Would you divorce if it meant losing your family's money?

[HouseRen]

I put in 250k deposit on our house. This was possible from family's inheritance. V fortunate I know.

There is no big drama. DH is loyal and committed, but he's also mean to me, v insecure, and I do not enjoy his company that much anymore. We have young kids.

He is in and out of work for MH reasons. I have worked hard and earn quite well. He earns v little

Deposit not ring fenced. Never was advised I could do that by solicitor though apparently once you've had kids it doesn't matter. He could walk away with a very big % of that deposit money which my family still see as theirs. The fall out would be huge.

If it was my money I'd do it.

What would you do it?

Married for 5 years. Young kids. He has potential to have same salary as me as is highly qualified but he's messing about doing v little.

It's still a shortish marriage. His MH could get worse over time which means he could end up with zero potential which will affect the 50/50 more into his favour. The kids are young and will be less impacted emotionally and mentally if you separate now. So many reasons for leaving now, none for later. Let go of the guilt and if your family try to get you to feel that then they should have recommended you ring fenced it at the time. Did they?

The longer you leave it the more likely it will be that he will get more.

Right now you have young children, which I presume will stay with you. Plus his mh isn't stopping him from working. Of course he will need to be adequately housed but so will you, and that doesn't mean a 3 bed detached house etc for him, it could be a 2 bed flat. But if he starts to work less because of his mh and then you divorce he may get more as he can't earn - you may even end up paying him. Plus the dc will be older. So it really is a case of doing it as early as possible.

I know it feels like you're giving away family money, but that's on him not you!

Speak to your solicitor you should be able to challenge any claim he has over that money particularly if there’s a verbal agreement that you return it

Does he have any assets at all? No pension?

Was the house bought as joint tenants not tenants in common? I got gifted £35,000 which was used as house deposit so we are "tenants in common" and I own a higher % because the deposit is mine so IF we ever split up I'd get 67% of the house even though we are married

I’d rather be poor and happy, than rich and miserable.

Of course there’s somewhere in between where your comfortably off, you get along, are civil, friends even, but have your own lives, aren’t interested in meeting anyone else, perhaps you are older.

In your shoes I’d see a solicitor and see where you stand.

I was on the other side of this, husband put around £400K of inheritance into our mortgage/home and was not prepared to split it or include it when we separated (I instigated the split)
my solicitor told me it would definitely be considered part of the matrimonial pot. It was from 10 yrs prior and had been mingled in with family finances.
his solicitor allegedly told him he would be able to keep it.
I posted on here about it and many people said that whatever the legal situation morally it was his and I was being grabby.
the mediator was more circumspect and said it was a grey area but as there was quite a big pot in our case, a judge might try to ring fence it for him as long as mine and the kids needs were met.

in the end we’ve done 50:50 of everything but I’ve left his pension alone which roughly equates to his inheritance so he has basically been able to keep it. I feel it’s ok as I have been able to buy a house for me and the kids.

so it is a grey area is what I’m saying, and if he can meet his needs without that money then you may end up keeping it.

Those who are saying they are tenants in common and will get higher % if they divorce are not correct. You own the house in unequal states which is important esp for wills BUT in divorce the house assets can and often are split in different shares to how you own it- and a judge can and do vary the shares between spouses So will this indicates intent at point if marriage thus is not necessarily the split you’d get on divorce

The solicitor who oversaw the purchase of the house presented it as because we were married and had children that the inheritance/deposit was up for grabs and did not suggest any legal/contractual arrangement to protect it. Also at that point I was pregnant with our 2nd kid. I was totally committed. Deciding to procreate felt a much bigger decision than the money

I didn't forsee this happening. I didn't foresee him stopping work. Or turning into an arsehole. Or that i would potentially give him more than 50%.

What about a post-nup?
Wont help OP but for those that marry, they can go straight to the signing after the ceremony!

Have you tried talking to your family about it? Do they know you’re having issues?

In reality you can’t ringfence it . Most divorces are on needs basis. In which case, even in cases where attempts have been made to do so, ultimately a judge will include those to allow both parties needs to be met. In cases where there are surplus assets than needs there is a higher chance of succeeding.

most divorces don’t have enough assets to meet needs therefore they’ll bring in inheritance both pre marriage and post separation

@millymollymoomoo do you think he might be entitled to more than half?

I know I need to speak to a solicitor. I'm just trying to prep myself for the enormity of the mistake I've made.

What assets do you have?

House value and mortgage? Is the equity exactly what you put in or has the house gone up and mortgage balance gone down since you bought?
savings?
pension?

It’s not really that simple. As this is a short marriage it is likely he will get less. Much less.

if yoire not just looking for reasons to stay then see a proper family law solicitor.

The sooner you divorce the less money you will lose.

I'd get on the phone to a solicitor ASAP. What you were given was no small amount of money, and whilst your happiness comes 1st, its still a huge amount. Do your research first!

@HouseRen "I have come to terms with losing £125k. But people always say he will need to be adequately housed and if that means buying somewhere then he will have to take almost all of it. Not 5050"

You keep saying this, as if renting doesn't exist!

I know someone who divorced in a very similar situation. ExH dragged everything through the courts and tried to get more than 50% of everything. He wasn't awarded over 50% but my friend did have to sell the house and give him half. She kept pension etc. It was a lot but certainly better than staying with him.

Definitely recommend reaching an agreement out of court if at all possible. It cost them both a fortune going through court. Total waste.

How is it not your money? You inherited it, it was yours. You chose to put it towards the purchase of a house, which was a perfectly sensible decision and you have benefited ever since then because you have been living in the house. You might lose some of the wealth currently locked up in your house if you divorce an economically weaker spouse, but that is a risk inherent in divorce (and marriage). And you will still be better off than the many people who don't get any inheritance.

He can buy in a cheaper area, or rent, or start again from scratch with a new mortgage and get a job so that he can earn the money to service it. None of that would be your problem. And you don't have to share your financial information with your family, or anyone else.

The money would be likely to come back around to your kids anyway in inheritance when your husband passes though anyway.
I know it can go on care homes etc but I wouldn't necessarily see it as losing family money anyway for that reason.

Either way, an inheritance shouldn't become a prison sentence.

He is in and out of work for MH reasons.

He has potential to have same salary as me as is highly qualified but he's messing about doing v little.

Which is it OP? Can he not work because of mental health reasons or is he just messing about?

If he has genuine mental health reasons, then this can be classed as a disability & will have major ramifications on the divorce settlement compared to if he’s just “messing about doing v little” for no good reason.

Genuine mental health reasons that mean he either can’t work or has a limited capacity to work = him getting a more favourable settlement as it will be accepted by the court that he has no / a limited earning capacity despite his qualifications.

Not working because he’s choosing to mess about = courts will base a settlement on his full earning potential and not just on what he’s earning now as that will be deemed a choice.

It’s a really important distinction as any disability will be a big factor, especially if you’re the higher earner and there actually is enough money to provide for him if needed.

I don’t know the answer to this, but does it make any difference that he’s not contributing to family life in the way that an actual SAHP does?

I mean, if the OP is doing everything for the children and they’re in childcare, what exactly IS he doing?

Has he been diagnosed with a mental illness? If so, that does change the situation as a PP has pointed out.

Has the value of the house risen considerably since purchase? I would initially try and have that portion ring fenced especially as you need to provide a home for your joint children and will need to continue to pay childcare or out of school costs.

If you can't have it ring fenced is there enough in the equity that you can tell the relatives that he has walked away with x% of the equity?