How does a 50/50 divorce settlement work with older children to house?

[Lonelysummer]

H and I separated earlier this year. His decision, if that's relevant.

We are just talking about the legal formalities ie split of marital assets. My understanding is that there's a broad 50/50 principle for fairness, then a consideration as to whether that meets both parties needs.

Obvs housing is the key one. I am currently living in our home with dd19 and ds17. Dh is lodging locally. If we split the housing equity in half, that will give DH enough money to buy outright or very nearly a very nice flat in our area (London) and me not enough to be able to house 3 of us anywhere in London. Even taking on as big a mortgage as I can get, buying a 3 bedroom would involve us moving away from where we are now. Ds is at school in London for another year, DD is going to university and will be back for holidays etc and probably when she graduates.

Dh decided to take his pension when he turned 60 earlier this year. I am working full time and intend to go so for as long as I can and still have a job. My job is in London and I don't fancy my chances trying to get another at my age.

Both offspring want to live with me at the moment. Ds may change his mind as he gets older, but who knows?

I am struggling to see how this is fair. Dh improves his already very chilled lifestyle, while I have to uproot the children and myself and possibly not keep my job.

I don't have any family. I am on my own and would really appreciate not losing everything I have built up here.

Can anyone explain how 50/50 works when there are adult/nearly adult children to be housed?

TIA

Your eldest at 19 would not be considered as needing you to house DD. Does your DH expect half of all equity? Don’t forget to include both pensions in any calculation.

Well 50:50 only works if he houses them half the time so he will need a 3 bed not a flat. Friends of mine do 3 days on and 3 days off on a rotating basis so the start day changes each week. That's the fairest. If the kids don't want to live with him then that's not 50:50 and he will need to pay more although not sure how you can enforce this if they're over 18...

Well legally your eldest is discounted in housing needs. Your youngest may well be by time it reached court if you had to go that route. Legality vs morality and desire are completely different !

depending on the assets and your incomes ( dh pension) there may be a case for unequal division - how much age gap between you and ex ?

2 bed with a lounge separate to kitchen so dd can have a room when not at uni.
You cannot have everything
Or move area. You have to choose .

I had a similar situation.

children over 18 are not considered - they are seen as their own responsibility.

children under 18 are and if your youngest will stay with you that would be a reason for you to get more.

@Sunshineandgrapefruit he won’t have to pay more

If youngest is 17 then by time you argued it out she will be 18 anyway

the closer the kids are to the age of 18, the closer to 50/50 the split will be.

Why is why your ex has chosen now to proceed with the divorce. Because it favours him.

It cannot be enforced at all unless he happens to be very rich!

Do you mean 50/50 children split, house equity split or asset split?

it isn’t as simple as that.

it depends on your salaries too, pensions, needs etc.

for mine and exdh, we did 50/50 asset split - which essentially meant for us that I kept the house, my pension and all our savings and he kept all his pension - it was roughly equal as he had a very large pension.
i also got spousal maintenance as his salary was much larger than mine and are children still quite young.

dont worry yet op, give us the figures first!

Id say a law of 18yo meaning no parental responsibility needs an urgent review in today’s society. It might have been valid decades ago when it was all decided, but I would imagine there are now very few 18yos who are living on their own supporting themselves nowadays?

I agree.

same as children in care getting kicked out at 18

op unlikely to get spousal main if ex is drawing only pension income while she’s working full time

Yes. I am thinking in terms of both children as being adults, as they both will be 18+ this time next year.

I know the law sees them as adults and so they don't 'count' in term of dependents. I also know that's not realistic and that I want to continue to provide a home for them. Not just want to - they need somewhere to live!

It'll be a 50/50 asset split, which I understand other than I have to meet the needs of 3 people and him just 1. I do not want, nor would I be entitled to, any sort of support from him. What he gives the adult children, if anything, is between them.

He has a DB pension which he has the CETV of. My understanding is that we need to ask a PODE or similar to give a 'true' valuation, then we can start working out actual numbers.

