Now I aint saying she's a golddigger...

[FeelingGoodAsHelll]

Hello all

My title is exactly how I am being made to feel right now.

Me and my husband are currently separating - we aren't legally separated just yet - we need to agree on minute of agreement which will be issued hopefully soon - his solicitor is drawing them up.

We bought out house 2 years before getting married. My STBXH paid the deposit (around 25k). I had just finished uni at that point and was in a trainee role.. so my salary was peanuts for a while. His parents gifted £5k to US (no paperwork, nothing) a few years back and paid towards some of our wedding too. Again, it was to US, no paperwork.

My STBXH, as he earns x4 my salary, decided to overpay the mortgage every month, as he could afford to, and wanted to reduce our mortgage quickly etc. I didnt overpay as I had a lower salary and couldnt afford to. The mortgage / bill split was probably 70/30 (me paying 30, I didnt decide this split, he put everyhthing into a spreadsheet which worked out what we should both pay, his idea).

We verbally made an agreement that I could keep something (I wont say what as it will be very outing) if I dont touch his pension & savings account. He also wanted me to give back his deposit, which I intially agreed but house prices are high so I said no that I wanted the house split 50/50 as per title deeds. He agreed. He then came over a few days ago and told me that he wanted me to agree to not touch anything in his personal bank account (I said I wouldnt, why would I?!). He then said that he wanted x, y, z item from the house added to this "list". I started to get annoyed as this list is getting bigger and bigger and all I wanted was one thing.

Anyway, he said he would buy me out, and pay me half the house, he told me the figure he could afford. Home report came back below this figure (by quite a bit). He now tells me he can't afford it, despite telling me the bank has agreed to lend him the money. He then asked if I would decrease my share. I asked by how much. He then said he wanted all overpayments, his deposit, and all monetary gifts his mum and dad deducted from my share. I told him that we should just sell the house if he can't afford to buy me out, he is reluctant to do this.

I Told him he was taking the piss and that he wont be happy until I walk away with nothing. He profoundly apologised, said he would move money around to get the funds (So he can afford it). I then picked a solicitor who told me that my verbal agreement was rubbish and that she wanted to see all bank accounts, savings, pensions to see what I am legally entitled to. I disagreed but she was quite adamant. I gave my STBXH the heads up about this to which he said, "if you or your solicitor ask any questions, or try and take my pension or savings, the fighting gloves will come on and mud will be thrown... youll walk away with a lot less than 50%, you'll regret it".

In the meantime, he keeps telling me to put offers on properties so I can move out asap but I can't as I don't know what my deposit will be. He keeps telling me to get a mortgage in principle, which I have but they are really low as I am putting down the worst case scenario, i.e. if I do end up with nothing. He told me that he won't give me my share of the money until I give my keys back to him (if he buys me out). I offered to move into my dads, so I can get this money and move on, but asked if I could keep bigger furniture in our house (my dads house is tiny) until I move in my own house, he said no, once I move out, I cant come back. I feel like he is pressuring me. My solicitor said he is bullying me and I should call bluff on the thing he has promised that I can have if I dont touch x, y, z.

I only want 50/50 split on house and the promised thing. However, I feel he is being unfair and pressuring me.

AIBU??

This split was mutal!!

Interesting seeing people argue that having rich parents = being MORALLY entitled to the financial benefits of that, in comparison with someone without rich parents.

Again she doesn't want his savings or his pension just a share of the house 🙄 how is she grabby

Of course it doesn't say that in the vows but it is enshrined in law.

7 years may well be considered a short marriage and this can affect things negatively for the OP.

Court costs are horrendous that's why they try and settle it outside court you can win the battle and lose the war in court

What matters more principles or prices

When I divorced about 12 years ago after a 7 year marriage I was awarded 50% of the marital assets. For us that was one of the two houses of similar value that we owned.
I was also earning about half what he was because I was 16 years younger and so much further behind in my career progression than he was.
I didn't think about touching his pension or savings because, being younger I had more time to build up assets myself.
We also had no children and I too had changed careers - but it was solely because he wanted to move jobs from a substantive role to a FTC, so I changed careers to become a teacher and he supported me for the year I trained because it was for our mutual benefit as we wanted to buy a house.
He kept what was left of his inheritance from a parent - admittedly by then it was barely anything.

We went to court, we disclosed everything and I remember that when we were there there was a lot of to-ing and fro-ing between our solicitors while we were in separate side rooms and when we reached an agreement we went in front of a judge to have it all rubber stamped - and that was that.

OP take the advice of your solicitor. I agree he's hiding something so play the game, don't communicate other than through solicitors and take the emotion out of it.

And please remember that a woman's input into a marriage and a home is worthwhile even without reproducing.

"For about 5 years you were basically a kept woman"

By that logic a SAHM or 'housewife' if no kids, shouldn't get anything?

Marriage is a legal joint partnership. Each partner contributes 'their share' according to their joint agreement on how the marriage is to be run. Sometimes that contribution is 'in-kind' in the form of increased/all household 'duties' and responsibilities. Other times it's financial with each contributing equally. But sometimes, by mutual agreement, one member of the couple contributes less financially in order to advance their career, care for elderly relatives, or whatever.

It's still a joint partnership in which each is due a fair share. And 'fair share' as determined by law starts at 50/50.

