Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that upon divorce everything is shared?

30 replies

QueenofmyPrinces · 05/10/2018 18:34

My cousin has been spending a few days with me because she walked away from her home/husband to get some breathing space but she has said their marriage is over.

The house they live in was originally hers and she lived in it for 3 years before she even met her now DH. Her now DH moved in with her about two years into the relationship and they were married two years after that.

She has told me that she is going to make him leave and then change the locks because it’s ‘her’ house and she doesn’t want him letting himself in. I said I didn’t think she could do that as legally it’s his house too but she was adamant that as it was hers before they met then it’s still only hers. I said that I thought regardless of the fact she lived there before she even met her DH, now that they’re married then he’s entitled to half of the value etc but she said I was wrong.

She also said that if she died (whilst married) then he wouldn’t get the house then either because it was hers first and his name isn’t on the mortgage or the deeds. She was saying this to strengthen her argument that her DH has no claims to their home.

I told her I was sure she was wrong and that she needs to investigate things properly so she knows where she stands but she was very dismissive of me.

AIBU to have said this to her because she’s adamant she’s right?

OP posts:
Now100 · 05/10/2018 18:50

It depends on what they each contributed and how long the marriage was. For a long marriage 50% each is the starting point.

Original poster
QueenofmyPrinces · 05/10/2018 19:03

They’ve been married just over 18 months.

He’s been there about 3.5 years: the first two years as just her partner and then the next 18 months as her husband.

OP posts:
HannahnotAgnes · 05/10/2018 19:22

To be honest, I would hope she's correct - such a short marriage & house clearly hers alone to begin with that it seems very unfair if he's entitled to half of it now.

Hope she gets proper legal advice.

MacosieAsunter · 05/10/2018 19:23

She also said that if she died (whilst married) then he wouldn’t get the house then either because it was hers first and his name isn’t on the mortgage or the deeds. She was saying this to strengthen her argument that her DH has no claims to their home.

^^ incorrect - if she died without a will, he would be NOK and inherit.

FrancisCrawford · 05/10/2018 19:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Fragolino · 05/10/2018 19:28

Interesting.

What does the law consider to be a long marriage!

huggybear · 05/10/2018 19:29

I think she's being selfish. What's the reason for breakdown after only 18 months?

greendale17 · 05/10/2018 19:29

If she dies without a will her husband will get everything

YeTalkShiteHen · 05/10/2018 19:31

I’d be trying to hold on to my house in that situation too!

Ex-SIL married my brother, left after 2 years and tried to claim £100k!!! (Brother is skint, parents aren’t)

I asked her if she thought she was Heather fucking Mills and told her to fuck off.

Ellisandra · 05/10/2018 19:31

The time to think about this was before she effectively gave away a chunk of her asset to a man she no longer likes.

I actually think that the marriage licence fee should be increased by £100 and used to fund every couple being given a fact sheet read out loud by an advisor, with huge “if any of this makes you concerned, you need a solicitor before you need a registrar”.

She can’t just change the locks - he can register home rights protection. She needs to talk to a solicitor now to do things correctly and hopefully avoid having to give him too much.

Of course, he may be ethically entitled to some anyway - there are no details here.

Original poster
QueenofmyPrinces · 05/10/2018 19:32

francis - I genuinely thought that it was legally his house too since they are now married. I thought everything because a joint possession, joint savings etc once a couple were married?

huggybear - there’s an OW

OP posts:
Racecardriver · 05/10/2018 19:34

Given the length of the marriage its unlikely. If it was a longer marriage then yes he would be entitled to a share but because they've barely been married he will have to prove that he has paid into the house and therefore has an equitable interest by virtue of that but his interest would be small.

huggybear · 05/10/2018 19:35

Ah in that case I take it back, take him to the cleaners.

EcoCalc · 05/10/2018 19:36

You don’t sound very supportive, rather than argue with her maybe just listen and tell her to see a solicitor. He has an equitable interest but that doesn’t necessarily equate to 50/50 ownership at law, especially after a short marriage. In my jurisdiction you have to be married for at least 2 years before you can even get divorced so this is definitely not a long marriage

ExFury · 05/10/2018 19:36

Divorce depends on the court tbh. A lot of the time in a short marriage they just put people back to the position they were in before, but it’s not automatic, especially if he’s been contributing financially.

If she died without a will then he’d inherit the bulk of her estate - and that’s the case until they are actually divorced. Even with a will he could have claimed if she hadn’t made provision for him.

MikeUniformMike · 05/10/2018 19:37

She should consult someone qualified to give legal advice.

Original poster
QueenofmyPrinces · 05/10/2018 19:39

I hope to God she gets to keep the house. He had nothing before he met my cousin and the thought of him now being entitled to some of the house is quite hard to stomach.

OP posts:
Sethis · 05/10/2018 19:40

Pretty sure if you have had a house in your sole name for 7 years, he doesn't appear on the paperwork, and you've only been married 18 months before filing for divorce due to adultery on his part no judge in the history of the legal profession would sign half of it over to him.

However this is the kind of stupid bullshit that sometimes happens, so I would strongly advise professional legal advice.

ClashCityRocker · 05/10/2018 19:41

My understanding (which may be incorrect) was that for marriages of less than two years they wouldn't start at the presumption of 50:50 and would in effect try to restore each member of the couple to the position they were in when they got married.

(disclaimer: this is based on conversations with a friend who had a short marriage... Actually, I think she walked away with around 30k, which was far less than fifty fifty (he owned two properties including the marital home) but far more than she entered the marriage in....)

Jasperoonicle · 05/10/2018 19:41

Is his name on the deeds of the property or even on the mortgage?

ClashCityRocker · 05/10/2018 19:42

But yes, she needs to see a solicitor.

Original poster
QueenofmyPrinces · 05/10/2018 19:57

Is his name on the deeds of the property or even on the mortgage?

No, she told me everything is in her name hence why he’s got no rights to live in it.

OP posts:
LaPufalina · 05/10/2018 20:25

Fragolino DH's best mate is a solicitor and said five years, so did the solicitor that did our wills and deed of trust (we bought our house before we married and I paid the deposit from my flat sale proceeds so that was protected before marriage).

Original poster
QueenofmyPrinces · 05/10/2018 20:28

I’m starting to panic about my own situation now as I’m not on the feeds/mortgage because it was originally my DH’s house and I simply moved in with him.

OP posts:
FrancisCrawford · 05/10/2018 22:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swipe left for the next trending thread