Dividing money from house

[Hedgepeeg]

I'm a couple of weeks into seperation and so far we have agreed on everything and are getting on ok. I had my free consultation with a solicitor yesterday which was very helpful and she totally understood that we have no money for a legal fight and want to do everything ourselves. She was saying what we've got sorted in the short term re money and kids seems fine but our plan is to sell the house in 6 years when the youngest is 18 and she said because his wage is over twice mine, I should be asking for a larger percentage of the sale. She said the aim is to come out of it with equal and fair opportunities, so if he will be able to buy another property after we sell ours, its fair that I should be able to as well (which I definitely can't on my current wage if I only get 50% of the house money). I only briefly mentioned this to him when he asked how it went and he hit the roof, he wants 50% and isn't interested hearing about the difference in earning potential, the fact that he only earns that much because I focused on raising the kids etc while he furthered his career. He now thinks I'm a money grabbing woman who is going to rinse him for all he's got (he's heard some horror stories of this happening to other people). Now I'm worried that I shouldn't have listened to the solicitor, was she just doing her job of trying to encourage me to get all I can? On the other hand, is it fair that in 6 years I'll really struggle to buy another property myself while he'll be absolutely sorted and be able to get a big house?

If you are staying in the current house that puts you at a financial advantage from day 1. You have 6 years to get yourself back in the running financially and jobwize.

Your solicitor may be right but you have to offset any potential financial gain from the house against big solicitors fees, court costs, loss of your H's goodwill and any changes of circumstances in the next 6 years (For example, he might lose his job, you might win the lottery/get an inheritance/gain an amazing promotion).

Your solicitor has given you "free" advice. It's not free. Nothing solicitors do is free or out of the kindness of their heart. They exist to make money for themselves or their company. She wants you as a client and that is the point of these freebie sessions to sign you up as a client. She is aware that if you go after 60% you may have to hire her to fight your case as your DH will not agree. She wants your business not to give out free advice.

It's up to you of course.

Women are absolutely disadvantaged in their earning power due to child rearing. This also includes your pension. This has long been recognised the the divorce courts and in settlement figures.

Don't sell yourself short. Being fair doesn't always mean 50:50.

It's early days for now but your STBXH doesn't get to call the shots on everything.

Have a think about what you want in the long term. Don't forget to include pensions into the pot too. Take legal advice. Mediation can be a good way of resolving stuff.

I'm going through similar with the added complication that I put in a nearly 50% deposit into the house from the sale of my flat. In my opinion my stbxh is money grabbing but he thinks I am and wants half of everything! Listen to your solicitor. He's being selfish. Your career will likely never be up to his standards. My stbxh says men are screwed in divorce. That's misogynist bullshit. Stay strong.

Things to think about

Where will he live over next 6 years? Renting? While you have use of fmh
Can you pay mortgage and bills on that ?
What was your career before children and us the earnings different irrespective of chikdren? Ie did you really disadvantage yourself or is it rather simply a lower paid career/field
Did you give up work / go part time jointly agreed when children were younger?
How much equity is there and how much will you need? Bear in mind when the children are 18 you will be deemed as only to need a 1 or2 bed property
If you have a mesher now then whatever split is agreed will be based in equity available at that time including any house price increase
How old will you be in 6 years and will you be able to get mortgage at that time

Are there any pensions to consider?

What % do you seek

Don’t of course need to answer these on here but to give you things to think about

Thanks for the responses, so much to think about! Trying to discuss it with him is hard, although we still get on really well he has some massive roadblocks in his head on certain things and it easily turns into an argument. I think I need more advice before I make any decisions.
I also don't understand how the financial agreement caters to any change of circumstances when making long term plans. The solicitor says we have to base it off our circumstances now and assume they be stay this way but he's caught up on the what ifs.
Again, fighting this is not an option, we have no money for solicitors so have to do it ourselves.

Can you park it for a bit and let the dust settle? Can you work out what you actually need to get a decent home at the end of the 6 years and show him what the implications are? What could you afford based on the current scenario?

Don’t back down, fight for every penny you’re due.

Lesson learned. Don't discuss what you have discussed with your solicitor with your H.

The solicitor has given you very sensible advice. It is supposed to be fair in the way she suggests. The judge who signs off the consent order will be looking to see fairness like that.
Best bet now is to get the house valued by 3 agents. Use the middle figure.
Given your earnings work out what mortgage you can get.
Look at local market and take screen shots of 3 bed houses you can afford. How far out you'd have to move etc.
At what % of current equity does it become feasible? (Take off selling, moving and buying costs and mortgage redemptions)
For us it was 70%
Then think if you really need to stay in that home for the kids? Would it better to move now? They do say women get hung up on staying in the house and I can see that I did although I still made the right call for the kids and the 13k redemption penalty - but I'm ready to move now.
Don't forget his pension. He may also be willing to trade your share for additional equity. (this took us to a 82/18 split)
How long were you a sahm or working pt?
What is your future earning potential?
The best thing is to pack him off to see a solicitor for his 30 mins - it might be an eye-opener for him.
Where are the savings if you have any. At least 50% of those are yours.
You are not money grabbing. Just looking for a fair division of assets to let you both start on an equal footing.
His tales of men getting fleeced is ridiculous. Luckily you are getting divorced so won't have to listen to crap like this.
Ultimately you have to negotiate though and decide what you will settle for.
Remember it's the kids that are most important. You need to be able to give them homes that are not too disparate.
Have you applied for UC now that you have separated?

