Split but neither backing down - advice please?

[frazzledbasket]

I'm going to keep it fairly ambiguous as I don't want any bias.
Married couple, 2 primary aged DCs, one soon heading to secondary.

Both professionals working FT, Partner 1 with long commute so effectively longer hours, Partner 2 WFH 90% of the time, both with a good income and both could afford to buy a sufficient property on their own.
P1 is instigating the split, there is no abuse, misbehaviour or foul play on either side. P2 would have preferred to stay together.

Both partners want to stay in the family home as its very close to the DCs school and neither could afford to buy anything quite as close by.
P1 has offered a lump sum to P2 to move out. P2 is refusing as there is more than that in the equity and various savings accounts. P1 also has a substantial pension pot whereas P2 does not.

It's a stalemate at the moment and neither is budging.
What is a good way forward and also - if this was to go through court what would be the potential outcome?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Read about “birds-nest” residency arrangements, @frazzledbasket

www.nbcnews.com/better/health/birdnesting-gives-kids-one-stable-home-after-divorce-does-it-ncna935336

Money wise, the split proposed isn’t fair. It’s all at the advantage of P1. All savings and pensions should be taken into account and split 50/50.
This includes the house.

If both parents are planning 50/50 sharing parenting, whether one is working at home and the other not should not be taken into account imo.
P1 would have to find a way to look after their dcs on their days. Just like P2 will have to get organised around their work.

P1 wants to leave so I’d say it’s up to them to move out and find somewhere else to live. The fact they can’t find a house close to where they currently live is, unfortunately , part of the package of getting divorced.

I’d also suspect P1 is the man who wants to have his cake and eat it. Aka not sharing 50/50 of the assets, getting the most out of the situation and keeping the house whilst also asking for 50/50 for the children wo a thought to what happens to P2 (even though it’s them P1 who instigated the whole situation.....)

P1 wants their cake and to eat it too!

Maybe mediation would help them see they are being unfair before getting lawyers involved?

@Aspergallus, that sort of arrangement is only possible if the two people involved have enough money to afford to pay for two houses each themselves.
That’s a heel of money.
Plus P2 working from home so that means you are expecting them to move their working environment twice a week too....

That kind of birds-nest arrangement sounds hideous to be honest. Yes it’s crap for small children to be shipped back and forth constantly which is why I don’t think 50/50 is in the best interests of small children.

Who currently does childcare/school runs? Assume P2 (who sounds likely to be the mum) if P1 has a long commute. If that’s the case I think P1 who is instigating the split should move out and have the children EOW plus an extra weeknight and leave P2 and children to the stability of their family home.

I strongly believe that where there is no affair, abuse etc then the partner who ends the marriage against the wishes of the other person shouldn’t then get to deny the other person 50% of their time with their kids on top. Not a popular opinion on here but I believe if you walk away from your family life (including the family home) you do exactly that and you take the hit, you don’t get to rip it in half down the middle to the detriment of the children’s stability and well-being.

But this bird's nest thing - why would anyone want to share a home with their partner in that way? I think it would be disastrous.

Is it possible for you both to buy two smaller houses near to each other?

I don’t think the fact that p1 is instigating the split automatically means they are “punished” by having to move out, the pension issue also surely depends on the reason why it’s bigger (ie you can’t automatically assume it’s because p2 gave up work at some point to care for children hence had lower earning potential).

You probably need to see a specialist lawyer but my starting point would be to sell the property and split the proceeds plus other assets fairly.

The person who does the majority of the child 'work' should stay in the family home. The one who does the school runs, organises the play dates, makes lunches, organises sports clubs, school admin, orders uniforms, does their washing etc etc... . Quite odd you havent mentioned any of that OP, makes me suspect its not you. And 50/50 is horrible for primary aged kids.

[quote Meuniere]@Aspergallus, that sort of arrangement is only possible if the two people involved have enough money to afford to pay for two houses each themselves.
That’s a heel of money.
Plus P2 working from home so that means you are expecting them to move their working environment twice a week too....[/quote]
I think the idea is that there’s a family home and then 1 more smaller property and each adult takes it in turns week-on week-off to live in either. Rather than family home plus 2x smaller properties, which I agree is unaffordable for most.

It wouldn’t work for me because I’d hate the bolthole property to be shared and I’d hate my ex living in the family home too - because if I ever divorce DH his housekeeping and domesticity (lack thereof) would be a contributory factor! I’d hate the sense that no home was truly mine.

FWIW I dint think the 50/50 arrangement is manageable if one of the parent has to move out of area. Taking the dcs to school and picking them up would be quite hard if not impossible.