He wants half the house equity and to keep most of his pension. I don't think that would get signed off by a court, as it would give him far more assets and leave me struggling to house 3 of us and with my very low private pension (Iow because I worked p/t to look after children and all my money went on the children and house).

My utter priority for the next few years is to keep the house it at all possible, for the children's sake but also my support network and the reality that buying and selling houses is bloody expensive. I'd be willing to take on a large mortgage to fund some of buying him out. I've also thought that if there is a small amount of pension sharing, I could liquidate that portion of my pension (I'm over 55) and give him that. With some of my savings, that would equal about 20% of the house equity and give him enough to house himself, albeit with a small mortgage.

Has anyone done similar - one person keeps most of house equity but releases enough for the other to house themselves, and the other keeps most of their pension?

TIA

Yes @Lonelysummer, we did that, I posted earlier.

50/50 of every individual asset wouldn’t have worked for me, as I wouldn’t have been able to live where we were for our girls schools. (Although I would have been set up for retirement!) So he took his pension, and I got our house.

unless your pensions are equal or yours is larger , why would he think he gets half the house AND his whole pension. Seems a strange thought process. It’s 50/50 on everything, debts, pensions, savings, everything. Divvied up whichever way works best for the kids.

Yes my ExH took on a mortgage to buy me out and I kept my pension.

The kids moved out with me/visited me in the holidays as he got a new wife and family.

If you had a long marriage, and with your age kids you presumably have, I thought the idea is that you should have similar standards of retirement. So if your earning capacity has been reduced due to you doing more parenting, then that will be figured in to the equation. I found the whole thing quite fair tbh, my contribution as a part time/sahm was definitely recognised.

I’d be wary of any suggestions or ideas that involve taking on a large mortgage (although appreciate our definitions of large may be different) and liquidating any pension as if you are over 55 you just don’t know how long you’ll be working for or at least full time for. At 56 my dad was adamant he had another 14 years of full time work ahead of
him, genuinely loved his job, and by 60 he was retired and really had no choice in the matter due to huge and unexpected changes to health.

If I was being cynical I would say that your DH knows exactly what he is doing

by divorcing you and waiting it out it means your kids aren’t really going to be taken into consideration as needing to be housed

some men will play the long game when it comes to divorce and he’s probably several steps ahead of you already

Sorry, I missed this message. Thanks for posting. His pension is far larger (mine is currently about 15% of his CETV although I do have another 10 years before min retirement age).

He was talking today about his entitlement to half the house and not wanting to lose his pension. It really makes me anxious, although I know that's nowhere near 50/50.

I think our next step is to ask a solicitor to write to a PODE to get a proper evaluation of his pension. When we have proper figures, we can start to talk more sensibly.

As my user name suggests, I'm finding this hard going.

Your children are nearly adults you’ve had the best part of a decade or more without the need to work part time …. Him taking his pension is a significant point - you are earning he is not. I doubt he will have to share any of his pension

Absolutely good idea to see a solicitor. Separately. He is definitely trying to swizzle you, especially with the leaving on the cusp of 18, clearly he’s been preparing for this. He is not your friend, please remember that, so don’t believe a word. And don’t worry, if your pension is only 15% of his, of course it will be evened out either through you having more equity or pension sharing.
yes, definitely get other valuations other than just cetv. Exes was a nhs pension and my solicitor used an actuary who valued it at twice the cetv value! Although be mindful that solicitors are so expensive so the more you can do yourself/between the two of you, the better. Although I don’t think I would trust your ex, there’s quite a few alarm bells already.

100% this.

He has waited until your children are adults or almost adults. He knows exactly what he’s doing.

And why wouldn’t he do it this way? A woman who abandons her career and destroys her earning potential on the basis that her marriage will never break down and her husband will always support her is spectacularly naive. Men are smarter than women on this front, which is why you rarely see men give up paid work to take on the lion’s share of parenting/drudgery.

Not necessarily. There are plenty of situations where teens still need loads of time - living rurally, ND, disabilities, school refusal, even high standard of sport requiring lifts. If the op only worked part time that was a decision they made as a couple.

Also depends completely on the numbers. Many pensions provide higher incomes than salaries.