One party keeping the house - consent order

[Illbefinejustbloodyfine]

I'm in the middle of divorcing my husband. Long (loooong) separation during which I have had the dc living with me in the family home. Joint mortgage. We've continued to pay half each but I pay everything else.

He rented a place for a few months then moved back with his parents. (Had moved straight from living with parents to moving into our house) so he's been living with his parents since then, several years.

He sees the dc 1 day a week. Very rarely over night (handful of times a year - 4 this year i think) does no school runs, no school holidays, no days off work with sickness, no clubs, doctors, dentist. Etc.

Hes self emoyed, full time. I'm emoyed but part time due to being the main carer and lack of local childcare,

There is equity in the house. He has offered to "sign it over" to me. I can get a mortgage in my own right but not enough to buy him out. It's a 2 bed. Dc share.

What's the liklihood of this being approved by the courts? There are no other finances to worry about. I get the house. I'm not asking anything else of him. He's not asking anything of me. He has the financial ability to be living independently should he choose to.

I couldn't buy or rent another house for the price I can afford.

I think it will depend on whether or not you can release him from the mortgage. If you can, great. If you can't, I think a court would see it as unfair and want to see that he gets some percentage of the equity in the future.

Yes, I can. Thank you. Just worried that after everything I've gone through to get to this stage, the consent order won't be signed off.

I think if it is not a lot of equity and you can release him from the mortgage, a court would be happy with this.

What do you consider "not a lot"? It's quite a lot in my world (100k)

I would happily pay him a lump sum if I could get a big enough mortgage, and in fact had 2 mortgage offers last year but he refused to engage or consider my offer because it was less than 50%. The rise in interest rates has meant I can no longer raise enough money to pay him anything.

If you can show that you've both had legal advice and understand what you have agreed to, it could be signed off. Our consent order was in my favour, I kept the house, but there are extenuating circumstances. Until the signed order came back, I was never really certain it would be agreed - but it was signed off the day it was submitted to the court so I think it helped that we had shown clearly that we could both afford to support ourselves (and in my case the kids and mortgage), and why we'd agreed on that split. The courts also like a clean break so if your agreement means he's not tied to the house, that'll count in your favour. Have a read of the Advice Now guides at the top of the page, there is one on finance and consent orders and what the court considers before signing it off.

I thought he was in agreement? "A lot" depends more on both your circumstances than an actual sum. Someone earning £200k is going to look on £100k differently to someone earning £20k for example.

If both of you are on minimum wage then no, I don't think a court will think it fair for one of you to get all £100k. However, if say he was on about £40-50k+ and you had more of the childcare responsibilities, this would be looked at differently.

I was granted the house. But... it was refused first time round.

I offset the house equity against his pension.

@FSTraining he is in agreement now - it was his suggestion. Clearly he should have accepted one of my offers last year but didn't and here we are. Mortgage fixed rate ended almost a year ago so monthly payments have increased by a lot.

Neither of us are on minimum wage.

I have ALL of the childcare responsibilities. All of it. All I want is a stable hone for my children, which they have. It's not lavish, it's a 2 bed. But I can afford it.

@Fourmagpies this is my worry now, we have reached an agreement , I'm absolutely terrified the court won't agree it and I'll never be free of him.

I don't want anything else from him. He's had an inheritance which I'm positive will be hidden/spent. I genuinely dont care.

Difficult for anyone to say imho unless they are a judge or solicitor. I understand they do query signing things off sometimes. Does your ex have pensions? Imho if 100k equity in total and he is walking away with 0 they could query if he has had legal advice as sounds unfair. If there are pensions that puts a different spin on it.

He has had legal advice. I dont think he has much in the way of pensions. He's never going to have the DC anywhere like 50% (said so himself) and currently has them 1 daytime a week.

Due to being part time (thus enabling him to work as much as he does) if the house is sold, I wouldn't be able to buy anything else. Rental is awful atm and there has been nothing remotely affordable within miles of the dc school, neither of us want them to move.

We discussed a mesher order but he doesn't want that.

I guess if he is willing to sign then you will just have to see if the judge signs it off. If that is all the equity, there are no pensions and if he doesn't earn more than 60k, and the kids dont have any disabilities it sounds unfair to me. Still if he is willing to sign it, that is his choice.

Your not wanting to rent does not make it a fair equity split. A fairer option is probably a mesher order where the house is sold and equity split when children are 18. I am amazed he is still paying the mortgage on the house if he expects to take no equity from it.

