Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

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.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Non Amicable Separation--- legal matter forcing house sale or cash

37 replies

sawlipad · 15/03/2018 00:19

Please help me if you can. I am the father of 2 wonderful children who are both now at university after having their latter years at senior school disrupted by my separation from their mother. Their mother had a string of affairs and became an alcoholic after being my partner for 26 years. I was not aware of what was happening for some time and only now know the full horrors of what went on.
We tried to mend the relationship, but it didn't work and in the end myself and the children asked her to leave in the hope she would get help. We found some months after she was having more affairs.
many years have gone on and I managed to painfully and slowly get my son and daughter through their exams and eventually to Uni. Now to the nitty gritty:-
My ex used to work at an estate agent and organised most of the paperwork. Although I paid for EVERYTHING she managed to put the deeds in both our names and I was stupidly none the wiser. Worse I paid off the mortgage with some inherritance money and now the children are at Uni she has had a solicitor write to me and demand that I sell the house to give her 1/2.
I have employed a solicitor who I feel is not helping me as mush as he first said he could. He has drawn up a plan but I'm not happy with how much I'm having to give up. I did nothing wrong and we have been put through the meat grinder to the nth degree but it seems like everyone wants to take all my savings and property just because of this one piece of stupid paper drawn up without full comprehension.
The proposal from my solicitor splits the value of the house and then we have to deduct what she hasn't paid for since separation. For instance child maintenance and benefit. rent for my children while at uni etc.

what i would like to know is what can I deduct (reasonably) from the 50% value of the house to get the settlement cost down. We are presuming separation date of 2008 so can I knock off things like paying 50% of the council tax for the time she was in the house. Her car which I bought and insured.

Can anybody provide me with a list of possible deductions as my mind is a mess with all this. It would be very much appreciated.

OP posts:

NoSquirrels · 15/03/2018 00:37

I’m so sorry it feels unfair, but 50% is what she’s entitled to as your wife. Regardless of the deeds, so don’t beat yourself up about that. Even if it had just been you on the deeds, as you are married she’s entitled to half that property.

Do you have proof of the inheritance that paid off the mortgage, assuming that happened after 2008 when you’d split up and she’d moved out?

What deductions has your solicitor indicated would be reasonable?

The car, for example - is that fiat post-split? I can’t see it would be relevant otherwise.

Child maintenance- I don’t know legally how this stands. Certainly you could argue she owes you whatever the CMS calculator says she should have paid - but if you didn’t pursue it I’m not sure it works other than as a threat to get her to negotiate.

Maintenance or improvements to the house I expect you could claim- again if you have records you’ll need to show those. You should be agreeing a split if whatever the house was worth in 2008 valuation if possible, but unfortunately without the agreement & financial settlement being sorted out then it might not now be possible.

Sorry - sounding a bit gloomy m! Perhaps you’ll get more positive advice from other posters.

Familylawsolicitor · 15/03/2018 03:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Vitalogy · 15/03/2018 04:40

You were together a long time OP. Did she do the majority of childcare? Sounds like she worked outside of the home too. 50/50 seems the way forward.

Collaborate · 15/03/2018 06:31

Pointless to try and fixate on what the house was worth at separation. The court will never play along with that and neither will your ex if she’s getting competent advice.
Concentrate on proving post separation contributions to property improvements and mortgage repayments. That’s all you’re likely to get.

MrsBertBibby · 15/03/2018 06:44

No you can't "knock off" council tax you paid, before or after the split. You are jointly and generally liable for it.

You can't charge her for child maintenance or uni fees unless you had an order or CMS assessment she didn't pay, in which case you might claim arrears.

If you don't trust your solicitor (although you have said nothing that makes him sound wrong) get another one, or better still get him to seek advice from a barrister. Luke Barnes at 3 Dr Johnson's Buildings is fabulous on these kinds of things, I always use him for unmarried property messes like this. It is a highly complex area of law, most family solicitors loathe it, for good reason.

And seriously, do you really think it would have been "fair" for a woman who you lived with for 26 years and who gave you two children to have no share in your home? You don't come across well, here.

MrsBertBibby · 15/03/2018 06:45

Jointly and severally. Stupid autocorrect.

BoneyBackJefferson · 15/03/2018 07:05

MrsBertBibby

You don't come across well, here.

IMHO he comes across as someone who has been shit on from a great height, had his life destroyed and is clearly in pain.

MrsBertBibby · 15/03/2018 07:21

I'm sure he feels jolly hard done by. From a lawyer's point of view, he really isn't, and It's a really bad look.

If he wants a hand hold because his ex is exerting her legal rights and he thinks that she shouldn't have any, there are other boards. This is Legal.

