Mesher order - trigger for sale when youngest starts secondary school?

[friendlynotbendy]

Hi

Am starting divorce proceedings against H. Solicitor told me that because our youngest is only 1 year old, that she would ask for the mesher order to trigger when youngest starts secondary education (i.e. when she is 11), rather than the more usual trigger of when she turns 18, because it is too long to expect H to wait 17 years before he gets his equity.

Is this right? Or do I need a more 'aggressive' solicitor?

Thanks

Depends on the rest of the circumstances I should think. That gives you 10 years to rebuild your life and sort yourself out financially.

How much equity is there, what sort of salary does your H earn etc?

I know when I was looking at this, my solicitor was looking at up to 18, but that was mainly because I will always find it hard to fit a job/earn independently around DS2 who has disabilities.

TBH, although your own situation might be very different from where I was. My parents went to their own solicitors on my behalf as well, and I know that the feedback they got was that because my DS2 would never truly hit "adulthood" when he was physically 18 then it might be worth trying for settlement that took that into account! My own solicitor looked at 18, as did another I consulted. At the time, my younger DS was 5. So I don't really see why 17 years would be too long?

Disclaimer - don't know your personal situation, and my personal situation is at an extreme.

My understanding is that the court rather than the solicitor would decide the mesher or any other orders. There are certain other 'triggers' though I would be surprised if starting secondary school would be one? Only advice I would offer is to be very wary of agreeing to mediation, my experience of it is terrible.

often the meshers is remarriage or co-habiting, birth of another child with a new partner that type of thing

cargirl, my circs are not as extreme as yours. I am SAHM to 3 children, H earns about £30k ish, BUT his business seems to be going tits up (self employed).

I know there are other triggers too (death/remarriage etc) but was surprised when solicitor advised to ask for trigger age of 11 instead of 18.

artydeb what problems did you have with mediation? My sol has recommended it but I did wonder whether it would lead to me getting the best deal for me, as I have no clue what would be deemed a fair settlement legally.

oops, sorry got the names muddled up a bit there, meant latteaddict re the extreme circs

TBH do you really want to be financially tied to him in that way for the next 17 years?

How much equity is the home, what size is it etc? If you pay the mortgage for the next 17 years do you really want to have to give half the equity at then end? If it was at all possible I'd like to gain me complete independence asap.

Also is it really fair that he has to wait that long before he stands a chance of purchasing a property again?

Realistically you will have to go out to work at least part time which does give you potential to own in your ownright etc.

Good points cargirl. I need to have a serious rethink about my life. At the moment I'm a SAHM and so no chance of getting a mortgage in the near future, and all benefits would stop if we sold the house (equity of about £100k - so £50k each). But that £50k would not be any use to me as a deposit, without me having a proper job (around here would need to spend at least £170k for a very small 3 bed house with 1 reception room). So that would be a £120k mortgage, which no way could I raise.
Maybe would just have to rent for rest of my life and think of the £50k as being my pension?

Why don't you go for a 2 bed place? Is he happy to pay part of the mortgage for now? I think you need to rethink being a SAHM even working part-time will mean that you are better off.

We have 4 dc in the smallest/cheapest 3 bed terrace in a not great area so I'm not talking from living in a luxurious house point of view IYSWIM. Dh and I both now work full time, we were very very poor when I was SAHM and i have kissed my career goodbye, in hindsight I would have been better off making part time working more of a priority.

I think adult company and working may help you move on with your life more than being at home just you and dd, it was my sanity when I divorced my first husband and was on my own (working full time) with my eldest.

2 bed house would mean 3 DC (diff genders) sharing a bedroom for the long term. I don't think that is really a long term plan, although poss a short term one in terms of renting as the little one could share with me for a few years.

I did one of those comparison sessions at the job centre, where they compare how much better off you would be working. We worked out that if I earned £30k (which I did before became SAHM) that I would still be WORSE off, because of childcare costs etc (would need 2 in full time nursery and 1 in after school clubs). It is crazy. The woman actually said to me that I might as well stay on benefits until childcare is no longer so much of an issue.

I totally know what you mean about the adult company of a job. I am thinking about starting college to retrain (can't go back to old industry for various reasons).

Didn't realise you had 2 older ones. As you have 3 dc with him and 2 of them are still relatively young perhaps you aren't going to be in a position to buy even in 10 years time!

It's a tough one tbh.

Yep, it's a bloody nightmare!

Are you on good enough terms that you can talk it thru on a one to one basis?

If he may end up going bankrupt/big financial mess you may end up with charges against his share in the property anyway. Is he happy to contribute towards the mortgage to make a 50/50 split fair in the future or will it be a 70/30 type one to reflect you bringing up the dc?

Could you borrow some money off parents to pay him off now ie £10k or something.

Is he likely to be able to pay maintenance in the future, if not can you use that as negotiation for how much £ he gets from the property as a %

Much depends on how reasonable he is being about it.

Don't know enough about your financial circs to say anything much but as a general principle there is no 'rule' that the Mesher trigger has to be youngest child reaching 18. So much depends on your individual circs.

The court must reach a decision that is fair. Of course, fairness is often in the eye of the beholder. It might be incredibly unfair for him to wait 17 years or it might be the fairest result, depending on all the other factors.

People often talk about getting an 'aggressive' solicitor, if that is the factor that will get them 90% of the assets. I am afraid that is absolute bollocks. It is usually pretty clear how a case will end up; most people don't have enough money to make sure everyone has a house and a lump sum. Thus the needs of the children usually trump everything else.

thus all you are likely to achieve with an 'aggressive' solicitor is a massive increase in your legal fees and a more drawn out court battle.

Agree with Spero about aggressive solicitors. The guidelines are the same whether you take a collaborative approach or a ridiculously aggressive one but the costs will be way higher if you take the latter.

tbh I'd be querying whether a Mesher approach is appropriate at all when there isn't much equity to argue about. Possibly you should be looking for an outright transfer but a clean break on pensions and spousal mtce? Alternatively you could go for a Mesher but with provision for your voluntarily buying him out once you get a job.

I'm not really sure how reasonable he is going to be cargirl as we are at the beginning of the process and I'm very wary tbh. Understand what you are saying re the 'agressive' solicitor spero and mumble. I am certainly hoping that it can all be done as peacefully as possible, but am worried that it's almost inevitable that it will get unpleasant once solicitors get involved.

Unfortunately mumble H doesn't have a pension (in fact he may be claiming on my tiny one!) and he is self employed so can (legally) hide his income due to all the tax breaks that limited companies get. I can't imagine for a second that he will just hand over £50k to me, it is a huge amount of equity to us!

My sol seemed to be saying that we will just go on an assumption of 50/50 split, which seemed contrary to everything I've read?

The starting point is 50/50 but in reality that is very unlikely to be applied unless there is enough money to meet the needs of both parties and the children. Every decision the court makes must be viewed against the 'yardstick' of equal division but there are many, many reasons why a departure from equality is justified in various cases. If £50K is a huge sum for you both (and it would be for most people!!) this is likely to be a 'needs case' - i.e. the needs of the children and their primary carer will come first, once those are met, you can look at what you do with what is left in the pot, if any.