to think I’m not being unreasonable (divorce)

[BettyBroderick]

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 can you work?

I agree with WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll take on it.

Don't let people bully you into feeling you're being unreasonable.

It's pretty bloody clear he's going to be a typical EOW father while you do the actual parenting, housing, feeding, clothing of the children

He doesn't want xyz or to go to court is irrelevant to what will actually happen.

He has a far greater earning capacity which he has been to achieve because YOU have been bringing up the children. If he'd been 'doing his share' he wouldn't be where he us now.

He's not thinking about the children & he's definitely not thinking about you. Once you divorce, he'll be 'getting on with his life' having the freedom to make a good living, while you're still raising his kids. You NEED to get FSR more than 50% out if the divorce settlement & you need a decent regular amount of money towards raiding the kids, HIS kids.

See how things go with your solicitor, you may need to speak to a couple of different ones. You need a GOOD one who is actually on your side!

Realistically, aside from any maintenance for the children should the 50/50 not work out (and we all know how little that would be anyway), unless you're in a position to work or claim a decent amount of whatever benefits, I think your only option will be to see how much of the £550K equity you would be spending outright on a smaller house, take that equity and instead spend half of it on a very much smaller/less desirable house and then live off the difference for however long you need to.

Are you able to work at all (or might you be when the children are older)? If not, do you/can you claim PIP or other benefits if your injuries were disabling such that you're unable to work?

Unfortunately, I think you're going to be reliant on the state for a lot of your income for the foreseeable, one way or the other - even with the (presumably untouchable) pensions and the value of the house, I just don't see how there's going to be enough from his earnings to pay for the children and your everyday needs, plus two homes, plus two homes' worth of running costs. £85K is a very nice salary, but it's not a fortune, with all that it has to pay for - now and ongoing.

So it's £1.6 mill in total that's including cash and pensions. A £500k house that has a £50k mortgage on it is a fuck load less than 50% of £1.6mill. In fact it's less than a third. But of course a lot is tied up in pensions.

Add to that his 'clean break' and so called 50/50 involves him getting progressively more wealthy and also involves you getting poorer no it's not ideal.

You'll have to stop being a SAHM though. And the children's bills especially medical need to be split 50/50. It's not unheard of for fathers to push for 50/50 and then not actually have the children, but also not pay. You can't force him to have them 50/50 even if that's the arrangement. Is he really going to take 6 weeks leave (or more) for school holidays? Do 2-3 school runs (morning and evening) a week? Do 50% of dentists and doctors appointments? No of course he's not. You don't make £85k working those kinds of flexible hours.

So he will lumber your with the work but you won't have any way of keeping on top of your life financially. He has to pay something and you have to get a job,

You need to agree or have the court decide what is happening with the children first. That is key as it will affect your earning capacity and your respective income. Without this it would be hard for your solicitor to advise you as 50 : 50 is different to eow.

I agree re keeping out of court. I think that you need to agree the minute detail too. As I mentioned dentists, school trips, uniforms, etc. How much does it cost to feed them. And when they are teenagers. You need to make it all about them. And splitting the obligation and expenses down the middle. So many people don't agree on or even discuss this stuff. Then dads swanning off on holidays and mums buying shit they need for school.

There's stuff like you needing a car to ferry them around. He needs to see that it's not you he's paying for - it's them.

Don't let people bully you into feeling you're being unreasonable.

It's pretty bloody clear he's going to be a typical EOW father while you do the actual parenting, housing, feeding, clothing of the children

It's not about bullying - just about what is actually achievable.

If we discount the pensions and focus on the money available now, even if we assume that she does become the full-time RP he gives her the house outright and the £40K in accessible assets and takes on a small loan to repay the final £10K of the mortgage, he will be left with nowhere whatsoever to live himself; therefore, his £85K earnings will need to pay for rent for a place to live himself, child maintenance for the kids and his own other bills, food, living costs, travel expenses etc.

Where do you see enough left over after that for him to be able to afford to pay the full running costs for a large family house plus OP's entire personal living expenses until she can retire?

And what is she going to do once the children are 18/19 (assuming that their disabilities are not severe enough for her to get a high amount of carer's allowance)? Is he expected to make his £85K earnings stretch to his own rent, potentially fully running a large empty house for his ex-wife alone and also helping out his then-adult kids with uni costs, rent deposits or whatever on top of all that?

