 proceeds divided 50/50 or 60/40 or whatever. The problem with just a fixed sum is that if house prices go up 10x in the period and the ex spouse just gets what is currently 50% they would then get virtually nothing so most would want a percentage.

In general most people find a clean break is psychologically better with just child support paid to the one who houses the children (or not in my case as I earn too much to get anything but that's another story)

Newbrummie · 27/05/2015 18:33

I completely agree I would much prefer a clean break and given he is so unreliable with regards to child support I feel 100% of the house - which he'd previously agreed to is very reasonable - especially given he's in Australia too.
Anyway thank you

RedToothBrush · 27/05/2015 18:41

Have you considered the implications if your ex was to get into money problems and get a poor credit score. If his name is still on the mortgage you will also have your credit score affected which could affect you if you ever did move or met someone else and wanted to buy a house with them.

For this reason it might well be better to have his name removed from the mortgage as soon as you can for this reason (although I do understand reasons why that might not be possible straight away in practice).

It doesn't mean he shouldn't contribute to the mortgage. It also means he can not control you by setting our his 'terms' for any future partners you met. The fact he is doing this, does suggest that whilst things are amicable now, there is a lot of potential for things to become a lot more bitter in the future.

Again another reason why being tied up in a mortgage with him could be an issue.

Andrewofgg · 27/05/2015 18:49

In Australia? That makes a big difference. If he was here you could not bargain more capital against no CM because you could not deliver your side of the bargain. As it is it may be - it depends on whether you could enforce any CM award, which would have to be through the courts, out there.

LotusLight I would regard advising a client to accept a fixed sum rather than a proportion as negligent. Who in their right mind would settle for that?

Newbrummie · 27/05/2015 18:58

I will be enforcing CM even with the capital as the bugger can't hold down a job I'm unlikely to see any with any regularity anyway I consider it a bit like a bonus if it happens .... I was going to exchange capital for not pursuing maintance for me given he's ruined my career

LotusLight · 27/05/2015 19:11

A, that is what I said. If you were the person being offered a fixed sum you'd not be likely to accept it but I were on the other side and the ex was not going to pay a penny of mortgage for the next 18 years and he had just put up say £5k of the current £10k equity in a house then saying he gets £5k back in 18 years' time might be justifiable.

BoneyBackJefferson · 27/05/2015 19:23

newbrummie

Apologies, I was still in the making the new partner pay for staying, not making them secure a debt.

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread