Page 3 | Urgent - Does this sound like a fair split of assets on divorce

Amicablecouple · 2025-04-01T09:45:53+00:00

My husband (of 16 years) and I are going through a divorce. We just do not love each other anymore and want different things from life now and in the future. We are talking very amicably and are at present discussing our finances. I would love to know anyone's thoughts on where we are and if it would (or is) considered a fair split of assets by you or would be by the judge. Assets House - £380000 (no mortgage as my husbands parents have given us over £100000 over our marriage to pay off the mortgage) Money in accounts investments and savings - £65000 We have vehicles etc but these will be easy to split as they are worth pretty much the same so we will just keep our own. I have been a SAHM for the past 12 years but have been back at work for the last 4 years working 3 days a week. Take home pay for me is £900/month. My husband works full time and takes home £2600/month He has a pension which we have decided to split 50/50 for the 16 years we have been together (he has 5 years paying into it before we met which he will keep) We are looking at a complete 50/50 split of everything. 380000 / 2 = £190000 65000 / 2 = £32500 Total = £222500 each. We are trying (big priority for us) for him to keep the family home so that it has minimal impact on the Children and I will buy another house and probably take on a small £50k mortgage to do this. I simply could not take on such a large mortgage and would not get one approved either. My husband will have to take out a large mortgage and will just about struggle to pay it and everything else on his pay but he thinks he can just about manage it for the children's sake even if it is going to be very hard. He will look to sell once on the youngest (now 11) finishes school. We will share the children on a 50% bases. I will have to get Universal Credit to help to pay for my mortgage etc. and possibly also work full time. We have grave concerns that as on paper it will appear to a judge that I will need more of the assets to support me in buying a house (£900 per month is not going to come close to what I will need) but in fact once UC and child benefit are taken into account I will actually be on a similar monthly income to him but he will have a large mortgage and larger household bills (tax, energy etc) so I will probably have a good bit more disposable income than him. Does anyone know if a judge will take this UC payment into account when judging 'fairness' of the asset split? (I'm obviously not receiving it yet but I will once we fully divorce). Any advice, thoughts or comments would be VERY greatly received!

Soontobe60 · 01/04/2025 14:29

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 13:48

Thank you so much for your considered response.

We had thought these things also. It's just so bloody hard to try to do what is the best in the long run. Yes, they probably will feel that I am missing from the family home. Yes, they probably will see that Dad is struggling to keep things going etc. Yes, it would be better for them to keep their rooms and the safety/familiarity of the only house they have known.

I think possibly involving the DC's in this and see what their point of view is. The last thing we want to do is to impose something on them that they are not happy with....especially as they are not happy about us divorcing.

Show quote history

Please don’t ask your DC what they think! That’s a terrible idea, putting that on a child.
You and your DH are the grown ups here. You make the decisions. Your children will not suffer by living in a different house - children move all the time. In fact, children living in rented houses move very frequently.

Soontobe60 · 01/04/2025 14:31

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 14:03

I understand you point but I think if done sensitively to at least gauge their views might be better than just imposing things upon them.

For example:
There is a small possibility of being able to keep the house (Dad will live there) but this will mean...XYZ........... What are your thoughts about that? We are not saying that it will definitely happen as it may not be possible.

I think that by not including them in any discussions will be worse and risks them feeling isolated. They are impacted (more that us) so they should have a voice in my view.

Show quote history

You’re just passing the book here, poor kids!

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 01/04/2025 14:33

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 14:15

There are.....just do some searches yourself instead of jumping with unhelpful (and erroneous) comments.

I will have £225,000 in equity and on a 50K mortgage there are plenty who will lend even with UC.

Show quote history

One point due to some of that money being from savings you won't be entitled to UC until you buy a house. You're in a bit of a catch 22 situation

Mrsttcno1 · 01/04/2025 14:33

I’m not sure you understand the process here OP.

He’s only getting 2.6k a month so spousal maintenance is a none starter, 50/50 with kids so unlikely to be child maintenance, UC you’d be expected to look for work if you’re only earning £900 a month and potentially once you are working full time you wouldn’t be eligible. With a mortgage you’re not going to get any housing benefit.

Kardamyli2 · 01/04/2025 14:36

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 14:15

There are.....just do some searches yourself instead of jumping with unhelpful (and erroneous) comments.

I will have £225,000 in equity and on a 50K mortgage there are plenty who will lend even with UC.

Show quote history

I'm disgusted that the state will allow this. why should other people pay tax so you can have benefits to pay a mortgage. Go back to work full time and stand on your own 2 feet.

