Ex wife about to have another baby and living in my husbands house

[ChloeBed]

Hi All
I am looking for some thoughts on this matter, abd I appreciate this may divide opinions, but I am genuinely keen to learn from men and women on their thoughts.

my husbands ex wife is pregnant (this is a very surprise situation), my husband and his EW have 3 amazing children together, none of which are to be honest thrilled about a new baby in their lives, which I get at their ages (they are teenagers).
the legal agreement that my husband has with his ex is that he continues to pay the mortgage on their house until their youngest reaches 18, he also obviously pays CM. We are really involved in the 3 Childrens lives, see them regularly, have daily contact, they are great children etc.. you get the picture. So life was pretty settled, until this bombshell was announced.
on legal advice their agreement is that whilst my husband owns the house and pays the mortgage nobody else can live in the property. This was advised because the mortgage company would not permit another adult living there without more legal costs, deeds if trusts etc. My understanding is that everyone thought this was fair as my husband was paying the mortgage. EW has always been allowed partners to stay, which they have and nobody has says anything - I say this as this was not done as a controlling thing, purely practical from a legal perspective. Obviously, my husbands ex wife is now considering, understandably, moving her new partner in, and we just have a rollercoaster of emotions of what is best to do, first for the children but also financially- because let’s face it his has an impact on the children! My husband has mixed feelings about this. He is happy for her to move on, but feels he shouldn’t be paying an entire mortgage for another guys child and her new guy? When he thinks he gets his head around this, he worries that the house is not big enough anyway, and definitely at least one of his children will have to share a room (2 already do) and none of them are thrilled by this (they are all teenagers, doing exams etc ). However, if he sticks to the legal agreement and ‘allows’ her new partner to move in, this undermines the legal agreement and leaves him vulnerable legally.
Wortg noting my husband will be in for capital gains tax when they do sell, as he has not lived at the property for several years!
EW response is that if my husband ‘forces the sale of the property’ (which I feel is a little unfair as he has totally done all he could, and more and force is not the right word, as this was an agreement she was happy with for several years) then she will have to move far away with all the children to afford a new place.
worth noting that my husband does not contribute towards my house which he lives in, as he cannot afford to whilst paying the mortgage on his former home. We are fine with this, as it feels the right thing to do even though legally he was advised he did not have to when they separated. But we get by, it felt right, we don’t have much left over every month (if anything!) and so it feels if I am honest a little unfair that we are subsidising a new baby and her partner that are not part of this ‘blended family unit’- new partner appears to have no property. I’m trying to judge, but I also understand he has a few (we believe 3 or 4?) children from previous relationship(s) that he sees only ad-hoc.
long post- apologies but I want to give a balanced perspective.
what are peoples views, should my husband stick with the legal advice triggering rather than forcing the sale of the property (If they admit to moving in together?) based on the fact this protects his position, and the house is not suitable for their needs? Or is there another solution that could protect financial interests but let them live in the property (although we know the children are not keen on this anyway!).
Tge property is my husbands, although he has agreed to 50% going to his ex on sale (they were not actually married so he was advised he did not have to offer 50%, but felt that he wanted to as he wanted her to be ultimately rehoused somewhere where his children would still be able to live or visit even as adults - as who can afford a house or to move out at 18 anyway!

I know I shouldn’t feel like this, as everyone has a right to their life, but I feel so sorry for my husband as he’s a good man, he’s always wanted to do the right thing by everyone. We have made huge sacrifices in our relationship too, including not having a family of our own for financial reasons to allow his children and their Mum to live conformably… and all was so well…it feels incredibly selfish of his ex to have a baby (and I know I sound selfish saying that too!) but it has affected so many lives, mainly the children, who I adore and I really am worried seeing them like this and just unsure of what their new family life will be like.
Finally to add, we are happy to offer the children a home with us. But are not going down this route as that feels a little like emotional blackmail too, although I feel this is what she is doing by suggesting she may move away. My husband and I have both agreed that this not the time to enter this into the discussion, as it will just sound like a counter threat (even though it is not!) and we are keen to resolve amicably and practically. Thanks for reading!

