Can I specify the percentage of ownership of my house?

[rainsbows]

Background: I bought a house outright in my name pre-marriage (no mortgage). The house has me as the sole owner on the deeds.

To prepare for the "what ifs", can I change the deeds by adding my husband but at a specified percentage? Husband is more than happy with this as he did not contribute to the purchase. Say, 90:10?

If then, say we did ever divorce, would he get his 10% as could be specified or would the courts always rule 50:50?

You need to ask for ownership as "tenants in common" - this is the kind of ownership that allows you to divide the ownership into specific shares, as opposed to ownership as "joint tenants" where you both jointly own the whole thing.

If you owned the property prior to the marriage, then a court would not award part of it to him unless the rest of your assets cannot meet his reasonable needs. Bear in mind that if you do give him a share in your property, then on a divorce your husband could force a sale to get his share (if you can't buy him out, of course).

Speak to a solicitor to sort out the ownership situation (and perhaps discuss a post-nup if you have other pre-marital assets).

We are not "joint tenants", I am the sole owner.

As you have married the house is currently an asset of the marriage regardless of the fact that you are the sole owner. That doesn't mean he would get 50% of it in the event of divorce - that depends on a range of factors. But he may be entitled to a slice of it. If you want to limit his claim you both need to get independent legal advice and get a post-nuptial agreement put in place. Provided you both make a full disclosure the agreement will be respected by the courts unless it is unfair.

Yes dh is more than willing to declare it 99:1, I'm just not sure what I'm asking for from a solicitor.

You can set up a deed of trust specifying percentages, but marriage would trump this, Iirc. So in the event of divorce, it may be taken into consideration but can be ignored
(not legal knowledge, just on personal experience)

A deed of trust would have no effect. You need a post nuptial agreement. But you don't have to use the correct term. Tell a solicitor what you want to achieve as you have on this thread and they will do the rest.

Yes I think a post-nup sounds right but research on it doesn't show much weight in court.

The approach of the courts has changed a lot in recent years. A post-nuptial agreement is not binding but the courts will generally uphold it provided both parties have received independent legal advice, there was full and frank disclosure by both parties, there was no undue pressure to sign and the agreement is not obviously unfair.

Sometimes wonder why people marry? Pre-Nups and now Post-Nups! If one does not trust the other or wants to have such arrangements in place before or after the marriage just in case it fails maybe they should not get married?

Missedtheboatagain it's about protecting yourself! Surely that's just being sensible. If youd bought a house completely yourself, your husband hadn't bought one brick, do you really think it's fair for him to claim 50% of your property should you divorce? Ie, imagine you'd paid £500k yourself. How would you feel giving him £250k cash and find yourself struggling to stay in your own home? Yes I think it's damn sensible!

What happens if one of the Partners will not agree to a Post Nuptial?

Then there is no post-nuptial and, if the parties cannot agree the financial settlement on divorce, the courts decide the split of assets. Contrary to the often-repeated assertion on here, that does not mean a 50/50 split. The courts look at a range of factors in determining how assets should be split.

As people say whetjher he is put on the deeds or not he is entitled to a share on divorce and indeed my husband didn't just get 50% he got 59% of everything as I earn more than he does. A postnup is your only chance and then you probably need to ensure both of you have separate solicitiors, all assets are declared, no one is pressured into it etc Then in addition have it in joint names as tenants in common with the 90/10 split mentioned or keep it in your name and in the post nup what the % is although even that is not easy as if the post nup is uttelry unfair then it would not be valid eg if yo bought the house £300k and then you dont' work for 20 years from now and he pays the mortgage for 20 years and it goes up to £3m what is a fair division of the £3m? etc etc

To clarify:

• no mortgage
• house bought outright cash purchase
• husband has not paid any of it

I want 99:1 and husband is totally agreeable

I've made an appt with a solicitor for next week to begin a postnup and deed alteration both to show a 99:1.

I think people are trying to tell you that even if your husband is totally agreeable now to signing the paperwork, he may still be able to get more in a divorce if he wanted to. There are limits to contracting out of the law.

Exactly. In England even if you both agree the courts will not enforce an unfair post nup eg in 5 years' time he may be disabled at home looking after your new triplets full time whilst you work and he might get 1005 of both your assets in that case no matter what the post nup says. So the way to protect against that is not to marry in the first place. You could give assets to children 100% particularly once they are grown up but even some off shore trusts for children set up 20 years before a divorce have been broken by English divorce courts to achieve fair divorec settlements even where both parents were in 100% agreement with the trust for the children of 20 years before.

I have had to have some rather awkward conversations with clients about to get married in later life, each with their own children, frankly the only way to achieve what they want to is to ahem not get married. Which is not what they want to hear!

I agree. I have one whose wife thinks she is married but they are only married religiously, not in law, and he is not going to tell her she has no civil law rights. He and everyone else calls her his "wife". I was not advising him on divorce law as I don't do it - it just happened to come up in a business meeting.