If your children are very young part time work may only be possible now but over age 8 for example i think most women would be expected to get full time work by courts and start taking financial responsibility for themselves.

I don't think the proposal is too outlandish, provided he has had legal advice. I might have suggested he should look at a deferred charge Mesher (i.e. where you live in the house until the children are 18 but release him from the mortgage immediately and he gets a percentage of the value at a time in the future. These look very similar to Mesher Orders to most people but the legals underneath them such as who holds title etc are different).

However, if he is happy, you are happy and a court can be convinced it's fair - which given the split of childcare it looks to be - then I would crack on and avoid any more legal fees.

@FSTraining genuinely curious. Where does it say in law that division of childcare responsibilities falling on one party leads to 100% assets going to one party and 0% asset split to other party in divorce.

Genuinely curious as i had read that childcare responsibility split only affects maintenance payments...

Are the children babies, toddlers or teenagers in this case?

The law doesn't say this and it doesn't happen very often at all (except where the only asset is the FMH and the equity in it is negligible). However, each case is unique and a judge has wide discretion in how they balance the section 25 factors.

If you have a case where the children both have mild Aspergers and one parent has almost all the childcare responsibility, it's unlikely that this will have much impact on the asset split although part f) of section 25 does include:

the contributions which each of the parties has made or is likely in the foreseeable future to make to the welfare of the family, including any contribution by looking after the home or caring for the family

This will mean they may get a deviation from a 50/50 asset split in their favour if, for example, their taking on of most of the childcare reduces their earning and therefore mortgage capacity.

The outcome would be rather different though if both children were in wheelchairs, unable to attend school, needed around the clock care and the FMH had been adapted for them. In a situation such as this, the needs of the carer will trump the need of the non-resident and most likely end up in them getting all the FMH. It would rarely be that they got 100% of the assets though as normally there are other things like pensions and cars to go to the other spouse to balance things out a bit.

@FSTraining thx for explanation. Yes have a friend with a severely disabled son and quite rightly her and her ex agreed on her keeping house plus percentage of pensions so lions share went to her on divorce.

Not sure what OPs position is though or age of children. Without children with disabilities, fairer asset split likely to be 60:40 or 70:30 max in Ops favour.

I would agree although given the earnings/childcare split I would generally see little reason for a deviation from 50/50. The crucial factor is what does SEN mean in this case? It doesn't sound like it's stopping the wife working so I'm not entirely convinced she will get to keep the FMH in its entirety either.

I gave xh everything in our divorce- he kept the house, pension, car, everything. The judge signed it off because I signed a disclaimer that I was aware that I'd gone against the advice of my solicitor.
I kind of wish the judge had queried it tbh. I felt coerced into it by my ex and the money would have helped the children we had together.

It's not that I dobt want to rent, although obviously I'd prefer not to. We would both like to keep the dc in the same school (lower /mid primary years)

My earning potential and career progression have been significantly affected by being the sole carer for the children.

I can't afford a legal battle. He wouldn't accept my previous offers to buy him out (which would have been 30%).

Working full time is not an option atm - I have literally no way of providing childcare after school. I struggle enough as it is. I have tried and tried for years. Only a few weeks ago I asked him to do 1 day of picking up. He refused. There is no after school club, no local childminders with spaces who can collect from our school. It's a nightmare tbh.

So I could offer to pay him a share when the dc are 18? I've read that this may affect my mortgage potatlntial as it's classed as a charge on the property.

I definitely haven't coerced him. He came to me with the offer. I just hope its not another way to mess with me.

How long have you guys been separated and how old are the kids?

If the kids not mega young, a mesher may be fairer to your ex if house sale put off but means he may be stuck on mortgage which may not be what he wants.

With some people i believe an equity split can be agreed with payment to be made later on. If you have kids 60:40 or 70:30 may be fairer.

Maybe if your ex has a significant inheritance he is happy to write it all off though and you have got lucky. Im not sure you'd have a claim on that inheritance though post separation.

Probably if it all gets signed off, the more explanation you give on the paperwork for the split the better.

6 years, they're 6 and 7. He's refused a mesher. I don't want to claim anything from him.

Just one thought on that. Is your payment of the mortgage affordable only if you receive CM?

No, I could afford it. We'd have to make some cut backs.

No, I could afford it. We'd have to make some cut backs.

The new mortgage is over an extended term