How old is his youngest child?

where will the ex live when D.C. reaches 18? Will she move far away then anyway?

will the ex still get 50% if the house sale?

would the house be big enough for all of you if ex did relocate with new do and baby?

My thought, before I got to the end, was to suggest his kids move in with you.
if that isn’t an option then surely he comes to some new arrangement whereby the new partner pays rent thereby reducing the contribution your partner makes? He wouldn’t be living anywhere else rent free?

If the new do starts paying “rent” that’s a tenancy and he’ll have rights not to be evicted…

you say his children are teenagers and doing exams. How would they feel about moving? Could he not just charge them some rent to cover the partner moving in?

I think he should protect himself and bring the arrangement to an end.
New partner can contribute towards the ex getting a mortgage to buy your DH 50% out.
If they say they will move away and kids don't want to move schools they will be able to move in with you.
She should have thought of the consequences before getting pregnant and planning on still being g supported by her ex instead of her new partner! .

That's tough, and your DP has acted well. I think that he needs to protect his interests, and it's very unfair of his ex to use his kids as blackmail in order to get her new bf to move in. She is behaving poorly.

Ideally the house would be sold or an arrangement put in place that allowed both sides to move on with their lives.

There is nothing wrong with the Ex deciding to move on and have a baby, and the teenage children may find they like having a new baby around when they are actually here. She may also genuinely be unable to afford another house in the area if your OH sold up.

Is there a way for your OH to contribute less and her new partner to contribute more? I get that your OH pays the mortgage and it would complicate things if the new man were to pay rent - but could your OH move to interest only on the mortgage or reduce any other maintenance? If the house is meant to be for the kids then they still need it, but agree that the new partner shouldn’t be financially benefitting out of it. Maybe the Ex isn’t feeling 100 percent confident with the relationship- maybe an agreement that if new man plans on staying that after six months the whole situation needs reviewed. As I doubt your OH would be feeling as resentful if she was a single mum with a new one on the way.

Honestly I think I’d push for separating the finances of the house, whether that’s selling it or her and new man buying your OH out. Your OH paying for the house impacts on the life he has with you, and your ability to get a mortgage together etc.

Your husband sounds genuinely lovely OP and you do too. I think it might be for the best if the children ask, to let them move in with you.

The other thing that occurs to me is whether the wife could pay the extra money that having someone else staying the house would imply.

I agree - his ex is taking the piss here.

Tricky. Family house, rather than your husband’s house, perhaps?

In light of ExW’s forthcoming baby, it is time to get legal advice about updating the original agreement.

While it is sensible not to disrupt the teens’s lives unnecessarily by moving them during the exam years, just the presence of a new baby will certainly change family life.

The challenging business is the new partner - ‘new partner appears to have no property. I’m trying to judge, but I also understand he has a few (we believe 3 or 4?) children from previous relationship(s) that he sees only ad-hoc.’

He doesn’t sound to promising as a) father & b) partner as so far he has not stepped up consistently as a responsible adult.

Good legal advice specific to your situation will make sure that your DH’s children have security until they reach 18yo when they are ready to fledge, that ExW has clear view of what her claims on the property are & also what claims the new partner may have - I assume none, but then I am not a lawyer.

A refresh & reminder of the contract will allow all parties to be clear what will happen when the kids are of age, ExW will have to make her own arrangements as under no circs is your DH responsible for her new baby & the new fella may understand better that ExW is not the property owner or will she ever have a share of the proceeds. It doesn’t hurt to be clear.

Also given the new circumstances, it is a good idea for both you & your DH to update your wills so that your wishes are crystal clear.

Life moves on, changes happen, just get the paperwork sorted out to keep everything up to date.

Ah, I missed the bit where ExW gets 50% of proceeds at sale - wow, good deal!

