Help with splitting assists/mediation

[Redhed87]

Hey, I’m getting divorced, it is not amicable.
for background, he owned a house when we met, I haven’t earnt as much as him or contributed to the household as much, but am on the mortgage and joint owner on the deeds. We were together about 9 years, married 7, although split 3 years ago and he has made it impossible to sort the divorce - and has refused to move out since. He had a separate room and often stays at his girlfriends. Life is hell.
we are finally doing mediation. I now work full time, we have a 3yr old and 4 yr old. He’s agreed I can have full custody, he will have visitation every other weekend.
I am asking for 72% of the assets in our divorce. This was after we had mediation to discuss our debts/assets/income etc. we both said what we needed - I need a house in our current village, 3 bed, for me and the boys. Otherwise I’d have to change job and my son would have to change schools. Which I don’t think is fair, and also if I changed jobs it would really impact my long term career and earnings. My ex had said he needs a 2 bedroom property with a wider acceptable area. We can both afford these things with the above agreement. But he is saying no, it’s not fair, and he wants 50/50. But I can’t agree to that. And I feel like a monster asking for more to be honest but I have to think about my kids - and myself. And I am bitter to be honest and biased and I don’t know whether I’m being unfair. So would really appreciate opinions. Thank you.

My standard of living is going to change massively. I am not going to be able to go out, I’m not going to be able to afford to do things, life is going to be incredibly hard. I’m also having to move out of the home I thought I’d grow old in, because even though I could request to stay that would not give him any deposit/options or pay off his debts. The only things I don’t think are fair is that I may have to give up a career - for a second time - and that my son might have to leave his school - which my ex chose, and he loves, when his whole world is already falling apart.
in this scenario I am losing everything, my home, my job, my lifestyle, my family, and he is not going to lose anything at all, and will infact potentially end up with more, as his debts will be cleared, he’ll have the same job, get the same deposit as me, move in with his girlfriend so have two incomes and therefore be able to have a larger mortgage. He gets everything and I lose everything?
as I replied to the previous poster, if I was moving in with someone and would have two incomes I wouldn’t expect to get the same? As I would have more options available.

Him having a partner doesn’t make a difference to the asset splits. If they are proven to live together it could make a difference to maintenance depending if she has children or not.

I’m really not sure why everyone is fixating on this issue, I’m not upset about him having a partner, it’s just the fact he will have a larger household income. And therefore a larger mortgage so can get somewhere bigger. If there were living together it actually does impact the asset split. But they aren’t living now, so it’s irrelevant for the query I have.

It’s because you said “from a legal point of view him living with a partner changes things.”

Forgive me if I am misreading but I thought you were expecting this to affect the equity split which it won’t. It could affect maintenance requirements but this is dependant on a number of other things.

I understand how horrible this situation must be for you it sounds utterly rubbish but it is best to have realistic expectations of what you will get.

It feels awful now and I completely understand the overwhelm. From everything you have said though you will be so much better off without him even if this is an utterly crap time.

Legally, if they were living together it would indirectly impact asset division as it affects the assessment of need, which is what it’s based on. His mortgage capacity and household income would be higher, it would create an imbalance in living standards if he received the same amount of assets, and if it were the other way around for example and I was moving in with a partner, it would impact things like spousal support etc.
anyway irrelevant.
thank you, it is all utterly crap and heartbreaking. Just doesn’t seem fair on the boys at all but then neither is any of this.

I'm sorry because it is unfair. My ex is currently buying a massive house with his new partner while I am struggling to work out how I can buy him out of my small house. There's a whole list of things that aren't "fair" like their bigger double income and shared housework. I'm in a relationship but do not live together and I am very much on my own in running a house and caring for the children.

Your children are very young. Mine were a similar age when their father and I separated and they have adjusted so well, it is a very adaptable age. We are really close now they are older. My eldest also changed schools at age 7 and thrived, your children will be ok if you have to move them at this early stage.

I feel like you are feeling really angry and bitter at the moment because you see him as living a better life than you might be able to afford for you and your children but you really will be ok. You don't need a forever house right now, they will be happy in a smaller home if they are safe and loved. Better things will come for you.

You definitely need to look at his pension - with 240K equity half would be 120K & 72% is 172K. I don't know exactly how equalising pensions works but it could make a significant difference even if it's not up to 172K. The argument that he is not capable of providing overnight care due to substance misuse also seems a valid reason for a difference in housing needs but I've no idea if the courts would agree with that.
You need a good solicitor, mortgage broker and to prioritise maximising your earning potential in the long term.

OP's standard of living has changed, as she's gone back to FT work to facilitate affordability of the family home

Does family court not take into account the income of a new partner, if they are co-habiting?

I don't know but asking out of interest, as it seems like the ex-husband in OP's case is holding out on moving in with new partner to increase his 'needs' and therefore decrease OP's entitlement

I didn't think that cohabiting with a short term/new partner did legally impact the split of equity.

This has come up on here several times where posters have been asked to provide their income for their partners divorce and they've legally refused.

Have you both filled in Form E? That should be the basis of any asset split.
If he gets "an extra £800", that should be included in his income.
You need to both declare all assets including pension.

And I'm not sure why you are so certain your financial situation will never improve. Maybe you will get a promotion or something.

Also if you are in mediation you need to be prepared to compromise - otherwise the mediator should tell you the process isn't working. Also if the judge at the end doesn't think the process is fair then they can refuse to grant the divorce until they are satisfied.

