Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Divorce/separation

Here you'll find divorce help and support from other Mners. For legal advice, you may find Advice Now guides useful.

Original poster

Stbx inherited property

56 replies

NorthGirlie · 19/02/2022 09:33

Hi,
My stbx moved out last spring and I’m still awaiting a settlement figure so I can sort out somewhere else to live (as the family home needs to be sold).

We had been living separate lives for 2 years prior to him moving out (well, I had as I was emotionally switched off from the marriage - loveless and sexless and I knew I was living with someone who was no more than a friend). I was the one who ended the marriage and filed for divorce at the back end of 2020 and put the separation date as two years before this and explained my reasons (basically, so they granted the divorce but we were actually living separate lives in different rooms etc). Anyway, stbx inherited another property (half of it as he has to pay his sibling their half eventually) within the separation period but while we were still together. His solicitor has said is not a marital asset as he acquired it after the date I’d put down as separation date. Fair enough.

Problem I have is that, although I’m the bigger earner, I worked part time for 12 years raising our 2 kids and my salary and pension took a massive hit! And, I paid hundreds a month in childcare (no family support) for years out of my part time salary. He coasted along as a lower earner knowing my salary supplemented his (joint account).
Anyway, offer from his side is 50% of the family home (4 bed detached, mortgage free) and neither of us can touch the others pension. He paid AVC’s into his pension throughout our marriage whereas my pension went down due to working part time.

So, he’ll get 50% of the family home, a nice hefty pension and his share of the inherited property which means he won’t need a mortgage and he will have a comfortable retirement. He is 10 years older than me btw and his solicitor is arguing he paid his pension for 13 years before we married (although he didn’t start paying AVC’s until we were together).

I will get 50% of the family home which isn’t enough for me to buy another house in a decent area. So, I m looking at needing a £50-£70k mortgage at 50. My pension will be reduced due to working part time for 12 years. Plus, I didn’t pay any AVC’s.

We have two children - one is almost grown and may be leaving to go to university this summer. The other is 14. I have the younger child 100% if the time (her choice) and the eldest (50% of the time). I have not received any child maintenance payments and the child benefit for the eldest is split between both parents. I didn’t bother claiming for child maintenance due to still living in the family home rent free (if that makes sense).

I am in a very stressful job and don’t want to feel under pressure to continue to work in it for the next 17 years. Plus, paying mortgage payments will reduce the income I have ti spend on the children if that makes sense.

I feel really cheated in some ways as I was the one who pressed forward in my career to earn more so we had a nice lifestyle. He just coasted along and never moved from the point he was at 25!

Am I being mean? Should I just accept this 50% offer and let him be mortgage free, with a healthy bank balance and hefty pension??

Or, am I being done?

OP posts:
Herbie0987 · 19/02/2022 09:37

Take legal advice.

timeisnotaline · 19/02/2022 09:38

I would think more about splitting the pensions tbh, it would be very fair to include them in the divide, they are assets of the marriage. If hed been paying half of childcare fees for his children you too might have a decent pension.

HomeHomeInTheRange · 19/02/2022 09:46

Can you not go for more than 50% of the house given the need to house your Dd?

And I would ask for something in lieu of pension.

And make it your mission to spell out to women half a generation behind you what changing work for childcare means in the long run and to allocate resources accordingly! His salary should have also borne the childcare bills, you should have had money to keep your pension topped up!

Is he being reasonable and playing fair? Can you suggest this without it becoming a legally expensive wild goose chase?

Bonbon21 · 19/02/2022 10:01

I think all these conversations should start at 50:50 for everything..property, savings, pensions... everything.
Then count back in each direction for each item...who did higher % of childcare, who made highest career/pension sacrifice etc..
Dont forget what is decided now will dictate the rest of your life financially... so consider whether a higher lawyers bill might actually be an investment for the future..

Chestofdraws · 19/02/2022 10:38

You likely need to discount the inheritance you can’t have it, they are usually excluded from marital assets and you’d already split

Fifty fifty is fair, considering you’re the higher earner here, and yes his
Pension will be worth more but he has paid into it longer. You both just need to do the maths on that. And see if any is due, but honestly I think you’re clutching trying to take him for more.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 19/02/2022 10:43

Although his inheritance isn't part of the marital assets it does come into the equation for needs so your requirements to house yourself and the DC are higher than his. You need a lawyer to fight for a higher proportion of the family home.

sunshineforest · 19/02/2022 10:54

Talk to a lawyer.

sunshineforest · 19/02/2022 10:56

I obviously am not a lawyer, but based on my own experience I think that unless you have both signed a separation agreement it is probably in the pot.

SierraHotelIndiaTango · 19/02/2022 11:00

You need a decent lawyer , I was talking to a family member who is a lawyer who was saying houses with children involved are often split 70/30 or 65/35 so why are you settling 50/50 if you have the kids ?

Elieza · 19/02/2022 11:13

Can you tell him 60/40 of the marital home and you won’t go after his pension or inheritance?

If that’s not acceptable you’re going after the lot no matter how long it takes.

Scottishflower65 · 19/02/2022 11:43

Pensions can be the most valuable asset. If his is worth more, definitely go for it.

Chestofdraws · 19/02/2022 12:08

@Elieza

Can you tell him 60/40 of the marital home and you won’t go after his pension or inheritance?

If that’s not acceptable you’re going after the lot no matter how long it takes.

This is quite silly. You write it like if she goes after the lot she will get it 😂
Kshhuxnxk · 19/02/2022 12:10

Me, I'd have my pride and not 'go after' the inheritance, but I'm aware I don't think like most others......

LemonTT · 19/02/2022 12:13

Essentially there is merit to his position which excludes the pre marital pension and the post marital inheritance.

