Buying a flat for separated partners to share – pros and cons?

[quitethelittlekoala]

I read on a thread here recently that someone bought a small flat with their ex after separation, that they each lived in week about in order to allow the DC to remain in the family home all the time.

I am thinking this may be the best solution for my situation, which is relatively mature and amicable, but I'm keen to hear from others who have done this about drawbacks I haven't thought of.

Obviously it would have to be legally watertight with some kind of contract drawn up. Are there any issues with both of us living there one week at a time, in terms of council tax etc, does anyone know? Does one location need to be named as our permanent home – and would that be an issue if, for both of us, that was the family home and not the flat? I have no idea about any of this. Considering a one-bedroom flat where one of us can make the living room their bedroom, but again, not sure if this is legally dodgy in some way. I'm maybe overthinking things.

I can foresee potential issues with things like remedial or upgrading work on either the flat or the house – what happens if one party wants work done and the other doesn't, for example.

Please come at me with any other sticking points you can think of – I want to go into this with my eyes open, but am feeling it's still preferable to making the kids all pack up and move around every week or two. Many thanks.

Thanks @HenriettaVienetta – yes, these are all things I need to think about. Both places would be both our homes equally and as mentioned, I'd much rather it was me packing up and moving each week than the DC. I can rationalise it – I feel they'd get disgruntled and sulky if they're busy focused on doing something in one house and it's suddenly time to up sticks and get out – which I can totally understand.

I know it's not a long-term solution, but am still thinking it's a good idea for a couple of years at least. It's been useful starting the thread as no massive complications that hadn't already occurred to me have been mentioned yet.

At the moment, it's a case of "I've noticed the kitchen tap's leaking, will I call the plumber or do you want to?" I don't see why that would change if we separate. We're not going to suddenly decide to be obstructive and unco-operative to each other, I don't think. I mean, I don't have a crystal ball, but I just don't think we'd suddenly turn on each other just because we're not officially in a couple any more. We don't want vengeance...

I totally agree with this. I get that sometimes parents just want to keep everything the same for their kids and not let the breakdown of their marriage affect them but the truth of the matter is, relationships end, things change, people move house. A big chunk of marriages end in divorce and most romantic relationship fail. Protecting kids from this truth may be detrimental to them as they get older and start to have their own relationships.

I think a far better lesson for them would be to show that while relationships end and things change, people can still be civil and change can be good. When they enter the big bad world there will be several times when things may not go the way they want, their office will change location, their bus route will change, their best friend will go to university in a different city. This is all apart of life and teaching them to adapt to a new way of life is a good thing. Kids are more resilient than people give them credit for.

I think keeping the family home will also give them false hope that eventually you'll get back together.

Really, why are people going on about new partners? We are late 40s/ early 50s, have been together nearly 30 years, it's just not a priority. It might happen, but as I've said I would see the flat thing as temporary – for a few years only. If we did get new partners, we'd revisit it all and move on then. I wouldn't get together with someone who demanded I instantly change my living situation to accommodate them, anyway. They'd be patient, and if not, they'd be out. All I'm interested in at the moment is the kids.

providing two homes and helping children accept they are part of two families is more tenable and it works for many parents and children.

And having one home – the home they've been in since birth – is what I know they'd choose and prefer.

I wouldn’t live in a one bed flat shared by two people with one sleeping in the living room. Even for part of the week it would be a shit existence.

The idea doesn't bother me at all – as I said, I'd enjoy the solitude, I'd get on with work (wfh) and pursue hobbies. Each to their own :-)

Totally agree with the PP who suggested renting first if you want to try this.

If you see this as a 2 year arrangement, stamp duty etc may well waste more money than rental fees. Look into this. And if it doesn’t work, much less expensive to get out of it.

Separately, each person only gets CGT relief on their primary residence. So if, say, your ex designated the flat as his, there might be CGT implications for you on selling, and vv on the house. Take advice.

Just seen the point on WFH. Do you WFH fulltime?