Clouth · 01/04/2025 14:41

I think you would be much better off buying two small properties within walking distance of each other. Long-term this will be better for the children. You are trying to avoid the short-term pain of losing the house but it won’t benefit them in the long term.

rubberduck68 · 01/04/2025 14:50

Anything you both agree on is usually "fair" in the eyes of a judge, unless there is a vast discrepancy in equity/earnings in favour of one partner. The money gifted from his parents is (like inheritance) considered "married money" if gifted during the marriage, so if the house was in both your names, they gifted it to you both. Why would you want to move out of the family home? Sell it and get something smaller each. Do you really want to visit that every time you see your kids, and eventually see another woman living in there (men can and do often move fast on that front). Whatever you decide you must get the final decision drawn up as a consent order, because although you completely trust your husband now, things sadly can change.

Holdonforsummer · 01/04/2025 14:51

I have to agree I’m shocked at this causal assumption of £1k UC a month coming your way. You have huge amounts of equity and can work full time - you should not need UC and should cut your cloth accordingly. UC should not be topping up/subsidising your lifestyle. The UK plainly can’t afford this level of subsidising everyone!

AddictedtoCrunchies · 01/04/2025 14:53

I think you should take the £100k off the assets for him as it came from his parents and it feels morally wrong for you to have a share of it. Then you need to look at going full time ASAP so that you can use whatever £ is left for a hefty deposit on a smaller house for you and mortgage the rest.

fraughtcouture · 01/04/2025 14:56

Why can’t you work full time? How can you expect more from UC than wages, when your youngest child is 11? I’m shocked benefits are even an option here to be honest, why should you claim from the state when you will have £222k in a settlement?!

ZoggyStirdust · 01/04/2025 14:57

AddictedtoCrunchies · 01/04/2025 14:53

I think you should take the £100k off the assets for him as it came from his parents and it feels morally wrong for you to have a share of it. Then you need to look at going full time ASAP so that you can use whatever £ is left for a hefty deposit on a smaller house for you and mortgage the rest.

Pretty sure the op is keen on her share of the 100k along with uc and even fishing for spousal.

not sure a moral argument will get much traction…

rubberduck68 · 01/04/2025 15:01

fraughtcouture · 01/04/2025 14:56

Why can’t you work full time? How can you expect more from UC than wages, when your youngest child is 11? I’m shocked benefits are even an option here to be honest, why should you claim from the state when you will have £222k in a settlement?!

The OP won't get Universal Credit with that kind of equity, income and earning potential.

PocketSand · 01/04/2025 15:32

I don’t think the court would approve this. You have been primary carer for the last 12 years. It will be incredibly disruptive for you to move out even if you can make it financially work. Your DC would want you to continue to be primary carer with you staying in the matrimonial home or selling it. He has not done 50% of childcare for the last 12 years. How will he take on huge mortgage and increase childcare?

How about you and DC stay in the matrimonial home and it is sold when children are adult and proceeds split 50/50. As you are primary carer and can only increase your work as the become less dependent. You don’t have to get a mortgage. DH rents or gets a mortgage based on his income with the knowledge that he gets a share of equity in future. His childcare responsibilities remain what they are now. Your DC have security of both staying in the house and keeping primary care giver. Or family home is sold now - depends on equity, age of DC, income, ability to get mortgage.

I can’t see any situation where the best course of action, prioritising DC, is for you to move out. If he had done 50:50 for the last 12 years your plan would make more sense.

PocketSand · 01/04/2025 15:39

Worse case scenario he’s convinced you that the house is more important to the DC than you. Even if you hadn’t been primary carer for the last 12 years this would not be true.

SirChenjins · 01/04/2025 15:43

This can't be right, can it? Can a married couple split with very reasonable assets, and then one person can apply for benefits in order to borrow for a mortgage after choosing to work p/t for years?

If it were that easy, surely more people would do this? Or perhaps they do and this is why the benefits bill is now running into the billions...?

Original poster

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 15:48

PocketSand · 01/04/2025 15:32

I don’t think the court would approve this. You have been primary carer for the last 12 years. It will be incredibly disruptive for you to move out even if you can make it financially work. Your DC would want you to continue to be primary carer with you staying in the matrimonial home or selling it. He has not done 50% of childcare for the last 12 years. How will he take on huge mortgage and increase childcare?

How about you and DC stay in the matrimonial home and it is sold when children are adult and proceeds split 50/50. As you are primary carer and can only increase your work as the become less dependent. You don’t have to get a mortgage. DH rents or gets a mortgage based on his income with the knowledge that he gets a share of equity in future. His childcare responsibilities remain what they are now. Your DC have security of both staying in the house and keeping primary care giver. Or family home is sold now - depends on equity, age of DC, income, ability to get mortgage.

I can’t see any situation where the best course of action, prioritising DC, is for you to move out. If he had done 50:50 for the last 12 years your plan would make more sense.