My solicitor said that if your partner is significantly older than you , like 10 years, you can get more of their pension as men statistically die earlier and he is already older than you.

Include all assets and debts in the total pot that needs to be divided - including savings and pensions. You will, of course, both be worse off as you will need to provide two homes from the same current incomes. And both parents will need to be able to provide suitable housing fir the children. Although a court might vary from the 50:50 principle you will also be expected to maximise your earning potential.

By the way, it's not inevitable that women have Jess earning potential than men. I always earned more than my XH.

@GoodnightGrandma

My solicitor said that if your partner is significantly older than you , like 10 years, you can get more of their pension as men statistically die earlier and he is already older than you.

Your solicitor was talking bollocks. I work closely with the pensions sector and quite clearly your solicitor didn't understand compound interest.

A pound invested in a pension when you are 20 has 40-50 years to grow before the saver retires. A pound invested when you are 60 has little to no time to grow. If you invest a pound in your pension at age 20 then based on historical growth rates it will we worth around £20 when you retire. If on the other hand you wait until you are 40 to invest that pound, it will only grow to £5.50 when you retire.

Consequently, in almost all circumstances it would be extremely unfair to award more of the pension to a younger person than an older person. Think about it.

A couple where one is 30 and the other is 20. The younger person has their whole life to save a pension whereas taking most of the pension away from the 30 year old will do serious harm to their compounding interest. Same for a 40 year old vs a 30 year old.

With the older person at 50 and the younger at 40 it becomes trickier. The older person doesn't have as long to save a pension whereas the 40 year old has a reasonable 25 years to save one.

At 60, the older person needs to retire quite soon, whereas the 50 year old could still save for well over a decade.

The only time your solicitor wouldn't be talking bollocks is if both spouses have reached retirement age. Then if one is in their mid 60s and the other mid 70s then you could argue the older person could generate a similar annuity on a smaller pot than a younger person.

@MrsMoastyToasty

Lesson learned. Don't discuss what you have discussed with your solicitor with your H.

This ^^ exes don't always stay "nice" as he has demonstrated when he didn't get his own way

I earned 10x my ex and he got 60% of our assets. So it just depends on the couple.

This is a completely unfair system, I loved my wife dearly and she blindsided me with a divorce whilst braking two families with her affair with her boss at work. I met her when she was 21 and I was 28 with my own home, bought using inheritance from my mum. She was given 10k to get her out of her old home which wouldn't sell due to the financial crisis. She never ever paid a bill in the house or contributed to the mortgage, I never expected it. I earned good money and when expecting our first child moved her on to my mortgage. So 14 years later she has now destroyed my life and reverted on our financial consent order where I agreed to give her half of my house....not her house the one I solely paid for! Yes my salary is almost double and my pension much much larger as I saved for the both of us. So in what instance is it fair especially considering the age gap that she can cause me to need therapy for months then think its ok to come back and revert on our deal.....what does a cheating lying spouse deserve who provided very little. She has had a house out of me, what's next my pension.....shall I pay her a salary for her fun ? Horrible

I think the principle is to divide everything 50:50 including all assets - home, car, and pensions. You might qualify for spousal support or child support whilst the kids are of school age but I thought it was very rare these days for women to get more than half of assets. They are expected to improve their earning potential. I always earned more than my XH so I don't agree that women always have to be the lower earners.

In English law the starting point is 50% and clean break as to spousal support thereafter if that is feasible in the situation. However it will vary based on personal circumstances eg if a woman or man earns a lot more as in my case as I earned a lot more than my husband. The law can be very unfair so if you might marry a low earner not marrying may be the better choice or at least try a pre nup but following all the guidance for those and even then they might let you down. Also perhaps agree before marriage that even if babies come you will both keep working full time (we both did and paid half the full time childcare costs each - an absolute fortune but preserved 2 full time careers)

If you sell and split now then it would be fair for you to get a larger share because your mortgage capacity is smaller. If you defer the sale by six years then it is reasonable to expect you to build your earning capacity and your housing needs will also reduce as the children are adults. 50/50 would be more appropriate.

A deferred sale AND an unequal split (beyond a percentage point or two) would be an unfair outcome and he would be advised to refuse. Especially as he will probably have to spend more on rent than you pay on the mortgage whilst he is waiting.

I think your options are split now (which might be around 65/35) or split in six years 50/50 or thereabouts.

Just seen this is a very old thread, sorry