Avoiding getting shafted but still being fair.

[daffidoodledandy]

Looking for opinions on a fair split of house-selling proceeds.

Partner and I have reached the end of a hard relationship. We bought the house jointly about 7 years ago, just under £250k. Partner put down £90k deposit from his previous house, I was a first time buyer. He chose not to ring-fence his deposit.

The mortgage was calculated on my salary only because his wages were/are irregular. I paid moving costs, fixed his old boiler and simple redecoration on the old house to get it ready for sale, and bought new appliances for the new house. Over the years, I've also replaced the windows, had a new boiler, gas line and heating put in, and bought a new oven and washing machine.

On average, I pay £1000 into the joint account each month, though that sometimes goes up to £1500. He is meant to pay £400, but sometimes misses a month. In 2017, he didn't pay anything for the year when he was struggling with mental illness.

We don't have children. Not married. The house is estimated to be worth around £390k now.

How can we work out the best/ fairest way to split the money when we sell the house?

I'd go 5050.

You pay at least £1100 per month more.

1100x12 = 13,200 per year. Times 7 years = 92,400 (greater than his deposit).

Sounds like you didn't make a formal written agreement on the deposit, nor the boiler costs, moving fees etc.

So to avoid legal fees I'd go 5050 and consider that a costly lesson for the future.

50/50. Has he suggested otherwise?

Tricky.

So in 7 years he's roughly paid around £24k (6 years x average of £4,000 a year (£400x 10 to account for missed months)). Add that to his £90k deposit, so £114k. You've paid £84k, then, say £8-10k for new boiler and windows etc? So around £94k. So he gets £20k back, then you split the rest in half?

Not sure if that makes sense!

Hang on, missed off that you covered his £400 on the times he missed it.

So... You paid £12,800 to cover his missed months and then £16,800 in 2017, so your total is around £103,600. So he gets £10,200 then the rest 50:50.

So maybe just split in half!!

Do you know the exact payments? You've always paid at least £600 a month more than him, sometimes up to £1500 more... There is a big difference between £600 and £1500! £75,600 over 7 years difference.

I think 50/50. It’s impressive he only had to put £400 in but still sometimes didn’t do that even

I'd say you have both paid in so 50/50

It is tricky- I think that’s why I’m struggling to know what is fair. I feel like I’ve paid a lot more on a month by month basis, including covering for him. I’ve also remembered that I pay the water bill annually by myself too, so that’s £500ish a year on top. He has had his money tied up in the house, though.

He is very much burying his head in the sand and refuses to talk about it at the moment.

Definitely 50/50

Did he pay more of the other bills such as food etc?

Half each seems fair and simple, and if you took it to Court as joint tenants that would be what you'd get anyway.

Needle, he has paid nothing extra.

Council tax, food, all other bills come out of the joint account, which we are both meant to pay into from our current accounts. That’s the £1-1.5k I put in, and the £400 he sometimes puts in.

He didn't ring fence his deposit so it's 50/50.

You don't need to feel that you are being unfair because your monthly contributions have made up for the original deposit imbalance.

This sounds very fair to me at 50/50

You say partner, not husband, and the deposit wasn’t ring fenced. Did you buy as tenants in common or as joints tenancy’s and were any percentages specified at the time of purchase? Assuming no, (big assumption) I’d either work on 50/50 unless you want to go through every single bill for the last 7 years. It should be double if you want to.

Thank good you're getting shot of this loser.

50:50 is fair. Write down the sums and present him with it. He will struggle to argue with facts

We are joint tenants on the mortgage and he said at the point where he could have ringfenced the deposit that it would be ‘both of ours’.

I don’t think he will be difficult about money. I just wanted to see if I was being unreasonable to seek 50/50. The difficulty will be getting him to agree to selling. He’s going to find it very difficult to buy due to his age and wage, and our city’s houses are very expensive.

Thank you for the responses, everyone.

I think he should get his £90k back and then work out the rest based on the profit/what you put in.
He didn’t ring fence him deposit but I’d really struggle to not treat it as it if he had. He enabled you to get on the property ladder when you’d no deposit.

We used the money I had saved for the deposit on all the house-moving expenses, so all the legal fees, making his old place fit to sell, estate agents, hiring movers, furniture and appliances etc, because it was available and not tied up in the mortgage process.

But I do struggle with the idea of ‘taking’ half of the deposit, though. That’s why I’m questioning what the ‘right’ thing to do would be.

He should get his 90k back then 50/50.

He may have put in a lump sum at the beginning, but it sounds like (without trying to do the maths) that you have paid a hell of a lot more than he has since. In a nutshell, if you hadn't paid what you did, he'd have been sitting in his nice, he-paid-the-deposit house (assuming he could find the money for all the costs associated with house buying) with no food, no heating, no water and draughty windows.. Plus he got more when he sold his previous house because of the work and money you put into it.

I think if you work out what you've spent keeping him warm, dry and well fed, you've paid at least as much as he did when he paid the deposit. 50-50. Do a spreadsheet if you can't convince yourself.

You are not “taking half the deposit”. That’s a narrative he is feeding you.

Write it down on a spreadsheet and show how much you paid in moving expenses and preparing his old house for sale, how much you’ve paid since on upkeep of the house, to show that you have paid as much if not more than him.

Sure, his money was tied up, but he’d have lost the house altogether if you hadn’t kept up with the regular payments.

Take at least 50% and don’t let him stiff you when it comes to splitting furniture and appliances.

@Hankunamatata

He should get his 90k back then 50/50.

No because OP has paid an equal amount in different ways.

OP, you either work out precisely what each of you spent by combing through 7 years of bank statements, including the ones leading up to the sale where you spent on the old house. Or you do a quick reckoning that it is about even and split 50/50. If he is unsure of 50/50, just do the precise tallying on who spent what in total. Boring and time consuming but very fair.

Impossible to say as you haven’t given any indication of how much you have spent improving the property, which is very relevant. It would also be interesting to know what was the mortgage and what is left on it. Also was most of your £1000 that you mention, payment of the mortgage or did it cover bills etc?

Legally though, well if it is in both of your names and his deposit isn’t ringfenced then 50:50 is the legal answer. I think more danger of him being ripped off here, as I doubt you have contributed £90k to the equity.

@Hankunamatata

He should get his 90k back then 50/50.

What? That's not fair at all.