Selling the family home- who gets what. Please help !

[Pinksparke]

Bob was with Sarah for 15 years . They have two children . They lived together in a big family home . Bob left when they split . The mortgage is in Bob’s name . Bob pays the mortgage .

Bob lives with his wife in their house with their son . Bob and wife pay the mortgage here . It is a financial struggle .

Sarah lives in the family home with Sarah and Bob’s children . Sarah is getting married and her new partner is moving in. Sarah’s partner is mortgage free ( he has a bungalow ) he will rent this to his son now that he is living in Bob and Sarah’s home .

Sarah wants half of the house when Bob sells it. Bob is happy to do this however Bob paid the deposit for the house from inheritance and is paying off £25k credit cards that Sarah and Bob racked up.

Should Bob still pay the mortgage when Sarah’s partner moves in?
Legally, does Bob have to wait until their youngest child is 18 before he can sell the family home ? Should Bob take off the deposit and half of credit card debit before he splits the profit from the house sale with Sarah ?
Legally does Bob have to give Sarah half ?

Bob pays the legal amount of child support and uniforms , shoes and extras . Kids stay with Bob 2 nights a week.

For clarification they were never married and house is solely in Bob’s name .

@pinksparke you should be very proud. Your son is a very good person. The more I read, the more I see that Sarah is taking advantage of the situation. If they can sort this out without paying huge solicitors fees that would be great, but unfortunately I don’t think that’s possible. Get legal advice.

I'd say Bob is having the mick taken out of him massively.
New partners son gets to live rent free because the new partner is now rent free!
Bob sounds like he's already being completely fair.
Someone needs to take a look at their moral compass!

@LittleBearPad

Ok that’s fair *@CandyLeBonBon* though I think we can both agree that running teens to school doesn’t mean Sarah can’t work at all?

Absolutely not!

*CandyLeBonBon
If Sarah and Bob were never married and the mortgage is in Bob's name, afaik (not a lawyer) Sarah is not entitled to anything from the house? But yes, they need proper legal advice

This is in incorrect Sarah Is entitled to have her contrition both financially and support wise, bringing up family etc, taken into consideration*

@pomers what do you mean by 'support wise'? I'm not sure who would take it into consideration.

My partner and I are just writing our papers on how to split the house in case of a separation. That’s what Sarah and Bob should also have done with their solicitor when they bought the family home.
I think it is good for the children to stay in the family home until they move out themselves if it is financially and work wise feasible. This means Bob should wait at least until the youngest child is 18 or even until he/she has the first job. This is not a legal requirement but for the well-being of the children.
Until the children turn 16 Sarah has contributed to the household income by looking after the children and the household. I believe that is worth as much as Bob earned, any other split would be degrading/sexist.
Bob and Sarah need to get the house valued before Sara’s new husband moves in, deducting the deposit and the credit card repayment will leave them with the money to split. Now, either Sarah and her husband can payout Bob or Sarah’s husband has to contribute to the mortgage payment ( I think 50% would be fair) and basically renting half of the house of Bob. The fact that Sarah’s husband doesn’t ask his son for rent is his decision and has nothing to do with Bob or Sarah. His son could find himself a housemate if the additional income was needed.

As before, Bob needs to speak to an accountant or tax specialist as there will be CGT implications however he disposes of a house that isn't his primary residence, never mind all the splitting 50/50 - it's in his name only and he is the one who is liable for CGT even if he gives part of it away to the mother of his children. It's complicated!

Sarah and Bob need to sell Bob's house and Sarah's new partner can buy out Bob if they want to stay there and not uproot the children. Or it gets sold and Sarah and Bob move into bungalow or sell bungalow and buy a house with a mortgage.
Bob needs to think of his first children but not at the expense of his current wife and youngest child.

I'm curious why people think Sarah should be entitled to a percentage of the house?
when she's never paid any of the mortgage and never worked. I get it's often not viable for people to work with young children but we are talking teens here in later stages of school. No reason for her not to have worked at some point after her kids hit secondary school.
i strongly suspect spending and money is half the reason they split in the first place.

@N1no is there a reason you're not getting married?

@N1no

My partner and I are just writing our papers on how to split the house in case of a separation. That’s what Sarah and Bob should also have done with their solicitor when they bought the family home. I think it is good for the children to stay in the family home until they move out themselves if it is financially and work wise feasible. This means Bob should wait at least until the youngest child is 18 or even until he/she has the first job. This is not a legal requirement but for the well-being of the children. Until the children turn 16 Sarah has contributed to the household income by looking after the children and the household. I believe that is worth as much as Bob earned, any other split would be degrading/sexist. Bob and Sarah need to get the house valued before Sara’s new husband moves in, deducting the deposit and the credit card repayment will leave them with the money to split. Now, either Sarah and her husband can payout Bob or Sarah’s husband has to contribute to the mortgage payment ( I think 50% would be fair) and basically renting half of the house of Bob. The fact that Sarah’s husband doesn’t ask his son for rent is his decision and has nothing to do with Bob or Sarah. His son could find himself a housemate if the additional income was needed.

They didn't buy the family home... bob did!

@Coyoacan

It sounds like Sarah, in legal terms, has no rights at all in this case. So sad.

@Coyoacan

If they'd been married, then she would have had more rights

No one forced her into this position, and it sounds as though Bob has been generous for a number of years

There's info here. Sarah needs to shell out for legal intervention if she wants part of the house as without court intervention, she's entitled to nothing according to this: familylawpartners.co.uk/blog/property-rights-for-unmarried-couples/

[quote RantyAunty]@N1no is there a reason you're not getting married?[/quote]
Corona! I didn’t want to get married at the embassy with two witnesses that we don’t know. I would have been fine with a registry in either of our home towns but that didn’t work because of travel restrictions and pregnancy.

I’m not saying that Sarah is legally entitled to half the house but I think that she is morally entitled. Bob worked and paid the mortgage and Sarah’s works was looking after the children. However, she should have started to work at some point when the children were old enough. I also think that this calculation should include Sarah’s lost career and pension congratulations.

If I'd had a free ride for years you can bet your arse I would have saved a hefty deposit for a mortgage. Silly Sarah.

@N1no your contradicting yourself, you think morally she should get half the house. But you also think she should have started working at some point to contribute to the house.

So the fact she didn't contribute or pay any I'd the debts doesn't matter Bob should roll over keep working and give her half the house anyway. No I don't think so.

I suspect money, spending money they didn't have, was a huge part of the reason they split in the first place.

If they'd been married the divorce lawyers would probably have insisted that there was a clean break financially yes she would have got something out the value of the house but the debts would have been paid jointly, the mortgage cleared, and she would have had to fund her own accommodation since the split.

How old are the children? Bob should get legal advice. From what you've said best option would probably be for Sarah and new DP to buy Bob out in house through combination of selling bungalow and mortgage.

Bob is being taken for a fool. Do not be like Bob