Equity and Inheritance

[Fivesixseven8]

My ex and I own our home. I made a large deposit, inheritance from my mother.
He paid no deposit but has paid the mortgage and for work on the house over 5 years. Its now almost doubled in value, partly due to property price rises and partly due to the work done to it; an extension and new kitchen, bathroom, landscaping.

My ex has paid almost all utilities and the mortgage payments. I took primary care of the children and worked part time, paying for food, fuel, small expenses, days out, holidays etc.

The equity is around £340k. He wants to split it 50/50 and I suggested I take my deposit and 35% remaining equity which he won't accept.

AIBU?

Also won't pay any child maintenance. He will go 50/50, and said i'm basically free to take the children when he's needing childcare but it'll be officially his days, if I dont he's happy to leave them at grandparents. I only work part time term time and he works full time. It doesn't seem in their best interests to me.

Married?
If not did you ring fence the deposit via a trust deed or own the house as tenants in common rather than joint tenants?
If married, its based on need.
If he wants 50:50, start saying it's a fantastic idea, you will be able to start doing xyz when he has the kids. He probably won't like that. Also would you suggest 1 week with the kids,1 week with him so he gets all of the grunt work?He might change his mind as grandparents will probably not be available to do his 'job' of looking after his children.

Not married or ring-fenced the deposit. Not sure if we're tenants in common. I was young and naive when I went into this and expected to live happily ever after.

If you’re not married it completely depends if you hold as tenants in common with unequsl shares on a deed of trust or joint tenants ( 50:50)
Who paid in what becomes irrelevant

unless you can negotiate and agree something different. If not the law will fall
disn to how the deeds are owned

If the deposit isn't ring fenced, the starting point will be 50/50- that doesn't mean that is where it will end. He has contributed solely to the mortgage for 5 years, which will have to be recognised. The proportion of care for the children will also have an effect on the amounts awarded. You need to see a solicitude to determine what they think is a fair starting point, then attend mediation. If that fails, then it's court. Given you're not married, I don't believe any of his money can be considered as a joint asset- so you have no pension rights. A lawyer is the only one who can tell you, and you also need a copy of the deeds to see whose name the house is in, is it tenants in common, etc.

If they're not married, it will be 50/50 if it's owned as joint tenants. It doesn't matter who has paid the mortgage. Mediation won't make any difference either.

Checked land registry and we're tennants in common, would this put me in a better position to keep my deposit plus a portion of the remaining equity?

If it doesn't specify how the property is split between you then it's normally taken that it's 50/50 so probably not unfortunately. Might be worth a solicitor appt to clarify.

Likely to be 50/50. You should have ring-fenced the deposit.

I'd get legal advice to check, but I think you can't insist on anything other than 50:50.
Honestly as well, if it's doubled in value because of work he did, and he paid the mortgage, 50:50 doesn't sound that unreasonable.

If he really is going 50:50 for childcare this is good for you. Get back to work full time so you can build your savings and pension. You'll only need to cover half the childcare costs. It will be good for the kids to build a strong relationship with their grandparents (hope he's checked his plan with them!)

Will he want half the child benefit etc? Just to be prepared - he sounds very keen on 'equal'.

My deposit is still 25% of the current value so quite substantial. He paid for the work but I've also taken on all the childcare and worked part time around everyone else to pay for other bills.

We have 3 children so childcare would not be cheap through the 13 weeks school holidays If I worked FT. I havent got any family within a 3 hour drive. It's more financially viable for me to work term time, especially as my job gives me benefits of car and fuel. I might look for something FT once my children are in secondary school though.

Yes spending time with grandparents is nice but theirs have never even taken any of them out for the day. They've always seemed reluctant to have them and my ex wouldn't usually ever want to ask them. Whereas I'd be free in the holidays and want to have my children and my children would want to stay with me. I've always enjoyed the holidays with them and it seems illogical to take them away half the week.

I've spoken to a solicitor who said it was reasonable to open a case but I don't want this to end in an expensive legal situation if I'm not likely to come out with enough to make it worthwhile.

Unless you specify otherwise a tenants in common ownership split if 50:50. That is ownership you agreed and the contribution in terms of deposit and mortgage payments are irrelevant.

Your best approach to this issue is to appeal to his good nature as it a straightforward issue for a court. Unless you have evidence to show you both agreed your deposit would be ring fenced.

So you want £174.25k (25% of equity plus 35% of leftover equity) and he wants you to have £170k (half of equity)? I wouldn’t bother going to court for under £5k, considering solicitor fees.

If you’ve always been the primary carer for the children and they want to stay with you then it’d be worth going through the CAFCASS route of mediation then getting a CAO. It’s likely 50:50 will be the starting point though and it’s normal for parents to use childcare in the holidays (appreciate it would make your life harder/more expensive to go full-time and do so, but the courts will be looking at what’s best for the children, not what makes financial sense for ‘the family’ as essentially that’s asking your ex to subsidise you by seeing the children less).