Is Ex's financial split proposal unfair?

[breezy34]

Had a long chat with the Ex about our potential financial settlement. We'll start divorce and financial split later this year. What's your take on it - has he been unfair with his own spending, and his proposal in general? Or am I being unreasonable here?

Background
Married 11 years
I'm a SAHM mum, living in the FMH.
Only he has the mortgage on the property (I can't get one)
We have one daughter, starting school this year. (So I believe I'm expected to work 25 hours a week at that point, probably minimum wage)
Daughter lives with me, but stays 3 nights with him. (no custody order)
He pays me CM and extras (there's no CMS arrangement)
He deducts the mortgage cost from the CM, and pays the mortgage directly.
Ex is probably on a good income, though I don't know what.

Complication
Some time after moving out (2.5 years ago), he gave a lump of money from his account, to a relative (as he told me last night!).
Relative then bought a second home, in their name.
He's been renting that second home ever since, at the going rate.
He's spent money on fixing things and renovating parts of it.
He also says there's further fixes he needs to do, and isn't going to wait around (!) until divorce and financial splits are finalised, which he says could take ages.

My reaction was not happy! But this is what he suggested for a financial split (figures slightly rounded):

The assets:
70k = FMH equity
23k = lump of money he gave to a relative
7k = money he's spent on fixing things and renovations where he stays
100k = total

A 70:30 split

• I effectively keep 100% of the FMH equity (70k). (He says he'd sign the deeds over to me, but mortgage may not allow it.)
• He will continue paying the FMH mortgage on my behalf, but will continue deducting it from the CM (Says it allows him better chance to get own mortgage in future)
• He effectively keeps what he's already spent (30k) (although he says he won't be recouping what he spent...)
• He says he will not pay spousal maintence, as this would stop him being able to get a mortgage for himself, and he couldn't guarantee he'd be able to afford it in the future.

I told him:
-It was wrong for him to spend money sorting out a place for himself, and fixing it up, as he's basically deprived me of any share of it in cash.
-From now on until a financial split is approved, if we're agreeing on a 70:30 split, he should be giving me 70% of his monthly income (including CM). That way he's free to spend his remaining 30% on his own stuff. Because what happens if he overspends? It'll reduce the amount left for me, and he won't be able to offset that from the FMH house equity, if he's already giving me 100% of it.

So what's your opinion?

• was it fair of him to use money to set himself up, once he'd moved out, thus depriving me of cash, but offsetting it from the FMH equity?

• should he give me 70:30 of his income until divorce, to stop him overspending on the place he's currently in? Or just wait until divorce is done?

• is he right to propose continued deduction of mortgage from CM, if he's giving me 100% of the FMH equity?

• he says he's not recouping any of the money he spent and that its not an investment, but I think he should still declare it on the Form E somewhere? Even if its no longer a saving to recoup, or an investment.

• if I did agree to this 70:30 split at some point, do you think a court would think its fair?

• anything further I should ask him to change, to make this fairer?

It's difficult to say without knowing his income but there are some obvious legal flaws on both sides here, even to a lay person like me:

1. He can't offset mortgage against CM because the court has limited jurisdiction over CM. If he agrees to pay the mortgage in a consent order, you could promptly go to the CMS and ask for full CM too.

2. What he's done giving cash to a relative etc is dodgy and yet oddly the 70:30 split might be fair. I would be sceptical and demand full disclosure on both sides to check nothing is being hidden, what he's earning etc.

3. Unless he's earning significant amounts then spousal maintenance unlikely because it reduces universal credit £ for £. If you are a SAHP he could pay you £800 and you wouldn't notice because they would just take your UC away. You accept the need to work anyway and that plus CM plus UC should be an okay income.

4. It's fair enough to say you would have liked cash rather than equity but realistically as a SAHP you're better off with equity as cash in the bank can reduce your eligibility for UC.