The dcs wellbeing should be out at the centre there. They should stay in their home and close to their friends/school if at all possible.

If not possible, then sell the house and both parents buy in a less expensive area is another solution.

If the couple is male/ female, I’d bet my last dime that P1 is the dad and I bet there’s another woman.
Sorry if that’s not helpful, but thinking about residency don’t assume that you need 2 houses with space for kids +single parent 🤔
And a birds nest residency would be horrendous if there was a ‘stepmum’ swanning in and out.

@Jeezoh

I don’t think the fact that p1 is instigating the split automatically means they are “punished” by having to move out, the pension issue also surely depends on the reason why it’s bigger (ie you can’t automatically assume it’s because p2 gave up work at some point to care for children hence had lower earning potential).

You probably need to see a specialist lawyer but my starting point would be to sell the property and split the proceeds plus other assets fairly.

Doesn’t matter why P2 has no pension. It might well just be down to the fact their employers didn’t offer a package whereas P1 had a great employer. But at the time of the split, all assets are split and that includes pensions pots.

If it's actually shared custody, Sell.

You'll never agree over who gets the house.

At best the one who wants the split leaves and the other one buys them out but doesn't sound like that will work.

BUT 1 works far away, can they actually do 50/50 care? Can they do 5 drops or picks? Are they gone early enough to do dinner etc?

If it isn't 50/50 then the one taking on primary custody keeps the house and pays the other one out, or with some other agreement where y they're both paying out equal on housing

Who will be actually able to do school runs etc. If P1's commute makes this impossible then 50-50 won't happen.

P1 should move out as they ended the relationship.

A friend of mine is doing the birdsnesting thing with their ex - but they have enough money for 2 apartments so they don't share the other place too.

It's been going on for a couple of years now and isn't too bad. They don't spend time together at Christmas or birthdays though.

Agree with PP - will it really be 50/50? Who does the bulk of childcare now? Is it the WFH parent?

Both parties need to get independent legal advice. If I were the parent with most of the childcare I would be seeking primary residency in the former marital home, If this is P2, I would offer to forsake my stake in P1 pension in exchange for a larger share of the equity in the house so I could stay there. I would seek child maintenance from the non resident parent (20% of their net pay as a starting point)

If I were P1 I would be worried.

P1 is attempting to fuck P2 over and P2 needs a shit hot lawyer.

P1 also benefits from P2's lack of commute which I presume means that P2 does the majority of childcare.

How do the numbers stack up OP? What’s equity/savings/CETV of the pension?

@Meuniere

It is not necessarily unaffordable. There are lots of mortgage options that could help, like going interest only for the time until kids leave home, extending the mortgage period until retirement (or beyond, most providers accept up to 70 as the norm now). Even remortgaging to release funds for have a small deposit or two for the parents other homes. In all likelihood, a family home in the UK will continue to gain equity regardless. And the parents both work FT...

The major benefit is to the children, but there is huge benefit to the adults too -your week is your week, so 50/50 is more practically realised, and you don’t find that one parent becomes the default rememberer of all uniform, school and sports kit etc. It’s all in one location.

But I agree that it works best when each parent has their own place for the other week.

Yeah, the people I know that birds nest have bought one tiny one bed flat each, in fact, I think one is actually renting. It's a lot of money to maintain three properties...

See a solicitor

Thankyou for all the advice.

If it helps they have been married nearly 10 years. Well 10 next year.

School drop offs are mixed. Sometimes P1 drops them off at breakfast club on the way to work when P2 starts work early. Otherwise P2 drops them off. Pick ups again mixed depending on P2s working hours either they get them or they go to the after school club.

P1 has a need to be in control and "helicopters" or "coddles" the DCs a lot. P2 is more passive and in the past has just allowed P1 to take over for an "easy life" and tends to be lazy in general and take the easy way. So there's some mutual resentment that has crept up over time.
Intimacy hasn't been a thing for just over a year now.

There's equity in the property, a couple of savings accounts and the aforementioned pension pot. Enough for both to walk away with a very decent amount should they sell up and split everything down the middle.

I don't agree that whoever instigates the split should leave or have to suffer further. I know this isn't always the case but people don't normally leave relationships on a whim. Sometimes relationships don't work and you can't stay out of a sense of duty. That said I also don't think the current offer is fair. I'd definitely get legal advice.

I couldn't think of a worse arrangement for children than 50/50 care shuttling between two houses.

Agree @Viviennemary. The birds nest approach puts kids before the parents convenience. If its at all possible this should be the goal.