This concerns me…
’We have made huge sacrifices in our relationship too, including not having a family of our own for financial reasons to allow his children and their Mum to live conformably… and all was so well…it feels incredibly selfish of his ex to have a baby (and I know I sound selfish saying that too!)’

Well, you are not selfish. You sound really pissed off to me, if only you could express your true feelings about this situation.

You have denied yourself motherhood & your own family for ‘financial reasons’?
Your DH has been very generous with the house etc but you are not only providing the cross subsidy but going without having your own children?
This sounds like a life long compromise too far…to me.

That you apologise for being ‘selfish’ when you are so self-sacrificing says to me that you are short-changing yourself badly. If you had decided not to have children because of medical issues or not having a maternal bone in your body, then I would understand your decision. But from how you describe the kids, you are kind, loving & maternal. Why have you denied yourself motherhood for someone else’s financial convenience? Is there some reason what you cannot have what you want? Some guilt or debt?

Not matter how fab the kids are, they are not your kids.
You sound like a fabulous step mother, but you are not their mum.
When they fledge & leave home away from mum, they’ll move away from you & DH as well.

While DH gets his act together over the ‘contract’, it may be time for you to consider your true feelings about sacrificing having your own children. It may not be possible for you to have children, but you can live honestly with your feelings about accommodating the choice you have made with DH.

ExW having another baby as selfish? Putting herself first at your expense?
Yes, this is so.
She’s breaking the ‘deal’ she made with your DH, putting herself & her needs/wants to have her baby ahead of their agreement to have someone else there.
That’s what bugs you, she’s doing what she wants with her life & having a baby.
You are are not selfish to be pissed off with her, you have envy.
You want what she’s having.
That’s normal & understandable.

He shouldn't sell the house and the ex's new partner should not be allowed to move in, at all. It's not your husband's problem that his ex allowed herself to get pregnant when she can't afford to properly house herself and her children independently. Your husband is being generous enough if he allows the new baby to live in the home under the current agreement.

I think you need proper legal advice.

I'm assuming the property is insured? Is that still valid with a new person living there?

The old arrangement is ending, and it's not your DH that has caused that.

Does ex wife work? Does her new partner? Is the house in joint names or is it in his name? How many years are left on the mortgage?

You said 'their' so I assume it is in joint names. Could your husband sell his half to the ex? Or could she sell her half or part of her half to your husband, so she still lives there until the youngest is 18 but when it is sold she gets 1/3 rather than 1/2?

There are just so many options and questions.

on legal advice their agreement is that whilst my husband owns the house and pays the mortgage nobody else can live in the property. This was advised because the mortgage company would not permit another adult living there without more legal costs, deeds if trusts etc

should my husband stick with the legal advice triggering rather than forcing the sale of the property (If they admit to moving in together?) based on the fact this protects his position, and the house is not suitable for their needs? Or is there another solution that could protect financial interests but let them live in the property (although we know the children are not keen on this anyway!).

You need to see the solicitors who advised you. You don't mess around with this kind of stuff. It isn't down to you guys being nice - it is whether legally you have options. FWIW I think the ex is taking the piss.

Your husband should not be expected to provide free accommodation to a complete stranger. That is ridiculous.

I suggest he sees a solicitor and makes new child support arrangements.

what age is his youngest child?

Mortgage company need to be made aware of the other.adult potentially moving in...it may not agree, and will likely require a waiver or other documentation to be in place to protect its interest.

Also check the terms of the legal agreement. It may be until the children reach 18 OR the remarriage or cohabitation of ex-wife. (Used to be a fairly standard clause in divorce/ancillary relief, although its been several years since i worked in this field, and of course every agreement will differ)

In terms of finances, they could potentially agree a reduced level of child maintenance based on ex- wife's new circumstances and household income.

Good legal advice, at an early stage, is likely to be money well spent..

Good luck with it all.

I notice it’s his ex partner not ex wife? How did they come yo this agreement?