The big sticking point seems to be OP's disability which - although very unfortunate - to be blunt, will no longer be any concern for the man she used to be married to.

You need to agree or have the court decide what is happening with the children first. That is key as it will affect your earning capacity and your respective income. Without this it would be hard for your solicitor to advise you as 50 : 50 is different to eow.

Agreed

There's stuff like you needing a car to ferry them around. He needs to see that it's not you he's paying for - it's them.

But isn't maintenance based on covering the non-RP's half of the children's costs and not all of them? OP says that they're pre-teens and not babies or toddlers, so wouldn't there be the expectation that the RP would also contribute half towards her own children, whether through work or benefits?

I'm not sure there is a way of doing this fairly whilst also achieving a clean break.

@MJMG2015

Don't let people bully you into feeling you're being unreasonable.

It's pretty bloody clear he's going to be a typical EOW father while you do the actual parenting, housing, feeding, clothing of the children

He doesn't want xyz or to go to court is irrelevant to what will actually happen.

He has a far greater earning capacity which he has been to achieve because YOU have been bringing up the children. If he'd been 'doing his share' he wouldn't be where he us now.

He's not thinking about the children & he's definitely not thinking about you. Once you divorce, he'll be 'getting on with his life' having the freedom to make a good living, while you're still raising his kids. You NEED to get FSR more than 50% out if the divorce settlement & you need a decent regular amount of money towards raiding the kids, HIS kids.

See how things go with your solicitor, you may need to speak to a couple of different ones. You need a GOOD one who is actually on your side!

Not sure shopping around for a solicitor just does whatever you want them to tell you actually means they are a good solicitor.

does the legal system work that way?

You're unlikely to receive spousal support- it's not really done anymore. The main issue I see with what you want, is that he gets no equity to get another house, and you get a house. He has stated a preference for equal child care- you've decided that's not suitable. A court may decide otherwise. I think he's reasonable I'm afraid to want some capital to be able to buy another house. You have been SAH since before kids, is there an ongoing reason you can't work? Do you receive any monetary support for this?

You are being completely unreasonable. You want a mortgage free house whilst he has to start again at age 50. So what if he has a bigger pension pot, he can’t live on that for years and even so it is not bigger to the tune of the house equity. You should equalise pensions, sell house and both buy somewhere else with the proceeds.

I have no income beyond benefits including those relating to my disability. I am not totally incapacitated but equally I have no ability to earn anything beyond min wage type stuff.

If we equalised the pension, and I got half the equity there isn’t enough for me to get a house big enough for me and the kids nor can I service a mortgage, whereas he retains his earning ability.

RoseMartha Tue 06-Oct-20 01:32:41
Would you be able to afford to run the house? I imagine a 500k house costs quite a bit to run.
...
Depends where it is. In the Greater London area £500k might buy you a three bed terraced (I've been looking). I wonder what sort of house the op would b able to buy outright if the family house was sold. It's not unreasonable for her to want to hang on to it if her children are still living at home; when they eventually leave, that would be the time to consider selling.

@BettyBroderick

I have no income beyond benefits including those relating to my disability. I am not totally incapacitated but equally I have no ability to earn anything beyond min wage type stuff.

If we equalised the pension, and I got half the equity there isn’t enough for me to get a house big enough for me and the kids nor can I service a mortgage, whereas he retains his earning ability.

I don’t mean this in a mean way, I mean it in a legal way, but your diminished capacity to earn through ill health is not his ongoing problem. His responsibility is to the children not you and he plans to have them 50:50. So you can’t expect to take the house.

If he does take the DCs 50/50 will be paying for a full time SEN nanny? He'll need that when he goes back to the office full time. The price of that might focus his mind.

You want the house with the mortgage paid off so you get 500,000 pounds and your pension pot of 400,000 pounds so that's 900,000 pounds. He gets to keep his pension pension pot of 725,000 pounds plus the investments of 40,000 less the mortgage of 50,000 he pays off so he get 715,000 which is much less and he'd be very cash poor. Realistically, if you end up with children most of the time, the agreement has to provide that he will then pay maintenance. Also how are you going to be able to afford to run the larger house when I presume you are not employable?

By the way for the previous poster, there are good solicitors and bad solicitors. It is not a matter of telling them what to do but them providing you with good advice about what it is best to do in the circumstances and some are much better negotiators than others.