You seem to have made your mind up OP and you don't want to listen to what others have to say (people probably with a lot of experience of what comes next) so not really sure what you want from posting this.

If you're really interested in the kids, you'll stop muddying the waters and get a clean break.

@SheilaFentiman no, I'm hybrid – why? I could just do extra wfh the weeks I was in the flat, potentially, bringing in more cash.

@CornishGem1975 it's bizarre that you assume that moving the kids between two homes is always the best solution in every case. I disagree. I think we can make this work and nothing on this thread has changed my opinion of that. Getting good tips and advice, but everyone's situation is different.

Because if you are renting/buying a one bed flat where the sitting room is off limits as it is his bedroom, you will be sleeping and working in the same room for hours on end, which may be tough.

If you're really interested in the kids,...

@CornishGem1975 and you can fuck off with that too, thanks. :-)

another issue is that many one beds will not have a separate living room but will be open plan e.g.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/138316973#/?channel=RES_BUY

Oh, please. Read the thousands of shit, messy divorce-related situations kids are living in, just from mums net threads. By contrast the OP's solution sounds like a dream life.

She's repeatedly said that future relationships aren't a concern. Why does everyone keep banging on about that?

Thanks – we wouldn't get one like that.

She's not talking about the next 30 years ffs. Just until the teens finish school.

Thanks @LaurieStrode . This thread has been eye-opening! And a bit sad.

Cool - if you have looked at housing stock in your area and can afford something with separate rooms in the flat, that helps, of course.

Would you need a mortgage to buy the flat?

Would you need a mortgage to buy the flat?

Partial, but we can just stick it onto our existing mortgage, which didn't have much longer to go Them's the breaks.

The way most parents rationalize and justify their selfishness is truly astounding and depressing.

Kudos to you for putting your children first.

It could be really financially sensible in that money is invested into a house rather than rent.
Draw up a practical agreement

FFS yourself! Who said anything about 30 years? It doesn't need to be anywhere near that long to feel pretty untenable.

OP has said they are young teens, so potentially 5 years of this, at a minimum. My older S will be almost 19 by the time he finishes sixth form. He will then be going to uni and will need somewhere during holiday periods, most likely a family home. As will his younger teen brother most likely, so if we went this route, it would potentially be at least 5 years from now, more likely 8+ years. Even if they don't do uni, they are unlikely to be able to leave home the day they leave school. 5 years minimum of living out of bags, not really being settled, not having a proper home is pretty unappealing. I think it is also a lot less confusing for the kids, wondering if dad and mum are going to get back together etc. Whereas, a true division of assets, allowing both parents a clean break is a lot less messy and complicated. However much they think they won't turn against each other, we all know the true reality of marriage breakdown. It is very rare for people to come out as friends.

Apart from anything else, the stamp duty on a second property, let alone potential for capital gains tax could be eye-watering.

Can you? Have you checked this? We extended our mortgage on our prior house and said it was for home improvements, but the bank had security over the house in question as an asset.

Unless you have a 'no questions asked, borrow back all you have paid' mortgage (which you might, we did!)

Can you? Have you checked this?

Urr... sort of... 😉 It's one of the things on my list to find out for definite! On my banking app, which I know is not the supreme authority, it says there's all these thousands 'available to borrow' up to the value of the original mortgage – but whether we can use this to buy another property, I need to 100% determine. Thanks, I will do.

That's good. I am trying to stick to your original question of practical issues to check and not emotional.

If you borrow back, it may be at the current interest rate, not any fixed rate that you had originally - another thing to check.

I’d do this if my DH and I split up I think. It’s win win really if it means you can keep your original house too and must be better for the kids surely.

Just because it’s not the norm doesn’t mean it’s not a good idea.

You are thinking this through with a fresh/recently separated mindset. Believe me, this will have a horrible outcome for you or him sooner than you think. You are better off packing the bags in your car weekly than sharing a space.

Give it two years and come back to this threat and tell us how it played out.