The reason why you have the higher income is just a fact of the marriage as is the relative contributions to family living. They won’t be factored in

What you want to do in the future is not a factor. Your earning potential is what it is and will be used to calculate whether you can afford to meet your needs.

The first thing you need to define properly are your needs post divorce. It’s not a 4 bedroom house. When the eldest leaves it is as basic as a 2 bedroom property. There is give on that but not much.

This means you are going to struggle to ask for a bigger share of the assets based on affordable needs. It sounds like you can afford a mortgage of c£50-70k based on your current income. And you may need a smaller one for a smaller property.

As others say go back to your lawyer and try to construct a valid argument that could increase your share of assets and bring the pre and post marital assets to the table. But he was a lightweight on the marriage isn’t one of them and neither is I want to reduce my earning potential. Lots of higher earning men have tried that for years and failed.

Original poster
NorthGirlie · 19/02/2022 12:14

I have a solicitor - part of a group - but I don’t know if they’re just doing the usual things and sending me the letters his solicitor sends without giving much input. I had, initially, planned on just having a quick divorce with a 50/50 share in the house but then it became apparent that he wasn’t contributing much to the kids upbringing and I started to realise I would be a lot worse off than him.
I’m not sure the eldest child will count anymore as he’ll be classed as am adult soon (18) and is planning on doing something with his life in September anyway.
I believe, if it goes to a judge to decide, I will get more then. I think a 60/40 split of the house would be better but he is sitting on a pension of >£350k (current value) and mine is half that.

OP posts:
Original poster
NorthGirlie · 19/02/2022 12:15

I don’t want to be horrible to him (I dont hate him) but I don’t want to end up a lot worse off especially as I will have the younger child to bring up.

OP posts:
MrsBertBibby · 19/02/2022 12:20

The court's approach will depend on whether this is a needs case, or a sharing case. It is impossible to advise without full info, however, here are some points.

There is no rule that pension earned before cohabitation started is in some way ring fenced. It is highly likely that a court would expect your pensions to be equalised.

There is also no rule that ring-fences inheritances. Inheritance will be taken into account insofar as he has "needs" : he can't expect the Court to pretend that money isn't available to him. The court will consider it non matrimonial, and therefore not amenable to the sharing principle, that doesn't mean to say it is not relevant.

The fact he has this money would certainly entitle the court to give you a greater share of the matrimonial assets than the starting point of 50%.

It is a question in each case of what will be fair. So if, for instance his inheritance were £3m, and the matrimonial assets were £500K, a court might go as far as to give you the whole of the £500K. A court would be much more reluctant to give you more, as that would mean giving you the non matrimonial property.

Conversely, if the marital assets were £3m and the inheritance £500K, the court might consider that the £3m should be shared equally, and he should keep the inheritance on top, as presumably your needs would be very adequately met with the £1.5m.

From what you say here, I'd be saying your worst outcome is half the matrimonial assets and pensions equalised, although that is a simplistic approach. I think his offer sounds unrealistic, but of course, there may be other relevant factors.

You need to get proper legal advice.

vivainsomnia · 19/02/2022 17:51

I expect his solicitor will argue that you still have 17 years to build your pension pot and there are no reasons why you can't go FT.

Wanting to continue to work PT is a luxury after divorce, not a right and you can expect they will use this against you.

LittleOwl153 · 19/02/2022 18:11

I wouldn't accept the offer no. I woukd take it as a first negotiating point.

You say he has a £350k pension and you £175k? Then there is £175k there to be equalised. I'd say you want 50% of house plus £87.5k and you will leave the recent inheritance out of it. I would also add to that an amount in relation to the missed maintenance of the DC for the past few years. You can work out what he would have paid from his salary - unless he paid all the bills and you didn't contribute to anything.

Easterbunnyiswindowshopping · 19/02/2022 18:13

So if you hadn't lied on a legal document you would have inherited half a house put into the 'pot'?

Crimesean · 19/02/2022 18:17

Get a new solicitor, you need proper legal advice. Some solicitors are lazy shites who'll do as little as possible to earn their fee - basic letters, churning them out one after the other. Others are amazing and will look at each client individually.

SolidGoldBrassiere · 19/02/2022 18:17

You need proper legal advice all the way.

"Go for his pension" and "go for everything" is right up there with the truly ridiculous advice given on here sometimes.

FWIW, I agree with @MrsBertBibby regarding needs/sharing. However, you need to explore this with your own solicitor.

Member589500 · 19/02/2022 18:17

Your situation is incredibly similar to mine! Three children though and all now young adults. It’s taken us this long to work out how to separate! We have now worked it out between us.

I haven’t taken legal advice but relied on my own feelings of what is ‘fair’. Half our family home plus enough extra from his inheritance and higher pension to enable me to get a house big enough in our current area for our DC to use as a base in between work, travel, Uni etc. He gets to retire early and move away to a nice modern flat. We don’t have to go to court and fight about his assets and I don’t care that he will end up with a lot more.

I think you should definitely at least be entitled to half the pension you lost by being part time to raise the family. Not what he built up before you married but the extra he built up in the 12 years you were part time. You should share that deficit.
I ‘lost’ 8 years contributions so we worked out what 4 years FSP would cost to buy so I am taking that plus about 25% of his higher assets.
DH is a fair man though. We are happy we can move on and he wants the best for his children.
I will also need a mortgage and to work until my early 60s though.

SolidGoldBrassiere · 19/02/2022 18:18

@Easterbunnyiswindowshopping

So if you hadn't lied on a legal document you would have inherited half a house put into the 'pot'?
How did the OP lie?
Choccyp1g · 19/02/2022 18:20

It might not be a huge difference, but I'd argue the value of the house should be value when the split happened, rather than the current value.

(but I am not a lawyer, and have no experience of divorce)

Swipe left for the next trending thread