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 I’m not being unreasonable (divorce)

207 replies

BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 00:11

We are divorcing. Kids are pre teens, some mild disabilities.
My pension pot is 400
His pension pot is 725
Cash/shares 40
I’m SAHM, no income
He earns 85k
House equity 500
Mortgage -50

I want to keep the house, with no mortgage,
Not so bothered about anything else. Is that fair?

He wants to sell the house to release the equity and us both buy somewhere each, mine outright, and him using his as a deposit and then remortgaging. He wants the kids 50:50 so no child maintenance and also wants a clean break. We are both 50.

I think he’s not being fair. AIBU?

OP posts:
CaffeineInfusion · 06/10/2020 00:55

You need professional advice.

What does your solicitor say?

MJMG2015 · 06/10/2020 01:06

I presume you gave up work to bring up the kids & enable him to climb the ladder?

If that's the case then no it's not fair.

What does he propose to do with the kids when he's working?

I can see 50:50 turning into EOW very bloody quickly. Especially if they're isolating, bubble bursts, holidays

What does he think you're going to live off? Fresh bloody air?

Hamm87 · 06/10/2020 01:14

Sorry but everything should be a 50 / 50 split so no i dont think its fair for you to keep a half a million quid house and he has to start from scratch again

Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 01:16

I gave up work due to an accident just before I had the kids, so I’ve never worked since.

I have a solicitor and I’m due to see him soon, we have been waiting for pension gigs and we just got them.

OP posts:
Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 01:17

Hamm87 his pension pot is nearly double mine though and he has more earning capacity

OP posts:
Hamm87 · 06/10/2020 01:23

yes so 50 50 both pensions add together and split

Babyroobs · 06/10/2020 01:27

I think his suggestion is far more realistic. If the kids are going to be with him 50% of the time he needs to buy a decent sized house.

Leaannb · 06/10/2020 01:29

@BettyBroderick

Hamm87 his pension pot is nearly double mine though and he has more earning capacity
YABU...Extremely.
user1473878824 · 06/10/2020 01:31

Sorry but I think you’re being hugely unreasonable. You don’t just magically get the house. You’re not being left with nothing unlike a lot of people.

Babyroobs · 06/10/2020 01:31

Whatever you do you need to make sure you come out of the divorce with a mortgage free house unless you are planning to work because you are not going to be able to get a mortgage by yourself and if you are planning to claim benefits to live off you cannot do this with over 16k of equity/ savings.

RoseMartha · 06/10/2020 01:32

Would you be able to afford to run the house? I imagine a 500k house costs quite a bit to run.

Recently divorced myself. In your circumstance I would probably go for selling with asking for a bigger cut of the equity.

Is he really on board with 50:50 with your children or is that to avoid maintenence? If he is a high earner does he work long hours? Is 50:50 best for your kids with their SN?

I have SN kids myself and 50:50 would not have met their needs. They currently live with me all the time and only see their dad during the day at a weekend or school holiday.

You need to think what is best for them.

I would get legal advice before deciding or agreeing anything. You can get a free 30 min initial appointment at a solicitors.

planningaheadtoday · 06/10/2020 01:39

The family court is very likely to recommend the house is sold and equally divided as there is so much equity in it. There will be an adjustment for pensions in this calculation.

His earning potential isn't a major factor, although if there is a valid reason why you can't work then he may be asked to pay a small amount of spousal maintenance for a very short time to get you on your feet, this is rare though. After this you are expected to work if you are able.

The family court will look at what can be done fairly with the assets you both have to benefit your children. The welfare of the children comes first.

Sadly women don't normally come out of divorce well provided for. But luckily you have enough equity to both set up home in some form again.

Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 01:40

The 50:50 is because he doesn’t want to pay maintenance and I also think that the kids wouldn’t cope with that sort of set up, they need continuity, not on/off. Personally I think we would end up at something approaching EOW ish.

OP posts:
Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 01:44

I was thinking that if the total pot is pushing £1.7m, my getting the house and keeping my pension and remaining the main carer for the kids, puts me at just over half the pot, with less earning capacity.

OP posts:
seayork2020 · 06/10/2020 01:45

What you want and what you will get could be very different things, the first thing you want actually should need it actual legal advice, a forum could debate all day about what they think is 'fair' but not does make it so.

