Who pays the mortgage?

[UnicornMadeOfPinkGlitter]

Hi all. I’ve had conflicting advice and I don’t know where to go next.
so long term relationship not married. Together over 15 years. Joint mortgage.
split up. He left. He was as paying the mortgage as didn’t work and there are two young children (9&7). Now work and pay salary into the account for the mortgage and live off of universal credits.

have been told that as he is a high earner and owns own company that they would have to pay the mortgage in while and maintenance for the children but others have said no he would only be required to pay 50% and then money for the children’s costs?
salary doesn’t cover half of the mortgage so they have been paying more % towards it currently.

but the question is legally what is he required to pay?

this isn’t for me but for a close family relative who has had the conflicting advice from a charity and citizens advice. She didn’t work during the relationship as that was his request for her to be at home with the children. He’s now saying he can’t afford to pay for the house and everything for the children.
if she has to get by on her salary and universal credit there will be a huge disparity between home life with her and home life with dad.
he has them one evening a week and every other weekend.

i have my own thoughts But the hey are just that my thoughts and not pointing her in the direction of what she is legally entitled to.

her salary is not large think around £1000 a month for 20 hours a week. Not really possible to work more hours currently due to children having after school activities most nights and also a lot of weekend. Plus cost of childcare would outweigh any gain in salary even accounting for universal credit paying towards it.

She needs legal advice, it is possible that because he's a very high earner she could make a claim under the children's act but it would depend just how high his income is.

"UnicornMadeOfPinkGlitter · Yesterday 14:32

Thanks everyone that was my understanding. I think it’s her mum who’s telling her all of this and she chooses to believe it as that’s what she wants to believe.

she has a very nice large 4 or 5 bed detached house, new car and kids doing expensive hobbies that involve completions and commutes to London for classes etc so I understand that this is a hard lifestyle to have to let go of but if they are moving on with other people then that’s the sorry state that she might not be able to have as luxurious of a lifestyle. "

You mean the court will force her ex to pay to maintain her current lifestyle?

You mean the court will force her ex to pay to maintain her current lifestyle?

No that's not the case, the Children Act is about the children's needs not her lifestyle. That can include transferring the home, giving her and the children the right to reside in it until they are adults, periodic payments etc. So in effect (if the money is there) then he could be ordered to maintain the children's current lifestyle (or at least some of it) and that will probably have some advantage to her, but a court would also be expecting her to be contributing and working too.

Useful overview of Children Act applications: https://www.brabners.com/blogs/what-schedule-1-children-act-1989

PS I hadn't spotted the point about London. Assume she is in England not Scotland.

They are jointly liable for the mortgage but as he is not living there and may be renting elsewhere, he isn’t benefiting from the family home. Is she paying half his rent? Doubtful. Legally he could continue to pay the mortgage but charge her 50% of the rental value of the property as something called “occupation rent” (a tidy sum on a house that big!). If he’s still been paying 50/50 she’s very lucky and should be doing everything she can to get the house sold as soon as possible. He could very well turn round and refuse to pay his half or charge occupation rent. For his kids he probably (hopefully!) wouldn’t do that on the understanding that she comes to the table and either buys him out or sells up sharpish.
It never ceases to amaze me the people that can’t grasp that it isn’t their ex’s duty to support them.

No but the court would potentially award her more of the assets to house the children in the future, so they could insist on selling the house but awarding her enough to buy a 3 bedroom outright. It really does depend on actual income and assets though, it would need to be very high to get anything over and above what cms would award. It would only be appropriate if it's outside of the scope for cms to award maintenance ie above their maximum limit so would be going to court anyway.

If they weren't married, will the court be involved at all?

Both their needs are equal and will both need a 3 bedroom dwelling.

But the adults’ needs aren’t relevant for the law on unmarried couples. The only issues are who owns what and the needs of the children (if making a Children Act claim)

There are plenty of people who live in 2-bed houses, with this many children. There are no automatic rights to a 3-bed.

Errrr... I am not sure if you have gone through a financial hearing yourself or read the various posts on this thread.

If the mother requires a 3 bed dwelling so does the father. It doesn't mean that they will both will get it.

The court sees it that way. i.e both their needs are equal.

After the division of assets, they both can each buy a dwelling with as many bedrooms as they want.

Are you thinking of a financial hearing for divorce? This couple aren’t married.

True and the mother would only get that sort of award for the children if it did not impact the father being able to house himself and the children. It is very unlikely but without knowing the father's assets no one can judge so the mother needs proper legal advice because it isn't true that she would only get cms in every situation possible.

The childrens act won’t transfer her any assets.
all it might do is allow her to make use of the house for a period of time, it won’t afford her a share of it

She needs independent legal advice and she certainly won’t want to hear where she stands because it’s way short of where she thinks she is

the house needs to go it’s not always about finances but as others said it’s not often 1 wage can pay for 2 independent home

also there’s the fact of whilst your on one mortgage you struggle to get another so it stop both parties moving on

She’s emailed me more info today, which I did not ask for. In fact I thought she was cross with me because I didn’t agree with him having to pay everything.

he earns over £100k she earns £15k he rents a 2 bed apartment. The children are the same sex so can share a room.

they live in England. Her full wage covers about a third of the mortgage payment so she lives off of universal credit payment for food petrol etc

They need advice from a solicitor and will need to sell the house so they can both start again with any money from that.

Is she looking at increasing her hours to full time?

If she can't afford the mortgage then the house needs to be sold. If she has sole use then she should be currently covering the mortgage.

Are they joint tenants or tenants in common?

Both names are on the mortgage. This is 3rd house brought between them. First was typical starter home but as his business did better they moved to bigger property. At all times house in both names.

if anything she would like to work less as says it’s a struggle to get from work to school to activity’s on time. Has one day a week off when the children are not home. Day they are at dads. But needs it for rest and to clean house properly.

How does she expect to survive if she is unwilling to work to support herself and pay her share of her children's support???

We'd all like to quit work and have plenty of time to rest and maintain a clean house. That's not how real life works.

Work takes precedence over kiddie activities.

But needs it for rest and to clean house properly.

Well, I think the ‘need’ to keep a roof over her head will probably outweigh this. She needs to work full time asap so that she can start to do this.

I meant all the applicable assets, the house etc, which are jointly owned.

But if they are unmarried then the court can’t adjust the ownership based on adult needs.

I don’t see how anyone can decide that both of them ‘need’ a three-bed house. If the money isn’t there for her to afford that, it’s not going to happen. Children can share bedrooms, even those of the same sex. It often happens when you can’t afford a bedroom each.

I think you’re thinking of a divorce. They aren’t married. She only gets half the house (assuming they own it 50/50) and that’s it. It’s up to them to decide anything else between them, but otherwise it’s split of the house, she keeps her money, pensions etc. and he keeps his. That’s the risk of not getting married.
The only thing he needs to pay is child maintenance.