If you want to walk away from this feeling like you’ve been fair, the way I see it is:

The £25k deposit is your ex’s and he should get this back
The £5k was a gift (might have been suggested for both of you, but realistically it was for ex) he should get this back.

Forget house value, over payments, him earning more. The remaining value of the house should be split 50/50. You may have earnt less, but you built a life together and the house counts towards that.

I would also let your solicitor get the details of ex’s savings, pension etc. Find out how much he’s worth and decide what you want to do from there. You can still decide not to request half of these things, but at least you’ll know the full situation.

We probably need the vows to clearly explain the legal contract you are signing, all this personally written stuff about being my best friend leads people to believe it's a romantic promise you can just row back on when you choose.

It's not. It's a legally binding contract which doesn't actually care how much you love each other when you sign it or hate each other when you want out of it.
It's the fact you have voluntarily agreed to enter the contract that matters.

It would make weddings less fun but would wake a lot of people up to the benefits and risks of what they are actually agreeing to.

It's far from just a piece of paper.

Of course it doesn't say that in the vows but it is enshrined in law.

It's been 30 + years since I took my vows, but part of the vows was "......and with all my worldly goods I thee endow", so it kinda is. Or was, if that's no longer in the vows.

You don't need to hear the vows - they are not in there! They are legal matters which apply to ALL married people.

Of course we all know " for richer and poorer" bath blah but the details are in the fine print of the law.

"With this ring, I thee wed, and all my worldly goods I thee endow."

So the judge won't split money depending on who put it in or earned it.... but you think op saying she did more housework means she should get a greater share?

The legal rules are designed precisely to be fair. A marriage is a partnership. They have been together for 15 years. You have no idea what OP put into the relationship which contributed to what her partner was able to earn financially. She’s not even going for 50%, she just wants 50% of the house and the dog . Who are you to say that’s not fair?

Legally you're entitled to 50% but MORALLY he's put far more in. Thankfully when I split with my ExH he was cognisant of me putting down the deposit and we worked on what % of the house was mine due to that, not just the amount I put down. It enabled me to buy him out (remortgaged)and stay in the home with our 2 DC. It was bloody hard paying the mortgage on my own, especially those early years, but it's been worth it. I also got v good maintenance way above the minimum to allow me to do this. AND he wasn't interested in my pension- which is better than his. Because he's a decent human being.

My now DH didn't have such an amicable agreement- exW wanted everything (no kids) and he walked away to save his sanity.

Legal isn't always the fairest. Be fair.

I predict this becoming acrimonious. You have only recently discovered that you could be entitled to half his pension and haven’t had time to digest this info properly.

I expect your solicitor will advise you to go for the lot. And as your ex gets more combative, you will want to take half of it all, savings, pension everything. Especially when you see house prices and what you can get for your money.

My crystal ball could be wrong of course ;-)

Listen. To. Your. Lawyer.

It's not part of the ceremony. It's the law.

Negotiation & brinkmanship isn't blackmail.

Op will look insane if she sends that.

Besides, the whole idea of hiring a lawyer is so that she can Grey Rock her Ex & avoid all the drama & unpleasantness. That message is just inviting escalation.

I strongly suspect if roles were reversed this would be a whole different story.

If his parents gave money towards your house, do the right thing and pay that back before you split assets.

Exh and I sold our marital home, gave back what each set of parents put in to help FIRST and then split the rest equally. But we contributed to the house equally to begin with. Deposit was 75% from me, 20% my mum and dad and 5% his parents.
Mortgage was all exh. The amount he paid the entire time we lived there equated to the same amount as I'd put in deposit. I wouldn't dream of keeping money his parents gave for the house. I find it appalling that you think its ok to keep!

I couldn't ever go for more knowing I didn't actually put a bigger share in. Regardless of what's said, take legal advice and think about what the right thing to do here is. You wouldn't dream of splitting 50/50 if you had put 75% in over the years.
Sorry OP but you're actually trying to screw him over here. Please listen to legal advice. Because yes you do sound like a gold digger.

Also. The law is very biased.
Just be fair. Regardless of whether you're entitled to someone's pension doesn't mean morally it's ok to take it. Regadless of whether youre entitled to 50%, doesnt mean you should take, especially given you put barely anything in. Reading threads like this makes me glad I stayed away from legal vultures who kept wanting me to take exh to the cleaners. Regardless of how and why we split, he was still an honest hard working man, just not the man for me in the end. Just do the right thing. Leave his pension/savings alone. Go for the percentage you put in. Keep it clean

I'm going to come at it a bit differently here.
I have seen an amicable agreement made until a solicitor advised one party to go for more.
This person ended up with less than what was proposed and the person who benefited from pursuing it was the solicitor. Every letter, every question, every push cost more and more.

It is entirely possible the solicitor wants to make sure he gives you what is deemed fair but be cautious as solicitors and barristers make a lot of money from divorce. More conflict = more money.

I would go with the solicitor wanting all the information he isn't providing to you and then make a decision. If he is being open and transparent then it is likely he is hiding something.

A deal can only be made when counsel has requested the facts and then you can negotiate.

That was supposed to be "isn't being open and transparent"

We need an edit function MN, it is a basic requirement!

Listen to your solicitor not the ex hubby. I suspect given he keeps asking your not to touch his personal savings and pension, there is more in those than he's letting on