5. Granted you are new to this but an experienced eye will look at your demand for 70% of his income and consider it absurd. Again, depends on the unknown quantity of his income but half the mortgage and CM would be more normal. You would also be entitled to UC and could even start work sooner rather than later especially as DC spends 3 nights a week with him. Also I don't know what your entitlement to his future income post separation but pre divorce is, one for a solicitor but I don't think it's the same as during the marriage.

In conclusion, it looks like you both need legal advice. It's hard to say what's fair without full disclosure too.

He's not stupid but thinks you are - check with the land registry who owns the house he is doing up. If it's him, how much has the second home increased in value? Saying that I think he is being generous. You are better having a small CM and him paying the mortgage because you only need declare the money given to you and will be able to claim UC. If he gave you the mortgage money too you could be over the UC limit. Likewisse Child benefit and Child tax credits. Will the mortgage be paid off by the time DD turns 18 and CM finishes? Can you move at any time you like and if so will he contrivute the same to your next mortgage. What about if you co-habit or remarry? Got for his pension too, you haven't mentioned that

There is no mention of pensions.

If you want to settle without an expensive dispute, request he shows you his current income. His settlement might be fair or unfair, without knowing this it's hard to say. A written agreement that he will transfer the deeds into your name after x years would be a starting point

@TheDangerOfIgnorance

He's not stupid but thinks you are - check with the land registry who owns the house he is doing up. If it's him, how much has the second home increased in value? Saying that I think he is being generous. You are better having a small CM and him paying the mortgage because you only need declare the money given to you and will be able to claim UC. If he gave you the mortgage money too you could be over the UC limit. Likewisse Child benefit and Child tax credits. Will the mortgage be paid off by the time DD turns 18 and CM finishes? Can you move at any time you like and if so will he contrivute the same to your next mortgage. What about if you co-habit or remarry? Got for his pension too, you haven't mentioned that

This isn't quite right. CM doesn't affect UC, only spousal maintenance does.

How can 23k and 7k be assets if he has given away/spent the money?! You sound like you have no idea what an asset is.
Your husband owns two houses, that means you do too, plus cars, savings, pensions. Get valuations on pensions. Then take away what you owe on the two houses in mortgages and that is your equity. Add it to the other assets (not what you previously listed) and that's your total amount.
That's what you split. Then you find out how much he earns and use the cms calculator to work out what he should pay you and work from there.

Get legal advice.

In your shoes I’d go for legal advice.

His split of assets is weighted in his favour and he’s not counted his pension in the figures.

You cannot ask him to give you 70% of his salary - that’s incredibly unrealistic. It’s 70% of assets not income which would be fair in terms of you being a SAHP. It would be for you to sit down and think what your priorities are such as staying in the marital home versus your likelihood of getting a mortgage.

As always you should speak to a solicitor before agreeing everything.

But as I see it, a 50/50 split is the starting point. This means everything, including his share in the 2nd home and any equity (not just the deposit) from both homes.

You've also not mentioned his pension. This goes into the pot too, along side any other assets such as cars etc.

Once you've got full disclosure on all this, then you can start to have conversations .

As for him offsetting the mortgage against CM, he shouldn't be doing that. They are 2 different things

70% of his income- are you having a laugh?! That is completely unfair

As to split of assets it might be reasonable might not
You will be existed to sign and support yourself
If you can’t get a mortgage it’s unlikely he’ll be able to transfer the house to you- you need to be able to get a mortgage and tsje over the bills- unless he’s ordered by the court to pay spousal - not enough info here
Don’t u deters d his you’re counting his tent money and upgrades as assets - they are not/ they are reasonable living expenses as you have full and exclusive use of the fmh

I’m not reading it as he owns two houses - he gave some money to a Tenerife - they used that to buy a house in their Ian name for which he rents at market rate… ? No?

Relative not Tenerife!