To be fair he has to a large degree. Our 3 children (11, 12 and 14) have been at school (two of them go with him as he works in a school) and all three will go with him from next September. It will therefore be quite easy for him to do 100% of the childcare when they are with him as they will simply go to school and come home with him at the end of the day.

I will need to get a mortgage to afford a house big enough for us all....although a smaller mortgage.

The children will spend 50% of their time with their Dad.

I'm not sure how it would be a fair split if he has to rent somewhere (basically paying someone else's mortgage) for the next 7 years while I live in the family home mortgage free etc.

I understand your points though but with 50% of the time being spent with their Dad and the other 50% with me I will not be the primary carer going forward anyway. It's not like he just got home and sat on his behind for the last 15 years. He has helped out with the house and kids when he was around (i.e. not at work). As I said I understand your points but they are and have been as much his kids as they are and have been mine.

OP posts:

Original poster

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 15:49

PocketSand · 01/04/2025 15:39

Worse case scenario he’s convinced you that the house is more important to the DC than you. Even if you hadn’t been primary carer for the last 12 years this would not be true.

It was actually my suggestion that he stays in the house for the kids sake. He was/and to some degree still is all for selling it and buying two different houses.

OP posts:

glitterturd · 01/04/2025 15:54

What you think you " need" and what the pot can afford are two very different things! Why should you get benefits for what you think you need?

rubberduck68 · 01/04/2025 15:58

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 15:48

To be fair he has to a large degree. Our 3 children (11, 12 and 14) have been at school (two of them go with him as he works in a school) and all three will go with him from next September. It will therefore be quite easy for him to do 100% of the childcare when they are with him as they will simply go to school and come home with him at the end of the day.

I will need to get a mortgage to afford a house big enough for us all....although a smaller mortgage.

The children will spend 50% of their time with their Dad.

I'm not sure how it would be a fair split if he has to rent somewhere (basically paying someone else's mortgage) for the next 7 years while I live in the family home mortgage free etc.

I understand your points though but with 50% of the time being spent with their Dad and the other 50% with me I will not be the primary carer going forward anyway. It's not like he just got home and sat on his behind for the last 15 years. He has helped out with the house and kids when he was around (i.e. not at work). As I said I understand your points but they are and have been as much his kids as they are and have been mine.

Show quote history

Friends of mine kept the family house, and got a flat around the corner. Whomever had the kids stayed in the family house with them, and the other one went off for some quiet time in the flat (it was a lovely flat over looking a park!), so the kids didn't get shifted about at all. When their youngest went to Uni, they sold up the family home and the flat, and bought something each. I thought the idea of disrupting the adults but not the kids every week was gentle and kind.

Starlight1984 · 01/04/2025 16:02

Kardamyli2 · 01/04/2025 14:36

I'm disgusted that the state will allow this. why should other people pay tax so you can have benefits to pay a mortgage. Go back to work full time and stand on your own 2 feet.

Show quote history

Yeah sorry but I completely agree with this.

Original poster

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 16:04

rubberduck68 · 01/04/2025 15:58

Friends of mine kept the family house, and got a flat around the corner. Whomever had the kids stayed in the family house with them, and the other one went off for some quiet time in the flat (it was a lovely flat over looking a park!), so the kids didn't get shifted about at all. When their youngest went to Uni, they sold up the family home and the flat, and bought something each. I thought the idea of disrupting the adults but not the kids every week was gentle and kind.

Edited

Show quote history

Do you know I had not thought if that and what a great idea!! I will put that to him but I can not think why he would think it was not a good idea!

Thank you for your support and suggestion here!

X

OP posts:

PocketSand · 01/04/2025 16:08

So he does the school run because it’s his place of work and he’s going there anyway. So he comes home with them - does he cook tea, organise homework, launder, organise activities, organise health and dental appointments, shop for clothes, toiletries etc and the hundred other things kids need?

How was parenting shared from birth? Did he go part time so you could continue to work and build pension?

Helping out when work allowed is not 50:50.

These things matter. Yes, he may be able to do 50:50 now the DC are older and more independent (and you are redundant) but it matters how much you both contributed in different ways throughout the marriage.

Don’t sell yourself and your DC short.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 01/04/2025 16:16

What will your earnings be when you're full time, OP?

PocketSand · 01/04/2025 16:17

Buying a flat around the corner sounds ideal but how would it work if either of you had a new partner and wanted to cohabit?

Coconutter24 · 01/04/2025 16:17

Amicablecouple · 01/04/2025 16:04

Do you know I had not thought if that and what a great idea!! I will put that to him but I can not think why he would think it was not a good idea!

Thank you for your support and suggestion here!

X

Show quote history

I can not think why he would think it was not a good idea!

For now it could potentially work but if or when either of you start with new partners it just won’t work. It’s definitely not a great long term plan