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?

He's not planning on spending any money your direction.

I would seriously consider suggesting that you get a house, keep your own pension and have the children visit you every other weekend. You can be the fun mum. He can finance the every day crap.

I know a mum who did this.

If you are not able to work, you won't get an unattainable CMS bill. You will be free of the day to day worry that he is happy for you to have.

Of course, this makes the kids collateral damage, but to be honest, they usually are in a divorce. Mine were, because their father wanted to have his cake and eat it.

How do you think he would react to that?

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 think you need to move beyond this model, because it's essentially getting him to pay for everything still. You get the house and he pays the bills via CM. Great from your POV, but from his - he can't get a house without selling and splitting equity from the current home and he wants 50/50 which will mean no CM. These approaches are totally incompatible and you need to at least consider other ways of paying your bills because you can't keep up the lifestyle you've been having without you getting some other income stream, even if it is minimum wage or your own business or getting a smaller place in a less expensive area and having some money left over. You talk about his earning capacity but he's 50 and nothing is guaranteed, plus he still needs a deposit and a place to look after the DC, and even 85k won't go that far, especially if you're expecting him to be paying your bills too. At some point soon, with legal advice, you'll inevitably have to shift your mindset from being able to carry on as you are to the new version of it, however that shakes down.

I've no idea where the idea that 'with a salary like that he won't be able to have the kids 50/50' comes from. People work, including mums, and they arrange and pay for childcare as required.

I earn similar to your ex and amazingly enough I am able to look after my child, who is with me most of the time, or pay for childcare for the times when I'm working. It's tight financially, especially as I work shifts, but doable.

I'm confused by the money amounts, are they all thousands?
I think if you're the main parent then you getting a little over half the pot is fair though and main parent gets the house.

Firstly how long have you been married, makes a difference. The starting point is 50/50 but in your circumstances I would expect you to receive enough equity to be mortgage free, but you will need to downsize so he has money for a decent deposit. Dp's exw got 70% of the house equity so she could buy mortgage free. At £85k you May get some spousal support for a limited time especially if you genuinely cannot work (has to be significant sn not compatible with you working for the court to order ongoing support). I think you need to downsize your expectations so that you have 60% equity and clean break after 5 years not including child maintenance - this is exactly what I got on a similar income except my kids are adults.

Ps your accident has no bearing on him supporting you, only the kids additional support needs are considered. You are expected to work as much as possible, I'm sure you can do something (and courts are more understanding of people who are trying to work but not earning a high hourly rate than those not working)

I think you need to get some self respect and go back to work now, you can't have a free ride for ever just because you were a SAHM.
The courts will make you sell up as they prefer that you both have a home to live in not just one person. I'm 58 disabled and sometimes use a wheelchair but I still manage to work full time.
However, the most important thing is to see a solicitor, they will tell you in your free half hour exactly how much you are entitled to.
If you want more than that then you need to negotiate with your soon to be ex a private settlement.
A clean break order is essential anyway as if this is not in place one party can come back at a later date and get more money off the other, I have a friend going through this right now.
Just got settled with 50/70 settlement in her favour but no clean break agreement and the ex husband has had an accident and can't work any more, he is taking her to court for more money and to date it's cost her £50k in court fees as he has legal aid and nothing to lose.
My own ex has been back to court to get more money as he's skint again as usual and has been sent packing as we have a clean break settlement.
You need to thrash out an agreement and then get a clean break settlement.

It's impossible to advise. We don't know whether you had a career before your accident, and how much your accident really prevented you from working if PT.

We don't know what your kids would prefer and how strong your ex is prepared to fight for 50/50.

It does sound like both of you just want the arrangement that puts them in a better financial position.

I can't see how this going to be resolved without going to court as you are so far away from meeting in the middle.

I think you have to think of it beyond you and your husband. Your OP states that your ex wants 50:50. So your children need two good, comfortable, nice homes right from the off. I think you're asking too much.

Also, and forgive me for saying this... divorce is fucking hard and even harder when you've given years to running the home without a separate work identity. You deserve to give yourself more than just that life, and that house, and that identity. The kids are going to be with him half the time, and you should really prepare for the time you'll get to yourself.

Don’t ask strangers on the internet. There’s a lot in there so you need to pay for legal advice.

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.

This, totally.

If you are in UK state retirement age is now 66+

Your exDH has no responsibility to fund your lifestyle

16 years to potentially work

What will you live on when your children are 18+ ?

There's some very poor advice on this thread - you may well have received better advice in the "divorce" section.

Your husband's financial responsibilities towards you do not necessarily stop once you are divorced - that depends very much on the settlement. You may get spousal support, you may get a larger share of the marital pot instead. I think a 50:50 split is unlikely to be viewed as "fair " based on the information you have given. (And what a court may view as "fair" may not reflect what you or posters here view as "fair"). Look at Section 25 I the Marital Causes Act for an idea of the factors a court will take into account.
What about childcare arrangements? Are you happy with the proposed 50:50? Do you think it will work for your children? Do you think your dh is being sincere in requesting this, or is it a ruse to try to avoid child maintenance?
Good luck with your solicitors meeting.

You want eow so he still has to give you money and you won’t actually have to work.

Your earning ability wasn’t stopped because of him and he shouldn’t have to support you until you retire. You need to find a NMW job and support yourself.

The house will need to be sold so he can also buy a place.

