Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

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.

Original poster

Divorce without selling the house- any ideas?

50 replies

Hugless · 28/01/2019 13:35

We've been separated for 5 years- she moved out. She had enough, I had enough, never mind, water under the bridge.
We have 2 kids just under 10.
I do look after kids, pay CM, etc.

Few years ago I paid her a sum of money to reduce her equity (to 25%) in the house we have bought jointly together after we got married. This agreement was "validated" by a local solicitor.

Bank hasn't got a problem with a mortgage being converted to sole.

My questions are;

  • Will mediator/ solicitor have to take into account the fact that she willingly reduced equity?
  • Which property value is taken into account when establishing finances- value at the time she moved out or current market value?

If anyone knows or perhaps could point me towards the answer would be brill- I searched here and there- probably in wrong places :/

Cheers.

OP posts:
Jon65 · 28/01/2019 13:58

There isn't enough info here to advise.

Jon65 · 28/01/2019 14:00

But the answers may be probably, and cmv. With whom do the children live?

Jon65 · 28/01/2019 14:01

What does the agreement say?

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 14:13

Hi, what other info is required?
Kids live with her most of the week, stay with me weekends and 2x half day during the week.

Although we've been separated for so long I'm just beginning to get the ball rolling on the divorce. We have amicably agreed the child care arrangements when we split up but not much more beyond that.

OP posts:
Jon65 · 28/01/2019 14:31

How much is your pension pot, does stbx have a pension, how much in savings, value of the property, any investments? What is stbx housing position?

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 14:36

Pension practically non existent (mine and hers), no savings.
She moved out 5 years ago and has been renting since. No investments.
If I had to sell today, would probably have about £70k left after mortgage was repaid.

OP posts:
Racecardriver · 28/01/2019 14:45

These issues are often dealt with with a constructive trust. Constructive trusts crystallise when then intention is formed (this would be the point at which you reduced her equity). So (from what I gather from your OP) from that point onwards she would be entitled to 25% of the house.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 15:26

Thanks.
Ok, I'll have to do some more digging on this. I foolishly assumed the value taken into account would either be the current value or value at the time she walked through the door. she has not contributed to mortgage payments/ maintenance/charges or anything for 7 years...

OP posts:
BubblesBuddy · 28/01/2019 15:46

Yes, but she’s looked after your children! She was probably foolish to accept anything to reduce her equity and your children need a home - with her.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 16:03

I don't disregard the fact she's been looking after the kids. So was I. There is also another fact that she's moved out 5 years ago and took them with her.
We have made a co parenting agreement years ago and sticking to it but after being separated for so long I feel best for all involved to finish the unfinished business.
Please, this topic is purely for the house issue. If you have something constructive to say, participate by all means.

OP posts:
titchy · 28/01/2019 16:14

You can't just have a thread about the house. It won't be taken in isolation - it'll form part of a much bigger picture which will include childcare, pensions etc etc.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 17:15

All other things have been taken care of and agreed. I thought it was stated clearly enough in the first post.

OP posts:
titchy · 28/01/2019 17:59

But it hasn't been agreed by a judge.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 18:12

Fair point, however if we already agreed almost everything relevant, do you really think judge will interfere? All arrangements made are with children in mind. We've been living separately since 2014, operating on agreements we made between ourselves. Hence why I'm really after advice regarding retaining the house.

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 28/01/2019 19:40

If a judge is not happy that the agreement is fair they will interfere. And until you have a consent agreement approved by the court it is open to either of you to make a claim against the other. When you apply for a consent agreement you will both have to make a full disclosure covering all assets - the house (at current market value), pensions, savings, etc. It will all be taken into account in determining whether or not the agreement is fair.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 19:54

Sorry but this doesn't compute.

How can judge be unhappy if we present court with what we agreed with mediator?? There is only one deal on the table and we are both happy to accept it.

Why current value of the property? We separated in 2013 and she moved out in 2014. I bought 25% of her equity in the property in 2016 and she had not contributed towards the mortgage since she moved out. And prior but as she was looking after the kids that counts as contribution so not going to argue about it. I'm not interested in her property assets abroad either.

I didn't have a pension when we split up. We both have live insurance policies where the other is named beneficiary.
Prh, if you could point me to the source of info you provided it will be much appreciated.

OP posts:
Toomanycats99 · 28/01/2019 20:00

I am going through these forms at the moment. I have come to an greenway with my ex about the split of equity but as far as I understand it can still be overturned by a judge.

When I was looking at options if I remained in the house and split equity when youngest got to 18 then it would be equity at the point it was sold not mattering that one party had not contributed for x years. As you have already done some transfer of equity though things may be different.

You really need to speak to a solicitor and not a free consultation as they won't give you specifics only general advice.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 20:22

To clarify, we split up in civilized way, we don't hate each other, there are no skeletons in the closet. didn't work out. If she wanted to, she would have already requested this and that.
I'm trying to get as much info as poss before I go to see a solicitor so I can ask the right questions.
I know this isn't the best place to be, especially if the case is fresh but our case is just some old unfinished business from long gone past.

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 28/01/2019 21:14

How can judge be unhappy if we present court with what we agreed with mediator

The judge must ensure that the deal is fair to both of you. It may be that the deal is clearly unfair to one of you even though you are both happy with it. If the judge isn't happy he/she will not accept the deal you have constructed. It is absolutely not the case that the judge must accept the deal you and your ex put forward. The judge can tell you to change the deal or, if you and your ex cannot come up with an acceptable deal, the judge will impose their own.

Why current value of the property

Because that is the way it works! Neither the judge nor the law are interested in a deal that might have been fair 5 years ago when it was agreed. What matters is that the deal is fair at the time the court order is made. Having said that, significant changes to the value of the assets following separation may carry less weight than changes whilst you were together. See, for example, Wyatt vs Vince. At the time they divorced they had no assets and didn't bother with a financial settlement. He went on to become a multi-millionaire. She made a claim against him nearly 30 years after they separated, as a result of which he had to pay her around £300,000 - a lot less than she would have got if he had made his fortune while they were married, but a lot more than she would have got if the value of their assets at the time of separation had been used.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 21:22

Well,I have invested over 30k in this property since she left (and a lot of my own time and effort) , is this also negligible?

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 28/01/2019 21:36

I didn't say anything was negligible. The fact you have put money into the property helps you but it doesn't alter the basics - when you go for a consent order you will have to declare all assets at current market value, including assets you have acquired since separation, and the judge is not required to accept the deal you and your ex put forward. You may not like it but that is the way it works.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 21:40

Assuming this applies to both parties...

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 28/01/2019 22:02

Yes it does. Both parties have to provide a full disclosure and the settlement must be fair to both of you.

Original poster
Hugless · 28/01/2019 22:09

OK,to stir this up. We got married outside UK (we are both EU nationals, same country) but within EU. Which law applies?

OP posts:
Jon65 · 28/01/2019 22:19

Where do you live, where does your wife live? What nationality are the children?