Is there any possibility of reconciling with your husband because this is going to be fairly miserable financially for everybody involved when I would think that you have a fairly comfortable life now?

I would be able to run the house is there was no mortgage on it. The child maintenance alone (if EOW) would cover the running costs.

I appreciate my STBXH isn’t responsible for my health. But equally I raised his kids, he didn’t have a childcare bill ever and I have done ALL the heavy lifting with the kids and their issues.

@Florencex

You are being completely unreasonable. You want a mortgage free house whilst he has to start again at age 50. So what if he has a bigger pension pot, he can’t live on that for years and even so it is not bigger to the tune of the house equity. You should equalise pensions, sell house and both buy somewhere else with the proceeds.

Absolutely this.

The only fair way out of this for both of you is for the house to be sold and you both buy somewhere new. Of course you could find a house big enough for you and the kids; you just might have to compromise on area if you’re in an expensive place.

Spousal support is extremely unlikely, so you shouldn’t be expecting that. You will have to do what everyone else does and find a job you’re capable of doing.

I don’t understand. His earning capacity is v high, mine is close to zero.

If we split the equity down the middle, I’d get £250k which wouldn’t buy anything and still enable the kids to stay in their schools. He could though, cos he has mortgaging capacity and £250k is a decent deposit, even with pension equalisation.

What minimum wage jobs have you been applying for?

I dunno how you can budget or plan for future without getting some income security for yourself by getting back to work.

I don’t think I can because of my physical difficulties and because of the kids’ therapies/appointments etc. Sadly I can’t just bung them in after school club or a childminder, it would have to be someone trained.

I don't want to sound too blunt but not sure of another way to phrase this.
If you are 50, and your children aren't yet teens you must have had around 10-15 years of employment history. While you've taken a large gap between work due to your accident and subsequently providing childcare you must have some skills. There must be something you can do to improve your employability and earning capacity, even at 50. It also seems convenient for you (in terms of your ability/disability) to have stayed at home with the children, it's wasn't necessarily a decision made purely because of a need for childcare.

I also don't think it's best to be making financial plans based on something (eow) that currently isn't seen as an option by the other party. It doesn't seem sensible at the moment, it might be best to plan for worst case scenario rather than best. That way you're prepared.

I'm also a little fed up of the 'his kids' talk on general (there seems to be a lot of it on this thread). You both made the decisions that have led you to this point. They're you're joint responsibility to provide a secure home for either when there in your care or his. It just doesn't seem fair that you can keep the family home while your stbxh will likely be left renting, at least for the short term. Your kids, even with Sen will adapt, a new house will become the new normal. This happens to hundreds of children each year when parents separate and it's only as big an issue as you make it when the time comes.

I appreciate your candour. I’m trying to get as many perspectives as I can - clearly I have my view but I’m more than prepared to admit it if there’s a better way through for everyone.

Be careful with the 50/50 promises. If he’s earning that much then how is that going to work? How is he practically going to drop kids off and pick up at 3.15 on his days? What happens with 6 weeks holiday and all the other holidays? Yes you might have to work but not cover all the holidays too and it’s not down to you to carry the mental load of sorting that. He needs to think about how that’s going to work now before la la land thinking he’s doing 50/50 and impacting the finances. You need to get as much as you can now because I’ve seen this before. Lots. With friends. I’m 50/50...months into “reality” oh can you have them for the whole of half term because I’ve got to work. Everyone saying this and that about the house well, the truth is you’ve carried the can for the kids 100% of the time right? He ain’t got to earning 85k by picking the kids up at 3.15 3 times a week. Right? So yes you stay in the house. The courts don’t look at what’s best for you or him they look at what’s best for the kids and to make sure the two of you come out equal and that includes earning capacity and the pension pot. Everyone saying house has to be sold...we are in a PANDEMIC for Christ’s sakes with thousands losing their jobs and the economy tanking. Plus add in the COSTS of selling and buying two more houses. Stamp duty. Get real. It makes more economic sense for you to stay there for both of you unless he wants to lose 50 grand in costs? It makes emotional sense for the kids. If he’s earning 85k his ability to secure other accommodation is higher than yours. You have no income so no ability to get a mortgage. Add up all the marital assets then split down the middle. Is your share more or less than the value of the house? You could also argue for greater than a 50% share. Go for the house as the reality is you’ll end up doing lions share of childcare like you do already