It doesn’t matter that his earning ability isn’t effected, it wasn’t his fault that you had an accident.

@BettyBroderick
While people with high salaries can be single parents it would be daft for one parent to pay for childcare from a stranger when their other, presumably capable and loving, parent was available to care for them instead.

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 really don’t want to be unkind, but you mention your disability as a reason why you can’t earn, but then just discount your disability benefits when it comes to stating your own income potential. I know disability benefits aren’t a lot, but they do contribute to your income. Also, if you are able to work, albeit for NMW, that’s still a reasonable-ish amount of money coming in.

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’d be amazed if child maintenance enabled you to cover your own and the children’s costs in full (except for disability and child benefits), as that’s not really what it’s intended to do. Also, it’s not based on what the children (and you) need but on what he earns - £85K is a very decent salary in usual circumstances, but it isn’t megabucks. How are you planning to run the house and pay your bills once the kids are grown up and no longer receive any maintenance?

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.

But that was part of the partnership - he earned your family money, so you didn’t have to pay bills and he has done all of the heavy lifting in providing financially for you all. By the sounds of it, he would have still done that just for the two of you even if you’d been unable or chosen not to have children.

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.

I thought the proposal was for you to have a smaller mortgage-free house and that he would have a mortgage again, but get the deposit he would need to be able to access that mortgage? So the house is sold to release £500K equity, you get a house worth, say, £400K and he gets £100K for a deposit on another house for him?

Are you still living together in the marital home?

Have you tried 50/50 with the kids, and if so, is it working?

At your age, a court will definitely make a big deal about pensions. They’ll want to make sure you have enough for when you retire - and yes, you’ll be expected to work what you can. If that’s minimum wage then it’s minimum wage - plenty of people do it.

You also both need housing - so you need to work out his mortgage capacity, and what deposit he would need. It might be that the equity is split 350k/150k, if that would allow you both to buy.

The primary concern in any settlement is that the children are taken care of. If you have joint custody, that means both of you need housing suitable for the children.

Thankyou everyone, I’m reading it all slowly and familiarising myself with s25 of matrimonial causes.

There’s quite a lot of assumptions and projection - I don’t think I need to “get some self respect”, nor am I after a “free ride.” I just find it confusing that such a large joint pot and relatively tiny mortgage might still mean the children have to lose their home.

@BettyBroderick

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.

Lol, I'd just about got to that point!

YANBU at all. You have made a massive sacrifice in terms of earning potential and pension provision by leaving the labour market to raise the children. If I was a judge, I'd give you more (which is why I'd be a rubbish judge).

Do any of your children get DLA, and are they likely to need additonal care and support once they reach adulthood? That would make a huge difference imo, if one of the children was likely to need lifelong care.

And what sor of income would your career have given younow if you hadn't given it up to care for the children?

Unfortunately although a good salary, £85k is not THAT high.

Would it not be fairer for you both if you take a larger share of the equity rather than half? Take £300k instead of £250k? Or even £350k? It still leaves a fairly decent amount for him to use as a deposit? He can then get a mortgage for the rest. He will be paying it off until he retires but that’s divorce for you 🤷‍♀️.

He might be more willing to agree to an unequal split of the equity so that he gets an amount for a deposit, rather than no equity at all him.

I think that as the kids will be “shared” 50-50, you need to be a bit more pragmatic in your approach.

I don't understand why you think it's OK for him to be forced to use his pension to buy another property while you keep the family home and also want him to pay off the mortgage.

By those standards, maybe you should take 300k out of your own pension, pay off the mortgage and buy him out of the house?

I can understand your worries as if you've not worked in years you're unlikely to be able to get a mortgage, but that doesn't mean your ex should had over all assets to you. Where does that leave him? Tbh he would also struggle to get a mortgage on a place big enough to house the kids at 50 if he doesn't have a substantial deposit.

A bit OT but I just wanted to say, make sure you thrash out details of the 50/50 & put it in writing. I've seen too many women struggle due to the NRP having a few sleepovers & calling it 50/50. List expenses and responsibilities (especially what happens on snow days, strike days etc). It's 50% of the Mental load, financial & practicals, not a bed for the night & mum does everything else.

Go to solicitor for advice, the ( admittedly few) people i know have got 60-70% share of total assets if they are main carers of kids. Going 50/50 with kids may muddy waters.
He has more earning potential than you and personally i think that should be taken into account, sounds like you are also main carer of dc which would have impacted your career choices and future income

and forget all this nonsense about “fair”. FFS this ain’t Mary poppins. You see a solicitor and you get what you can. This is business and what you get now has to last you the rest of your life. His work life capacity is unaffected and carries on.

That's exactly the attitude that helps to fuel all of the misogynistic 'jokes' about ex-wives bleeding men dry. It's so sad when divorce has to end in hatred, especially as there are children who will be caught up in the middle of the acrimony.

His work/life capacity will be severely affected, as he's being expected to start all over again at the age of 50 with a new mortgage and also run his ex-wife's house in full and provide her with an income far beyond just providing for his half of the costs for his joint kids. Disability is life-changing, but they will no longer be responsible for each other's lives at all - only those of their joint children: that's the whole point of divorce.

Cannot understand the replies on this thread.. there seems to be a lot of bitter people here. I don't think you are in anyway unreasonable and think you should fight for as much as you can get. As you have said it is highly unlikely he will do anything near 50:50. You have a fairly large pot here. really am baffled by the replies