It is not fair to uproot all the children's lives with the sale of the house especially if doing exams but the new man needs to be paying you rent from the start and then you can see about selling the house so they can move on and get a new place. Why are some saying the children should go live with the dad just because the mum is having a baby, shocking really. He needs to sit down with her and go over a new agreement and get the solicitor to draw up documents also. Not the end of the world and the children still need their security of their house but new man needs to pay rent.

Go back to court and new guy can buy you out?

The obvious thing would be for this new man to pay rent until your DH youngest was 18. If the older ones are all teens then it looks like the arrangement can’t last that much longer anyway?

it doesn’t sound like the new guy could afford this.

at the moment he thinks he is getting to live in a house fully paid for by his new girlfriends ex husband.

rely on a stranger to make a huge commitment doesn’t seem like a good solution. Also if this baby was a surprise, the ex wife might not be ready to make such a big financial commitment with this man - she has three other children to think about.

I think it’s best to sell the house now, give ex her half and leave her accommodation arrangements to her. One man selling half the house to another man all seems a bit 1950s - I had you my ex, she is your issue now

Leaving any kind of moral questions to one side I think your husband should take legal advice pronto as that could ultimately make the decision for him.

His kids sound a little disconcerted by the change coming to their lives. It's tempting to give them an easy way out of that to live with you guys. You seem to have realised that that's not necessarily good for them since you have already decided not to just offer for them to come live with you. But I think you ought to be a bit flexible on that matter as it doesn't sound like the EW is necessarily going to put their welfare first. If she does suggest she will move away, offering the kids the possibility of staying in their home with the two of you would not be unreasonable at all.

I think your DH needs proper legal advice and really shouldn't try and wing it. Going to see the solicitor who represented him for the original agreement sounds wise, followed by some mediation with the EW to bang out an agreement. He should start by telling her that she can't just move someone else in as it's against the agreement and they'll have to develop a new mutually acceptable agreement that covers the new situation and since she's the one forcing the change she and her new partner will have to pay for it (only if this is feasible - don't push her into a corner).

If your DH is still comfortable with the idea of giving EW half the house profit when it sells, I would work out what the costs of having the partner move in to the house are - whether it will cost more on the mortgage, what sort of agreement you need, additional insurance etc. and also what a fair market rent would be. Then suggest not rent, but that you will take off the final settlement of the house the equivalent of 1/3rd market rent and the additional costs. If he wanted he could set the settlement value to be when the partner moves in (using a valuation) so that any further gains in equity from the mortgage payments or market increase will be his (obviously there is risk here if the market crashes). That way EW doesn't have an immediate financial need to leave, but your DH will gain financially down the line.

But I don't think he would be unreasonable to simply enforce the agreement and offer the kids a home if EW does move away. Unless the 50% house equity is a legal requirement, he could delay providing this until after the kids have left home (or even not do so at all) so that he can keep the house for the kids.

Accepting rent from the new man gives him tenant or lodger rights. He could stay and make everyone's life hell,, including the children's, if the relationship goes tits up.

You and your DP need to run, not walk, to a solicitor.

The EW needs to either piss or get off the pot - new guy needs to stay in his own home and she moves in with him there, house is sold, kids either move with mum or move in with you. Or she and existing kids and baby stay in house and new guy stays where he is. Your DP should under ko circumstances pay a mortgage with new guy resident in the house. If new guy can buy out your DP then well and good. Get an appraiser in. Take the money.

Most disposal of property clauses in separation agreements include a stipulation that in the event of a remarriage or new permanent live-in relationship, the property must be disposed of and marital debt paid off.

Your DP needs to be assertive here. He can stick to the 50/50 arrangement on the equity, but allowing someone new to insert himself into a house he pays the mortgage for, where his children Re living and studying for exams, is allowing himself and his children to be walked on.

Get to a solicitor ASAP. Be prepared to face choices that will make your DP feel uncomfortable and to choose the option that safeguards his money and his children's security.