Would letting my husband buy me out make financial sense?

[PoisedUmberCrab]

Hi all. Grateful for some perspectives in relation to a divorce / housing situation.

1. Husband and I getting divorced.
2. We have 2 children aged 18 months and 5 years old.
3. We own (as joint tenants) a property worth £950,000.
4. The mortgage is £670,000.
5. we have paid 50% each of the mortgage and house bills for 7 years.
6. Property is 5 mins from school, 2 mins from nursery and 1 min from my parents.
7. Agreed that husband will have his £75,000 deposit returned (money came from his mother - it doesn’t feel morally right to pursue it).
8. Husband has suggested buying me out, to the value of approximately £100k.
9. His rationale is that, if we sell and both buy separately, we will incur early mortgage repayment charge (c £10k), legal fees (£5k), estate agency fees (£20k), two sets of stamp duty on new properties.
10. putting sentiment aside, I think I’m ok with the idea of moving out. Less upheaval for kids (one new home vs 2). Part of me worried they won’t want to leave the house to come and stay with me but that’s another story.
11. Has anyone done this - how did it turn out?
12. Did it make better financial sense?

I agree there’s no one size
and you’re right it could go any way:
but people saying he’s shafting her, it’s not a fair deal , she should get more, he NEEDs to pay x y and z are also not correct. Op also earns 100k plus herself and that will mean a lot

without understanding her ex earnings or their joint assets no one can categorically state. But what’s he’s proposing is not unusual at all and is a very common practice agreed both in and out of court

I might be wrong, but this sounds like him paying you an amount net of the moving costs and him not having moving costs but you will. That sounds deeply unfair.

The point is that you made a pronouncement about what would be ordered if it went to court, which was incorrect. Given that these boards are used by people in desperate need of advice, it is important to flag that just because someone asserts something confidently, it doesn’t mean it’s true.

Exactly. It is unfair. And were it to end up in court - which it hopefully won’t - that is exactly the point her barrister would make.

I think most people ignore that poster because they invariably give pro-men advice. I totally agree with your comments though.

OP, you should consult a lawyer to work out what is fair once all the marital assets are taken into consideration. The £100k your dh is offering you may not be fair once all your assets including pensions and savings are factored in.

You are quite right, and I shouldn't have risen to it. I've been around these boards a while and know exactly what you mean. I've been through all this myself, with multiple hearings, which means both that I have a pretty good idea about how these things actually work, and that I find it incredibly irresponsible when they post nonsense that could be taken literally by someone vulnerable. But as you say: hopefully most of us know to ignore it. Solidarity to everyone out there going through it. It's a bloody long tunnel but there are glimmers nonetheless.

This!!
If he is sitting on a huge pension you might be able to negotiate more of the house equity in return for him taking all his pension
Always,always go through a solicitor , men will do their best to screw you over
If he hasnt ring fenced his inheritance then its family money

He would be paying the remaining 670 mortgage though so Op would get nowhere near 475. 100k is right for there numbers

Surely if the kids are going to be with you more then you should get a higher proportionate split of the equity (after the deposit, if that works). Plus extra to cover moving costs/stamp duty. As your ex points out him keeping the house means those costs are incurred once not twice but they ought to be split between you or the benefit is solely his.

You should also get some maintenance if doing 60% of the care but you've mentioned he has his own company so presumably self employed. He could fiddle his salary to look like he's earning very little so even more important to get a fair deal from the house, split of pensions and other assets.

People can chose to listen to whomever they like on here,
I also have direct experience of such matters multiple times over but whatever.

im not pro man or pro woman.

most of the pronouncements and ‘advice on here on here are far from factually accurate at all.

carry on though

Honestly, stop it. I’ve seen plenty of your posts. You always like to come in like you’re the authority and can make definitive pronouncements, and you’re simply not. It wouldn’t matter - you’re just a random on the internet making yourself feel important - were it not for the fact that people come to this board when they’re in genuine need. Whatever of your own issues you’re working out on here, I just want other people to know that the reality is always much more nuanced.

The asset split, assuming there is a decent pot, will reflect that they both need to get a home to live with their children. The cost of a home won’t change if the split is 60:40 or 50:50. So she absolutely won’t get a bigger share of the assets if they are with her more than him. This could change if there isn’t a lot of equity or if he doesn’t intend to see the children. The asset split is likely to be determined by their respective incomes.

Child support is meant to fund the cost of being the resident parent.

The purpose of the divorce will be to try to make the OP and her ex equal. That will roughly translate into giving them enough equity to afford similar property in same area (the school proximity will dictate that). How they choose to use that equity would be up to them. It sounds like he wants to stretch to keep an expensive home. The OP seems to want a more manageable mortgage.

OP, it is up to you both to decide how you want to split things up. If you both have informed advice and agree to a split the court will sign it off. Personally, I think you are being magnanimous in allowing him to keep the £75k given the property market you are in. But that is up to you. I also think he’s pushing it to keep the house and that is driving his need for the £75k plus c£100k. But this shouldn’t come at your expense. It’s a convenient house but is it the only option for him (or you).

At this stage I would suggest you advise him that you are minded to agree to ringing fencing the £75k but remind him that in court it wouldn’t be ring-fenced and you do so in expectation that he is as flexible. This is a big and significant compromise for you. He needs to be willing to do the same - be that over fees and moving costs or something else. I would also advise him that you need to assess what your housing costs are before you commit to anything including the £75k.

I don’t expect him to be happy if you do that. But remind him that what you are asking for will probably get you a property worth 1/2 million compared to his £1m. That doesn’t sound like equal.

At first blush, no. No way. He is getting much more than half a mortgage free house and you are not.