Am I being unfair?

[tic73]

We are divorcing and cannot seem to get over the 50/50 on the upcoming sale of house. He earns 45-50k and on 16k. As I am the primary carer I need to live in the catchment for school and the property's are more expensive than his area.
I need 60/40 and he will not budge as he does not think it is fair. His earning potential is higher than mine and so I'm also thinking of future finances. Oh and he's also my boss!!
I will be going through a solicitor but he says no solicitor or court round award 60/40 and it will be 50/50!
Am I delusional???

When you say primary carer, how many nights will the children be with you and how many with him, over the course of a week?

60/40 doesn't sound unreasonable. Are there pensions to consider as well?

The only other thing to consider is how much it will cost you to fight for 60% rather than just accepting 50% - will you actually come out with more after you've paid legal fees?

50/50 is the starting point assuming both parties have equal wages, pensions, future potential earnings and commitment to housing children. 60/40 sounds very reasonable. You could even go for a greater share. I was awarded 100% of the house equity on divorce in return for him keeping his pension. Maybe you could consider something like that. It's worth speaking to a solicitor because they will have your best interests in consideration and won't see you off with a rough deal.

Mediation is needed.

50/50 is unreasonable as he clearly has higher wages and will be able to secure a bigger mortgage than you.

When dp and exw divorced she wanted a 90/10 split and the mediators told her to take a hike so they will stand up to unreasonable demands.

I think the courts could award you more than 60/40!!!

Yes to mediation and courts if need be.

Have a read of this:

www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/fjc-financial-needs-april-16-final.pdf

He's pleading poverty! The equity on the house will secure us both a property but my area because of schools is more expensive to where he is living. He thinks a 3 bed house is a 3 bed house regardless of condition as long as price is same. His is being built and the one he did comparison with for me is a shit joke!
Oh and he's also my boss so don't feel secure in my job! I woujd end up with a 60k mortgage and him mortgage free with about 20k left over.......but still he says its 50/50!
He has a 16k pension and the kids will do the usual 1 night in week and alternate weekends.
Have booked solicitor.

But he will also have to pay you child support and alimony won't he?

The law is 50/50. You may just spend a lot in legal fees fighting it out.

The law is not "50:50". It is a lot more complicated than that. In addition, it is pretty commonplace for primary carers to receive well over half the assets to meet housing need on the basis that the other spouse has to wait until the kids are grown before getting some back.

OP, can you talk to a mortgage adviser asap to get a good idea of what you can borrow? Will be helpful for solicitor.

It's not a straight 50/50 if your children are young, you are the primary carer, you have no pension, he has a big pension etc etc. Which is why you must get legal advice. Do not let him railroad you into anything.

Fighting it will end up costing more and the lawyers benefit from all of this ... that should be borne in mind.

The lawyers love a divorce getting dragged out as their fees go up with 15 minute billing hours. Could even be less now.

Every call..Every email..Every appointment costs you. Even when you simply leave a message with the secretary . you're paying for it

Fighting for a reasonable settlement can actually cost ZERO!!! No-one is obliged to pay legal costs, unless you are the person issuing the court papers, in which case you do indeed pay, it's disgracefully high not kkks.
It depends on how strong you are to self represent.

Add up ALL assets for both of you.
If you want to stay in your own home or have in mind a new home (a judge isn't going to be impressed if you move from a cheap to a more expensive area for better schools) and you have worked out you need 60% of assets to cover the cost and 40% can be made up for the other side in pensions, savings, endowments etc, if you have the children living with you with the other side as the "fun parent" who "sees" them, then that is even more reason to need that 60%, if you ARE and EXPECT in the next few years to be the lesser earner, even more reason to need that 60%.

Take initial legal advice for sure, sometimes you can get that for free or very low cost. Then if the other side wishes to go to court, let them. If they wish to employ a solicitor, let them. You however don't have to employ a solicitor.

If you do wish to use a solicitor and the difference between 50% and 60% is 20k or less, well it is however very likely your legal fees are going 5k-25k so bear that in mind, so you risk losing what you'll gain in paying your solicitor.

You MUST see a solicitor. The emphasis is very much on mediation these days and the solicitors will be able to advise you what is fair according to your particular circumstances. As a pp said, you may for example, be entitled to remain in your own home with the children if you cannot afford a home of your own on 'your' assets. No solicitor will let you make an agreement that could leave you and your children homeless.

Also bear in mind that the cost of the solicitors should come out of the joint assets

The cost of solicitors will NOT come out of joint assets!!!! It is very rare for a judge to order costs are shared. Each side, unless there is some very bad behaviour on one or both sides, has to bear their own costs.

This is why initial legal advice is a must, but further representation will be for YOU ALONE to bear and a 99% chance you will be paying YOUR legal costs out of YOUR settlement.

Just to clarify above remarks, I am talking about costs regarding financial settlement if you cannot agree and the other side bring the matter to court, not about divorce itself, however even for the latter, you usually pay your own solicitor's costs, but court costs are different. Expect personal solicitor's cost in a contested financial settlement to be at least 5k. My husband spent 25k when he demanded to take 55% and leave me and 4 kdis with 45%. I stood by ground, self represented, got awarded 63/37 split in my favour. I had only asked for 60/40 in my favour, the judge awarded me more! I was the respondent. My legal costs for solicitors were ZERO.

Life I didn't say they would, I said they should.
If a couple has joint assets ie a house and/or joint bank account, or other assets that need to be allocated, the couple should agree to meet the legal costs out of those joint assets.

And I'm not talking about contested agreements and subsequent court cases, I'm talking about getting legal advice in order to jointly agree a reasonable settlement. This is what mediation solicitors do.

But he will also have to pay you child support and alimony won't he?

Child support yes. Spousal maintenance not necessarily.

I got 70/30 as the DC live with me and I earn much less than exh so I needed the money to house them.

My exSIL got 85% of equity and a lot a child maintenance (£1300 per month for 3 kids). Her exDH has a massive mortgage and almost zero disposable. There is similar disparity between their incomes.

PS kids spend 50% of time with each parent.

My exSIL got 85% of equity and a lot a child maintenance (£1300 per month for 3 kids). Her exDH has a massive mortgage and almost zero disposable. There is similar disparity between their incomes.

It isn't that simple though. It depends on many things, not just income. They also have 50/50 split care.

My bestate friend ended up with 60/40 split (in her favour) on similar incomes.

*best

Thanks for all your feedback it's much appreciated! Lifeisunjust that is a valid point about the judge not being impressed with my choice of area ie the schools but he is in full agreement of this as he wants those schools so hopefully it won't cause a problem. Since my last post he has filed against me (although was decided it would be more)on unreasonable behaviour (I ended the marriage) it's all in hands of solicitors now......keep you posted x

*me not more