Who gets house?

[Whoeverwins]

Ok so my DH has this issue with woman staying living in the family house when a couple splits up. He's mentioned it a few times and had disagreements with friends in the past saying 'you know she'll get everything if you split up' when the woman owned the house! Also when watching a programme (Broadchurch) he's got really angry about one of the characters (Beth), like he hates her and the fact she got to stay in the family house and living with the children whilst Mark lives in a 'tiny flat, alone and without his family'. And that she made his suicide attempt all about her and she shouldn't have kept telling him to stop coming round the house etc. And that it was her choice to split up so she should have moved out.

Just wondered who's being unreasonable. I think it creates stability for the children if they stay in the family house and if you don't want to be together, then someone needs to move out and if the mum is doing more of the childcare it makes sense it's the dad, although it could be shared. Not sure where I'm going with this!

Sorry maybe I'm misunderstanding. You too aren't having this discussion? It's just a general comment on women staying in the family home post break up?

The decision should be made in the children's best interests and that does usually mean staying in their home with their primary caregiver.

Is your husband thinking of what children need or what he as a man would want? It's striking how many men believe a woman's place is with the kids, right up until there's a split.

It depends on financials. But the main caregivers being allowed to stay in the house until the children finish full-time education seems fair to me

Close friend got the house but had to buy out her ExH (half). She also had DC most of the time and he had every other weekend but as soon as DC hit 18 maintenance stops, although he helps towards higher education directly to DC, and will not pay towards anything else eg won't go halves on driving lessons or hobbies. He never helps out his kids. He is a high earner (friend is not) and has married someone who earns more than he does and he has no SC. They live in a lovely home and have lots of exotic holidays every year but make DC feel unwelcome. Basically he is a bit of a knob.

I think in most cases finding a way to get finances separate as soon as possible is best for everyone in the long run. Otherwise things just get more complex as time goes on.

I'm the process of divorcing and my remortgage came through today.

The concept that of a woman "getting the house" in the divorce usually carries some judgement / assumption that the woman has fleeced her ex somehow. And it's outdated because mesher orders - which allow the RP to stay in the family home with the children until the youngest hits a certain age - used to be very common. These days though, solicitors don't encourage them because it often means that a) the NRP cannot afford to buy their own place and b) when the children hit 18 the RP has to sell and often can't afford a smaller place even then, due to having worked part time or taken a hit to their career due to child rearing.

So solicitors will advise a clean break financially which either means the house gets sold and the proceeds split, or one party has to buy the other out and then a consent order drawn up which means if one party wins the lottery after the divorce (for example) the other party cannot put in a claim for this. Whether parties choose to sell and split proceeds or for one of them to stay put depends entirely on their financial situations, many people simply can't afford to buy out their exes particularly if there is a substantial amount of equity in the property.

I bought my stbxh out to the tune of six figures, which is more than he was entitled to according to my solicitor but I want him to be able to buy his own place someday as he's currently renting a flat. I was very lucky because I had inheritance/family help otherwise we'd have had to sell and split proceeds. I chose this option because I love the location and the children are settled here. I also carried on paying the mortgage by myself when he moved out whilst it was still in both of our names. I also got a better job which enabled me to take over the mortgage myself.

So, in my case, yes I "got the house" but not to my ex's detriment, which is what is usually assumed.

Surely this is just a case by case decision?
I suggested my XH stay in our house because the kids were really settled there as they knew it, and I knew that wherever they were with me would be “home” very quickly, because I had them more and they were closer to me. So they never had to go to a new house that didn’t feel like home. When we told them about the split, their dad came on a sleepover in my new house so they could show off their new “other bedrooms” to him.

There’s no one way to do it right.

He sounds like a prick either way though 🤷🏻‍♀️

Just a general discussion but things aren't great here so may come a reality. Just got some foresight into how he's really not going to be happy leaving the family home.