Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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

Finances

7 replies

CookieDoughKid · 16/09/2023 21:48

I'm in the luxury position to buy my ex out of our family home by selling one of my rental properties. However, I want to negotiate and keep a lump sum from that sale to cover his contribution of my housing costs since I am housing the children pretty much 6 to 7 days a week. My ex, well he's amenable to the idea in exchange for smaller children maintenance contributions.

He earns more than me now (never used to!) and he will have a smaller mortgage because he's buying a house with his new partner who is contributing to it.

My question is for those who have successfully negotiated a package, does your ex pay till youngest is 18 or 21? We intend for ours to go to University. And does your ex pay towards housing? My ex is on the low six figures. I appreciate I am in an exceptional position, I do work full time as well. Although I could cover the mortgage on my own, it will be a lot hence the request for an upfront settlement towards housing the children and for a clean break.

We are not married and I'm well aware of the legalities. Ex is adamant he will continue paying till the children leave home when they complete University. At which point I'll probably sell the house and downsize.

Am interested in your experiences especially high earners.

OP posts:
FSTraining · 16/09/2023 22:03

I'm a trainee solicitor. From what I have seen, normally most cases end with a roughly 50/50 split (up to 60/40 if one party has the children more in most cases, and rarely beyond this) and either a clean break or nominal maintenance. Where one party has the children most of the time, they get child maintenance from the other. A consent order can include child maintenance but this can be overridden by the CMS after 1 year, so clients are generally advised to not give away more capital in return for lower CM payments because their ex can come back for more after a year. CM is payable until a child finishes secondary education or turns 20, whichever is the earlier. He could pay until the children were 21, but if he was our client we'd advise him not to agree to that as he could not guarantee the money was used to support the children at university unless he paid it to them directly.

As CM would include payment towards the children's housing, you would be making the wrong argument to ask for a lump sum or any ongoing payment for that. You need to frame the argument differently by looking at what each party's needs are and splitting the assets accordingly. I would think it quite unlikely that you would get anything more than a 60/40 split and CM at the statutory rate in your situation.

LemonTT · 16/09/2023 22:44

What is your negotiating leverage. His requirement to pay statutory child support will exist even if you make a deal so he won’t be advised to do that. People do make these deals but it’s a high trust situation that he won’t be able to control.

The question you need to ask is why wouldn’t he take his share, presumably half, of everything you jointly own and just pay child support as required. He can contribute to university finances if and when that happens. A lot of parents want to fund the adult child directly at that age.

Married people struggle to negotiate bigger capital settlements. Without an entitlement to anything other than half and CMS how would you get him to agree?

wobytide · 16/09/2023 22:53

Either of you can go to CMS for an assessment given the circumstances so it's not really even a negotiation is it

More worrying reading a trainee solicitor missing you aren't married and using "secondary education" which would mean CM ending at 16

melmonroe · 16/09/2023 23:10

FSTraining · 16/09/2023 22:03

I'm a trainee solicitor. From what I have seen, normally most cases end with a roughly 50/50 split (up to 60/40 if one party has the children more in most cases, and rarely beyond this) and either a clean break or nominal maintenance. Where one party has the children most of the time, they get child maintenance from the other. A consent order can include child maintenance but this can be overridden by the CMS after 1 year, so clients are generally advised to not give away more capital in return for lower CM payments because their ex can come back for more after a year. CM is payable until a child finishes secondary education or turns 20, whichever is the earlier. He could pay until the children were 21, but if he was our client we'd advise him not to agree to that as he could not guarantee the money was used to support the children at university unless he paid it to them directly.

As CM would include payment towards the children's housing, you would be making the wrong argument to ask for a lump sum or any ongoing payment for that. You need to frame the argument differently by looking at what each party's needs are and splitting the assets accordingly. I would think it quite unlikely that you would get anything more than a 60/40 split and CM at the statutory rate in your situation.

Why would they have a consent order if they weren't married? If joint tenants surely the house would be 50/50. Having the children more wouldn't change that.

FSTraining · 17/09/2023 09:45

wobytide · 16/09/2023 22:53

Either of you can go to CMS for an assessment given the circumstances so it's not really even a negotiation is it

More worrying reading a trainee solicitor missing you aren't married and using "secondary education" which would mean CM ending at 16

I guess it would be if you didn't know A-Levels can be done at a secondary school.

Not being married I did miss. It may or may not make the split of assets more complicated. It's not always a straight 50/50 from joint ownership as people claim on here. It will depend on factors like who paid what at the outset, whether it's owned as a joint tenancy or tenants in common, who has contributed what to the mortgage since purchase etc.

FSTraining · 17/09/2023 09:47

I missed that they were not married.

A joint tenancy does not necessarily mean 50/50. Joint tenancy applies to the legal interest, not the beneficial interest. A resulting trust may apply to the FMH which means one gets more than the other.

Original poster
CookieDoughKid · 17/09/2023 16:51

Hi there, we are not married and all assets including mortgage has always only ever been in my name due to issues with his creditors and inability to pass credit checks. I will do right by my ex, he won't walk away with nothing. His career is on the rise, he is out earning me. Whereas I am not so ambitious. Although I earn a decent salary our family home mortgage is huge. I think I'd prefer a large capital settlement and less ongoing Child maintenance payment as my ex has always been flaky with paying towards our living costs.

Thank you for your replies. I am unsure exactly the figures but my ex and I have come to agreement that he will have smaller monthly payments if I can have a larger capital share as he says he may well start a family in the future with his new woman. Will carefully consider your responses, much appreciated.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread