Can ex H force me to sell the family car during divorce?

[NickiFury]

It's was £20k when bought but probably worth slightly less now, had it a year, fully paid for. He brought it for me and the children as he did not consider my car at the time to be safe, but it's registered in my name. We were separated but not legally when he bought it, but are divorcing now. I am resident parent to our two dc who are both disabled.

Thanks.

The car will become part of marital assets to be shared out as part of the divorce settlement. If you are on any kind of benefit purchase of this very expensive car could be seen as a problem.

Absolutely go for the car rather than - we all know cars make great investments don't they..... And if you're struggling for food, eat the wing mirror!

I didn't purchase it Vivienne he did. He is not on any benefits.

I should imagine the benefits office (if indeed you are claiming means tested benefits) would consider the ownership of a £20K car of interest to them. Especially if it was paid for outright by your DH if you were not legally separated at the time.

You imagine or you know? On what grounds do you imagine this? What do you imagine they might do if they knew about this?

Why are people going on and on about the car? OP didn't buy it, her STBXH did well after they separated. What are you expecting her to do and why the suspicious comments that she is defrauding the benefits system?

Why do you refer to him as my DH? He's my ex H and has been for five years. We have maintained separate addresses throughout that time and indeed he was often living abroad with no contact at all during that time, hence my inability to divorce him (no address to send divorce papers to you see). He now wishes to remarry, so now he is pushing the divorce though.

You don't have to be legally separated for your benefits to be calculated in your own name / based on your own circumstances. I was advised by the CAB to start claiming before my STBXH even moved out because he was not contributing financially any longer. If you are going to make nasty insinuations at least try and get your facts straight.

If he was your ex husband then the car would have to have been declared as a gift. But you are still legally not divorced so the assets with which he bought the car at the time may be considered as joint assets.

Because they clearly think I am still with him or certainly was when he purchased the car for us. It always amuses me the narrow mindedness here on MN, anything outside the box is viewed suspiciously and attacked.

There are one or two posters in this thread that know some of my back story and know how ridiculous this is. I have two autistic children, one also has other significant additional needs. My ex does NOTHING for them apart from throw material goods at them. My ds moaned that he hated my shabby little car so King of The Grand Gesture showed up with a cool car to impress him. He then fucked off abroad for six months and hardly saw them or contacted them. I do everything for them with no help whatsoever.

I'm disgusted by the attitudes on here and would despise myself for being so pompous and judgemental.

Nicki

Now, which of you bastards put gold leaf toilet paper in the loo? My Fanjo is all scratched now!

It sounds like we are going through similar horribleness Pink.

You'll need that looked at Yonic. Might I recommend my Harley Street Doctor? He's had a lot of experience with Gold Related Injuries since he took our family on .

So the car was sort of like driveable child maintenance?!

The benefits office are not interested in the car. As I proved above only cash at bank over £16k is relevant. if instead you have goods worth even £50k they are not interested. That is the rules (unless you buy the goods to reduce a bank balance which is clearly not what happened here).

More like a substitute for ever having to do any hands on parenting or indeed even spend regular time with his children ever again.

Thanks Greengrow

Oh, benefits bashing AND racism. Lovely, Greengrow.

?
I said I have no [problem with anyone claiming benefits to which they are entitled. I said if you ensure you have lots of cars, gold, furniture or whatever you're fine. But do not save up any cash. I did not say anyone was wrong.

So your post of 14.39 wasn't the least bit judgmental then?

Love how "who me?" posters are when called on their unpleasantness on here.

Nicki, sorry there are so many twats attacking you. Your day to day struggles mean nothing to them. I'm certain you would rather drive a car worth quarter the value if you got a hands on and supportive ex. You deserve any penny and more from the state.

Not at lal. I've never been against people entitled to benefits claiming them. As a lawyer I just thought the issue of what goods and their value you can have without disturbing HB entitlement compared to cash at bank.

If the state thinks the benefits system is wrong it can change it. Anyone entitled to benefits can claim them. I just think it's an interesting point that if you spend a lot and have valuable goods your HB when you come to claim it is fine. If you've salted away every penny instead, drive the £1k cars we drive and have over £16k in the bank you don't get a penny. Just seems a bit unfair on the savers but that is not criticism of anyone claiming the benefit - it is criticism of the state.

Well done for proving your point.

Has anything you've stated helped to answer the OP's question?

I wasn't having a go at you, I wasn't being disingenuous and I wasn't implying anything. I asked questions about something I didn't understand. I don't know anything about benefits or ha houses, hence my questions. I did not accuse you of anything, neither was I pompous and judgemental. I asked my question based on you OP to which you then added further information later on which answered some of my questions. I am not a benefit basher at all, although you seem to have taken my questions as me stating something derogatory towards you, which I did not do.

So don't accuse me of being something I am not, nor saying something that I didn't.