He is asset stripping this marriage

you seriously need legal advice

your ex is not telling you the entire story

I would want second home valued and mortgage amount
ex pension valued
FMH valued and mortgage amount

he should be giving me 70% of his monthly income

I can’t imagine any judge in the land agreeing to that!!!!

Get a solicitor asap.

Just to confirm, he has said he does not own the second home. I believe him, it would be silly to lie when I could find out somehow by looking up records.

Based on what he's told me already, if true, then if I were to accept something like this, then I walk away with £70k (100% equity in the FMH, and can continue living there if I wish) and he keeps £30k (which he seems to have already spent). That surely means I get more than double what he's leaving for himself. Except that he'll continue to be on a good income in the future compared with me. (Though I'll get a proportion of it as CM)

About offsetting mortgage payments from CM, (not that we use CMS) this is detailed on their website:

"If you are a paying parent you can ask for certain expenses, which reduce your gross income, to be taken into account. These are called 'special expenses' and are for making payments on a mortgage, loan or insurance policy for the home you and the receiving parent used to share – the receiving parent and the child or children must still live in the home and you must have no legal or ‘equitable’ interest in it"

www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/other-financial-commitments-child-maintenance-cases

Now, whether he gives me the full CM, and I pay the mortgage directly myself, or he deducts mortgage from CM and pays it himself, my net is still the same, it's just a different person who pays it. He said when he was chatting with a mortgage advisor, they'd accept that he pays a lower CM each month because he's also paying a mortgage for a place he doesn't live in (or that he would gain from, in the future). The alternative would be, he pays me full CM, I pay the mortgage myself, and he then can't get a mortgage because it looks like he has two commitments: mortgage and full CM. (He said they won't recognise that the mortgage is being paid by me)

About his pensions, I asked and he doesn't know at the moment what those are worth, or how that gets split up. I find that confusing myself.

As for me getting 70% of his income until divorce, ok, maybe that's not quite right. But if he continues to spend on the place he is living, from now until divorce, it leaves less of his savings to split, at the point of divorce. So surely he needs to moderate his spending up to the point of divorce, to keep things fair.

Of course he owns or part owns the house piece of advice

He is not your friend never take advice from someone you are divorcing

Get yourself keyed up and find a decent lawyer. Pensions etc you need full disclosure and he's not giving you that and has no intention of doing that

Sorry that should have read the house he's doing up who spends money doing up a house that's not yours

@breezy34

Just to confirm, he has said he does not own the second home. I believe him, it would be silly to lie when I could find out somehow by looking up records.

Based on what he's told me already, if true, then if I were to accept something like this, then I walk away with £70k (100% equity in the FMH, and can continue living there if I wish) and he keeps £30k (which he seems to have already spent). That surely means I get more than double what he's leaving for himself. Except that he'll continue to be on a good income in the future compared with me. (Though I'll get a proportion of it as CM)

About offsetting mortgage payments from CM, (not that we use CMS) this is detailed on their website:

"If you are a paying parent you can ask for certain expenses, which reduce your gross income, to be taken into account. These are called 'special expenses' and are for making payments on a mortgage, loan or insurance policy for the home you and the receiving parent used to share – the receiving parent and the child or children must still live in the home and you must have no legal or ‘equitable’ interest in it"

www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/other-financial-commitments-child-maintenance-cases

Now, whether he gives me the full CM, and I pay the mortgage directly myself, or he deducts mortgage from CM and pays it himself, my net is still the same, it's just a different person who pays it. He said when he was chatting with a mortgage advisor, they'd accept that he pays a lower CM each month because he's also paying a mortgage for a place he doesn't live in (or that he would gain from, in the future). The alternative would be, he pays me full CM, I pay the mortgage myself, and he then can't get a mortgage because it looks like he has two commitments: mortgage and full CM. (He said they won't recognise that the mortgage is being paid by me)

About his pensions, I asked and he doesn't know at the moment what those are worth, or how that gets split up. I find that confusing myself.