BoneyBackJefferson · 15/03/2018 17:56

MrsBertBibby

I hope that when you are in your office you act with more empathy than you do here.

bastardkitty · 15/03/2018 18:14

IMHO he comes across as someone who has been shit on from a great height, had his life destroyed and is clearly in pain

IMHE that's a very generous interpretation.

kittensinmydinner1 · 15/03/2018 18:36

It's legal 'BoneyBackJefferson'. Mrs Bert gave a legal opinion.

AIBU is the place to discuss reasonableness. (Or not as the case may be)

BoneyBackJefferson · 15/03/2018 21:16

kittensinmydinner1

I'm not arguing the legal position. I am pointing out that MrsBert has a difference of opinion to how the OP comes across to me.

Legal or not a bit of empathy wouldn't go amiss.

Familylawsolicitor · 15/03/2018 22:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Tamatave2000 · 16/03/2018 07:54

To OP

26 years would be considered a long relationship. There is no distinction between Breadwinner and Homemaker when it comes to asset split as both are deemed to have contributed. One with money and the other looking after children and running the home.

MrsBertBibby · 16/03/2018 08:06

Tamatave, this is an unmarried couple, so what you say is incorrect.

Tamatave2000 · 16/03/2018 09:40

After 26 years of living together and 2 children does ex not have same rights as if she had been a Wife?

bastardkitty · 16/03/2018 09:42

Not unless the law changed first thing this morning. As you're clearly not a solicitor Tama, why do you consider yourself knowledgeable enough to answer questions on a legal board?

prh47bridge · 16/03/2018 10:03

In Scotland unmarried partners may gain some rights. However, in England and Wales they cannot. The idea of a "common law wife" is a myth. It doesn't matter how long you live with someone, if you are unmarried you do not have the same rights as a wife.

Vitalogy · 16/03/2018 10:11

They both have their names on the deeds. Which is the main point yes or no?

prh47bridge · 16/03/2018 10:21

They both have their names on the deeds. Which is the main point yes or no?

Absolutely.

If they were married it wouldn't matter whose name was on the deeds. The house would go into the pot to be split between them and the courts would look to achieve a fair split.

As they are unmarried and the property is in joint names the equity in the property gets split 50/50 although the OP may get a bit more due to post-separation improvements to the property and mortgage repayments. Fairness is not a consideration.

Tamatave2000 · 16/03/2018 10:43

To All

My Ex's barrister made a point of bringing to Judges attention to fact that we knew each other and lived together several years before marriage and that as child was born before marriage the relationship was very like that of a marriage. Judge did not seem to reject that view. That was in English Court too. Guess that's where luck of the draw comes into play at Final Hearings? Maybe a different Judge would made a different order?

Collaborate · 16/03/2018 12:01

Tamatave2000
As has been pointed out more than once on this thread, OP is not married. Therefore, however the judge might have approached dealing with the assets on your divorce, makes not the blindest difference to OP's situation. In a cohabiting situation the court has to look at legal ownership and award both parties that to which they are entitled. There is no discretion (which might otherwise lead you to conclude there is an element of "luck of the draw") to adjust those entitlements.

prh47bridge · 16/03/2018 12:01

The length of a marriage is one of the factors taken into account in determining the financial settlement on divorce. As you were married, the fact you cohabited prior to marriage comes into play. If you live together for, say, 15 years and are married for 1 year, the courts would generally treat that as a 16 year marriage. However, if you had never married the fact you had cohabited for several years would not have affected the financial settlement. You would not have acquired any additional rights as a result of cohabiting.

Tamatave2000 · 16/03/2018 12:31

To Collaborate & PRH47

Lived together for 10 years and married 7. So I can see where PRH47 point comes from.

Luck of draw comment came from fact that recommendation made by Judge at FDR bore no resemblance whatsoever to Order made by Judge at Final Hearing. Was not intended to be a slur on the legal profession.

Original poster

sawlipad · 16/03/2018 12:41

Hi Guys,

thanks for all your responses..on the whole they have been pretty good, but to those who think I'm naive in thinking that my ex (unmarried) is not worth something, of course not ! I would make a sensible proposal that would have to be accepted by both parties. I do however find it strange that even though I paid for pretty much all of our family's requirements throughout our lives that proof of this does not count in legal terms. I cannot even begin to talk about the fallout it has had to both sides of the families and how much damage has been done to my children, myself and my work. The sad thing from my perspective is that the law seems to be an ass. It seems to adjust to the typical scenerio, of the man leaving his long term partner with children after finding new love or lust and the law rightfully help the ex partner. Because I'm a man and have a job with a little bit of money the bank the law doesn't want to consider my position and how she chose the destruction of our families lives.
So what I'm reading backs up the solicitors view, but if you have any other ideas on what I could argue as reasonable deductions for out of court settlement, please let me know.

OP posts:

Flip

1 2