Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Original poster

ExPartner demanding half busines and conflicting solicitors views!

27 replies

sneezecakesmum · 01/02/2011 21:57

My BIL has just split up from his exP of 20 years. He has a small business which contributed to the family finances, but his ExP (never married) has never contibuted financially or physically - his Mother gave him the money for tools.

They have separated (not amicable) and her solicitor says she is entitled to half the proceeds of the sale of the business as they were together when it was set up 15 years ago.

My BILs solicitor says as she didnt contribute she is probably entitled to nothing? He will be looking into the legality over this week. Is there a legal precedent re division of businesses if unmarried?

Is this a case of a grey area or has BILs solicitor not looked in the right place. Or has BIL got the wrong end of the stick - SO much information to take in for him!!

OP posts:
Ghekogiddy · 01/02/2011 22:26

I wouldnt think she would be entitled if she has not contributed into business as common in law wife not the case anymore (not in Scotland).

Not sure to be honest.

Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 01/02/2011 22:28

Dont think the solicitor is sure - unless BIL went into information overload at the meeting!

OP posts:
ajandjjmum · 01/02/2011 22:30

Was 'SIL' looking after the home and children whilst he was working? If so, I think she may have a claim.

Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 01/02/2011 22:49

Partly, but also working herself half the time. Why would it give her a claim, she benefited from the income it earned but contributed nothing? Unlike a marital home where she maintained it plus children - that makes sense. Being unmarried is a different situation - BIL needs to check this out.

OP posts:
ajandjjmum · 01/02/2011 22:58

I think the principle would be that BIL was able to work because she maintained the home and cared for the children, therefore she has a claim to part of the business.

Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 01/02/2011 23:23

Is there a legal precedent to this? Just phoning the solicitor costs him a fortune! He was told unequivically in terms of property - cars etc if he could prove ownership she had no rights to them. Isnt a business in his name the same? If he'd been a paid employee her maintaining house/kids would have been the quid pro quo in that case. The business is in his sole name? white v white is to do with married couples and I wonder if it is the same for unmarried. Think he will have to pick up the phone...kerr ching as they say, it all so expensive.

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 02/02/2011 00:00

As Resolution advised you on a previous thread, if his business is in his name only then it is his. Period. As they were not married she cannot claim anything of his and he cannot claim anything of hers.

Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 02/02/2011 00:05

Thank you prh. Its just that she said her solicitor said she had a claim which was opposite what BILs apparently said! Confused Having said that she is a b**r of mammoth proportions so probably just another lie!

Will tell him asap, cheers!

OP posts:
Resolution · 02/02/2011 00:19

Why is this cropping up again? ajandjjmum either missed the point about them not being married, or is symptomatic of the general myth of so-called 'common law' marriages.

BIL exP is just a wind up merchant.

What does BIL do? Is he in a trade? I'm assuming they weren't partners or shareholders (for tax purposes).

babybarrister · 02/02/2011 07:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Resolution · 02/02/2011 07:38

I agree, but that's not land law, and has nothing to do with whether they were living together or not. That would be a dispute under the partnership act or companies law. The person seeking to assert there is a partnership has to have some pretty strong evidence to back them up. The usual claim is because they took some calls or did some office work there must be a partnership, and the fact they cohabited is seen as somehow relevant. Not the case.

babybarrister · 02/02/2011 11:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Resolution · 02/02/2011 11:19

Going back to the OP, the ex-p never contributed either physically or financially, so the whole basis of the claim is that they were together as a couple when the business was set up. If that's what ex-ps solicitor is being told then it's shoddy work on their part, and they are wasting everyone's time and money.

Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 02/02/2011 18:35

I think the point here is that exP solicitor has said something to her, and she has said something different to BIL. He then asked his solicitor who gave him the correct info but BIL got in a tizzy over it. There was never any verbal agreement, contribution etc re his business.

She has also said her solicitor said ALL property was 50/50 (we know that is a lie) Her solicitor 'said' offer 10,000 for the house (equity around £115,000) to walk away from claims to the property.

She sent him a massive email with her demands that she said her solicitor had told her were her rights along with her solicitors name and address. BIL showed his solicitor who fell off the chair laughing. BIL also sent a copy off to her solicitor just to information share regarding the c**p ExP is purporting to come from him!

He has also sent a form 'private agreement' for child maintenance offering CSA guided amount - even saying it is not legally binding, she can go to CSA at later date for more, it is just so he is contributing financially and any increase can be backdated but she just wont sign!

If she would only be sensible it will save everyone money in the long run, and BIL is on a very limited budget.

OP posts:
Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 02/02/2011 18:41

Res. BIL has a small motor repair business (one man band)- currently sleeping there on the floor! (says its comfy there tho, except the odd middle of the night withheld call! Confused)
Never any link tax wise, partnerships etc with ExP.

OP posts:
freshmint · 02/02/2011 18:50

from what you say she will be entitled to nothing. if she was married to him it would be an entirely different kettle of fish

moral of this story is if you are going to have kids with someone, marry them Grin

BeenBeta · 02/02/2011 18:51

I am pretty sure that there was a recent case in England & Wales where a wife received a very substantial divorce settlement from a very wealthy business man husband who claimed she had not contributed to his career. She won on the basis she had looked after home and children while he built his career.

This argument could apply in this case.

freshmint · 02/02/2011 18:53

but that would require a divorce
they are not married

BeenBeta · 02/02/2011 19:04

freshmint - yes you are right. I misread. I thought they were married.

If it is not documented anywhere that she is buiness partner (eg registered shareholder, a director, employee, loaned or input orignal capital, etc) she is not legally enitled to any part of the business.

Although the CSA (if there are children) will obviously look at income from the business.

Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 02/02/2011 19:14

BILs accounts and stuff are currently with his accountant though ExP wont give him access to the house for a folder of receipts/docs (getting duplicates takes time) but he has offered CSA guided payments in the interim but she has refused Confused

OP posts:
Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 02/02/2011 19:18

She wants £350 pcm so DD can carry on riding her horse while BIL sleeps on the floor. (BIL take home £250 pw at mo) Sad Sorry it just makes me cross!

OP posts:
Resolution · 02/02/2011 19:22

Sounds like his solicitor is clued up. Try not to worry too much for him.

catinthehat2 · 02/02/2011 19:42

I don't understand the "sale of the business" referred to in the OP.

Why is it to be sold? Who is going to buy it? If BIL sells up, what is he going to do to support his children?

SUrely he either works to provide maintenance, or he pays a sum of cash instead, (presumably funded out of the sale of the biz). Hence BIL's P will end up getting cash from the sale of the business if that happens.

Original poster
sneezecakesmum · 02/02/2011 20:04

cat. Exp is insisting its sold to give her half the asset money. BIL doesnt want to sell. She expects him to give her this money then go and get an employed job to continue paying CM (she also wants him to pay towards the mortgage and all repairs and maintenance of the house!!)

OP posts:
catinthehat2 · 02/02/2011 20:07

Oh!
still not sure it would be worth her while Confused, don't think some well used tools and a (possibly) rented garage are going to be worth a whole lot...

Swipe left for the next trending thread