As for me getting 70% of his income until divorce, ok, maybe that's not quite right. But if he continues to spend on the place he is living, from now until divorce, it leaves less of his savings to split, at the point of divorce. So surely he needs to moderate his spending up to the point of divorce, to keep things fair.

You really need to stop thinking of his income today as something that is shared. Unless he is a very high earner (which seems unlikely given the size of the assets you're splitting) his obligation during separation is going to be something like half the mortgage and CM.

He is under no obligation to save any money so that you can have some savings when you split. The reality is that you don't earn anything and he probably doesn't earn mega bucks either. There's not very much money to go around and you're trying to run two households with that pot of money. The likelihood of being able to generate savings from that is very, very low.

@breezy34

Just to confirm, he has said he does not own the second home. I believe him, it would be silly to lie when I could find out somehow by looking up records.

Based on what he's told me already, if true, then if I were to accept something like this, then I walk away with £70k (100% equity in the FMH, and can continue living there if I wish) and he keeps £30k (which he seems to have already spent). That surely means I get more than double what he's leaving for himself. Except that he'll continue to be on a good income in the future compared with me. (Though I'll get a proportion of it as CM)

About offsetting mortgage payments from CM, (not that we use CMS) this is detailed on their website:

"If you are a paying parent you can ask for certain expenses, which reduce your gross income, to be taken into account. These are called 'special expenses' and are for making payments on a mortgage, loan or insurance policy for the home you and the receiving parent used to share – the receiving parent and the child or children must still live in the home and you must have no legal or ‘equitable’ interest in it"

www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/other-financial-commitments-child-maintenance-cases

Now, whether he gives me the full CM, and I pay the mortgage directly myself, or he deducts mortgage from CM and pays it himself, my net is still the same, it's just a different person who pays it. He said when he was chatting with a mortgage advisor, they'd accept that he pays a lower CM each month because he's also paying a mortgage for a place he doesn't live in (or that he would gain from, in the future). The alternative would be, he pays me full CM, I pay the mortgage myself, and he then can't get a mortgage because it looks like he has two commitments: mortgage and full CM. (He said they won't recognise that the mortgage is being paid by me)

About his pensions, I asked and he doesn't know at the moment what those are worth, or how that gets split up. I find that confusing myself.

As for me getting 70% of his income until divorce, ok, maybe that's not quite right. But if he continues to spend on the place he is living, from now until divorce, it leaves less of his savings to split, at the point of divorce. So surely he needs to moderate his spending up to the point of divorce, to keep things fair.

Surely spending money to make his place habitable for the children to spend half the week in is a good thing? I'm not sure you'd even get 70 30 split if it went to court, with just one child that you split more or less equally between you. No reason you can't get a high warning job like he has. I'd say 60 40 more likely.

Being paid 70% of his income in child maintenance is totally unrealistic. As for the splitting of the assets you need legal advice. Sounds like the giving away of the money to a relative to buy a house was a deliberate move to reduce his assets. Thats why you need to see a solicitor.

You have been split for 2 and a half years - 30 months. If he had not given some money to a relative for a house he lives in, he would have had to pay out for rent. For a 2 bed house you’re talking maybe £800 a month.
For 30 months, that’s £24,000.
So, surely what he’s paid out to the friend equals what he’d have had to pay out in rent?

I don't think I'd agree that he has reduced his assets.

If he'd have kept the £30k in cash, then given there is £70k in FMH equity, the total is £100k.

If I got 70% of that, I'd walk away with £70k.

His current offer, is that I walk away with £70k.

He's simply swapped £30k of cash (which he's now spent on some housing project himself) for £30k of extra equity (which I now get).

Its deprived me of cash, in exchange for equity.

He has reduced his and your assets. He has given away £30k to a relative to buy a house and is continuing to spend your joint money on it.

Chances are that once you’re divorced the house will be transferred over to him.

Half of what we he spends is yours, and you won’t see any value from it.

Get a solicitor.