I've posted before about this. In short, jointly own a property with my ex. He's a total financial mess, runs up debts, had lots of debt collectors at the property for his debts after he left. He totally ignored the property as ditched me with it, I stumped up full mortgage each month (barely) he refused to agree to sell or rent it out, refused mediation, ignored 6 letters from my solicitor over 18 months despite knowing I couldn't afford it alone. I moved out as couldn't afford it any longer. It was empty for a year, mortgage council tax etc not being paid. We have 50:50 residency of our 2 young kids. I applied to Court for an order of sale under tolata and whilst waiting I redecorated and cleared all old furniture out etc- at all my own cost. Once I finished the twat moved back in.
Here we are now. My tolata hearing was last week. He turned up but hadn't followed the Courts directions and hadn't filed or served anything before the hearing. Judge was clearly annoyed and was really shirty with him. Judge told him he wasn't taking this seriously and he must. He lied to Judge and said he'd paid full mortgage and ground maintenance each month since he moved it. He hasn't paid ground maintenance at all (terms of the lease and the management company are now taking legal action) and has underpaid the mortgage payments (albeit slightly) unfortunately I couldn't prove it at the time I have now had an arrears demand from the Mortgage provider- adding on arrears fees too. My argument is that he can't afford it and even if he could he doesn't care about running up debts- this is in my name too so letting him kept the property means I a having debts run up in my name and no way of stopping it.
He said to the Judge he wanted me off the mortgage so if I agreed to sign the deeds over to him bed agree to pay the mortgage. The judge told him he needs to do it officially and buy me out. He has been given 4 weeks to see of he can buy me out (not happening he earns less than 20k and would need a mortgage 10x his salary). If he can't he will say the children need a home so he wants to keep it.
Anyway. Because he has the children there 50:50 the Judge suggested he make an application under the Children's Act. This is my question. How does this work? Does he apply under he Children's Act to keep the property and that is heard at the same time as my next Tolata hearing or will it be a different hearing for his children act application with him being the applicant and me being the respondent? I'm hoping the children's Act won't protect him given that he is so financially incapable and irresponsible. My counter argument is the children live with me 50% of the time also, the way he is going will cause me financial stress and serious hardship by running up debts in joint names (mortgage and ground maintnenance arrears) and therefore risk the children's home with me.
The mortgage is interest only and about the same cost as local rentals. He's saying the 10k equity (his share) isn't enough to buy somewhere and he doesn't want to rent. He works and always has, so how the heck can he claim he will be homesless without this property- you rent like everyone else who can't afford a mortgage does! 
He also disclosed (accidentally) to the Judge that he has been left a property by his great aunt (recently died). This wasn't in his statement that he bought with him on the day. The judge told him he should try and sell it to buy me out. He said he'd rather not and the judge wasn't impressed. Surely his argument of being homeless is now void as he has another property he could live in!
Advice welcome as always as I'm representing myself due to lack of funds 