Yes I think that’s what we did in mediation.
the thing is I am compromising - I would like to stay in our current home but recognise that’s not an option because of his needs. However, I can’t compromise any further, I have no other options. I feel like he’s already destroyed too much of me too, I am not going to give up my career for a second time. And if I did it would change all the figures anyway and I’d still need the same probably!
And I will earn more in future, if I stay in my current role, as I will qualify in the next few years, but that will mean things like being able to afford a holiday etc, the boys to do the hobbies they want to, being able to buy nice things in the supermarket - things I am lucky enough to do now but won’t once this goes through. I don’t want to have to do this to him, I do feel awful, if I could get a higher mortgage or if there was a cheaper property available I would 100% take/need less. But I genuinely can’t. And the fact is this division doesn’t actually affect him hugely. He’ll have a smaller home (which everyone seems to be saying I should put up with, so why shouldn’t he), but he won’t have to change a single other thing. His world doesn’t fall apart.

None of us can predict how mediation or any court case will play out. But there are probable outcomes that mean you might have to come to terms with accepting less than you think you are entitled to. Because the law doesn’t necessarily bend to what you want. Thats not how it works. You wants are an idyll that isn’t commensurate with your circumstances. Your marital assets are modest and your income is modest.

You can stick to demanding what you believe you are entitled to. But the outcome of a court case will be based on laws, precedent and judicial discretion. You could spend a lot of money pursuing an unpredictable outcome.

There isn’t enough money to provide you with the idyllic future you dream of. Your ex won’t be expected to fund it. The decision will meet your needs.

You are a fool if you don’t go after his pension, especially if you were a SAHM for years. At the very least you can use it as a bargaining chip to get more of the equity.

I don't like your comment about how they won't call their dad's house 'home' and somewhere they occasionally visit'. This must be such a difficult time for you but regardless of how your relationship ended, he is their father.

Are you stuck not being able to go anywhere? Because - and I say this gently as it is clear you are hurting - I think you do have options. None of us want to move our children when they are settled in school but yours are 4 and 3 - they are either reception or preschool and will adapt so quickly. You want them to have the big house and they will one day but right now your home may have to be smaller, and this is the time to have a smaller home when your DC are so little and don't need/want more space!

It sounds like early in your marriage you and your husband had already achieved a big home in a place where you liked the schools and could see it being forever, raising your family there. Things have changed though, and I think you need to adjust your expectations and vision of the future. You can have a lovely home amd life with them, even if it starts as a tiny one.

I don’t want them to have a big house necessarily (obviously I want them to have everything but I get that’s not realistic), but my options are what is what is available in this area. Moving further away is not an option. I actually never wanted to live here, I wanted to live near my parents but he wouldn’t allow it, so I have built a life here. Like I said, giving up my job and my sons school does not seem like a fair decision at all, and if I left this job my income would be significantly less.

It’s really difficult to have to keep defending myself. These aren’t my actions that have led to this situation. He is not a safe space for them. If he wanted to be a better father, and create that for them, he could.

The issue people are trying to explain is that your divorce will be no fault. There is recourse in legal framework to give you more because of what he did or didn’t do. In your circumstances the divorce settlement will split the marital assets in line with needs. A judge isn’t going to be interested in the reasons you split it.

In relation to his ability to safely parent. He either is safe or unsafe. If he is unsafe he should be supervised until any concerns are resolved. Be aware that if the reduced nights is what is driving your offer he may decide he wants more nights.

People are also explaining that your housing needs could be defined as a two bedroom property because your children are young and the same sex. The area in which you could live may be larger than you prefer. We are highlighting that your contention that it can only be one village is maybe untenable. Parents do have to travel for work and schools. I can’t imagine a village has a secondary school and you will have to deal with this problem at some stage.

A judge might apply his or her discretion to your situation. But they don’t spend a lot of time pouring over the details of each case and they do focus on pertinent facts. And there will be an expectation that you accept change.

You came here asking whether you should compromise. We really don’t know if you should or shouldn’t but we are highlighting the risks in your position. In a nutshell if you go to court you will spend a lot of money and the outcome may not be what you want. You could also prompt him to push for more access.

Do you have the potential to out earn him in the very near future? i ask because you mention having years out of the workplace but now earning the same which is pretty unusual. Did he own the current 4 bed home on his own before you married? Did you bring any assets into the marriage?

You earn the same, both have small pensions and both need housing that can accommodate two children ( he still needs this despite not being the resident parent). His mortgage capacity will likely be lower than yours because he will have child maintenance to pay. That will be taken into account for affordability. Realistically, you probably need to lower your expectations and if you can agree on 60/40 should take that quickly. 50/50 actually sounds very reasonable in the circumstances you describe.

if you split both pensions you will be entitled to 22.5k from his pension but you currently want an extra 106k from joint equity (you 173 him 67). I think that is too big an ask: rationally he should give you half his pension, take half yours, keep half the house equity and he gains 84k vis a vis your offer. If you suggest 60:40 for house equity and promise you won't ask a share of his pension it might make it more attractive for him. you would still come out 74k ahead in a situation he could make a very good argument for going 50:50. Even at 55:45 you would be ahead. Keep negotiating and good luck. But don't spend money on lawyers as that will most likely be a complete loss.

Try 59:41 you get nearly the same and it sounds closer.

I agree with this. If nothing else it sounds more reasonable than asking for 72% of the house.
I do think you're getting a hard time on here @Redhed87 Your ex is a drug user, is hiding assets, has a bigger income and will only see his children twice a month. It's funny how he's asking for 50 % of assets but not for caring for his children ( even though I know you wouldn't want this) Ask for 50% of the pensions.

". However his girlfriend has moved across the country to our area to live with him (she’s currently renting), he is denying they are planning to move in together (as then it would be looked at different as they would have two incomes for a new place). "

Sadly this has no legal effect on your division of assets. You have your pot and that is what is divided. You should look at the pension - as a pp said you can use this as leverage against house equity. It may not be fair but that's what happens. In divorce everyone ends up poorer.