But if you are asking generally then I think the house should sold and then the court works out what is fair with everything else to see who should get what.

Or you buy him out to keep the house (and before anyone says 'read the thread' I have)

Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 01:53

He would rather we didn’t go to court. I’m trying to get an idea of what is reasonable before we start negotiating. I didn’t think I was being difficult, I just want things to stay the same for the children.

OP posts:
Evilwasps · 06/10/2020 01:55

I agree with Hamm. The starting point is 50/50, so 400+725+40+450=1615÷2=807.50 in an equal split.

You want to keep your pension (400) plus the house equity (450) and have him pay off the mortgage balance (50). So you want 900.
You think he should keep his pension (725) and the shares (40) and give you 50 to pay off the mortgage. So he would get 715.
So that isn't 'fair' in an equal split.

It doesn't take into account that pension funds are not accessible until retirement, nor are shares 'cash', so how would he fund a deposit for a new home? However, it also doesn't take into account that you don't work, and are unlikely to be able to do so (I assume) due to your accident, so you cannot fund a new home without a share of the equity. Bear in mind that not working doesn't automatically entitle you to more, despite what you read on here.

As you plan to split childcare equally, I think he is right, but that you should get a greater share of the equity because he can raise a mortgage and you can't. That way you can both own a home that will adequately accommodate your children.
You can then decide how, or whether to split the pensions and shares.

The only person who can really advise you is your solicitor though. Good luck!

seayork2020 · 06/10/2020 02:00

You do not have to 'go to court' but you should still both get independent legal advice, it can be done out of court but it is fair to both sort it properly for the kids

frazzledasarock · 06/10/2020 02:06

And what happens if he decides after divorcing and splitting everything 50:50 he can’t cope with the kids and his job needs his attention?

Does he take 50:50 care of the kids currently?

You’re the main carer they have additional needs. I wouldn’t agree to 50:50 if he doesn’t do it right now. He won’t do it when you split up.

Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 02:09

Am seeing my solicitor shortly, and as I say, I think we will end up with EOW, me as the main carer and hopefully the kids in the house they’ve lived in for years. He says he won’t pay spousal so surely then I end up with a larger % to account for this?

OP posts:
Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 02:11

Frazzledasarock he’s upped his game since the papers were filed and he’s at home way more because of Covid but prior to that, he saw them for less than an hour a day.

OP posts:
Movinghouse2015 · 06/10/2020 02:11

I would imagine you will receive more than 50/50 due to the fact your a SAMM.

I'd take a smaller mortgage free house along with a cut from pensions etc.

That way you are also protected later on with a secure retirement pot.

Original poster
BettyBroderick · 06/10/2020 02:18

That’s what I thought, MovingHouse - I also don’t want to be unreasonable

OP posts:
WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll · 06/10/2020 02:25

What does he think you're going to live off? Fresh bloody air?

If you read the OP right at the start, he's proposing to replace the £550K house with a cheaper family house that she would own outright (and likely be cheaper for her to run), in order to take a fraction out as a deposit so that he doesn't have to live off fresh air - and provide 50/50 accommodation for the children out of the same fresh air.

As to how OP will afford to run the house - any house - she will have to either work or pursue disability/out-of-work benefits. It sounds like she didn't actually deliberately sacrifice anything career-wise in order to look after the children as she'd already been forced to/chosen to give up work before they arrived and so it so happened that she was in a position at home to care for them when they did subsequently arrive.

Assuming the 50/50 does work, then he owes her nothing more; if it is decided by him/her/both/the courts that he isn't able to keep up the 50/50 childcare arrangement, then he will have to pay maintenance for the children, but nothing else. This would obviously be set at the minimum required by the CMS and he may or may not decide that he can/wants to pay more, bearing in mind that their mother already has a very nice family house for them all to live in, completely mortgage free, whereas he is now 50 with a large mortgage to pay for single-handedly.

As it stands, I think he's being very fair. It's rough on you if you have a serious disability that prevents you from working, but once you're divorced, his financial responsibility is only to his children and not to you.

Elsewyre · 06/10/2020 02:26

But your earning capacity is irrelevant as it wasnt caused by the marriage/kids but by outside events.

It would be the same if you had been single