Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Divorcing a Vicar After an Inheritance - Legal Advice Needed Please

8 replies

BetsyBigNose · 23/06/2019 03:29

Hi all,

I apologise in advance as this will likely be long, but I don't want to drip feed and it's an unusual situation.

NB: All figures are for illustration purposes only

My Mum left her alcoholic, gas-lighting, emotionally abusive husband last summer, after nearly 20 years of marriage. He refuses to accept that the marriage is over and appears to be waiting for her to 'snap out of it' and return to the home they shared. She took a long time to work up the courage to leave but is now happier than she's been in years and is adamant that the relationship is over. I’ll call him Bob and my Mum Jane for ease.

When they met, Bob was single with no children, had no savings and was working in a MW job. He lived in a small flat, which he sold for a £1k profit when he moved into Jane’s house 23 years ago. He frittered away this small return. Jane was divorced (on friendly terms), had 2 adult children (19 year old away at University and 21 year old living in a nearby city with their partner), had been paying a mortgage since she was 18 and had £60k equity.

Bob and Jane married nearly 20 years ago, and Bob started training to be a Vicar, so they were provided a house to live in by the Church. Homes provided to Vicars (and those in training) are rent free, but the occupant is responsible for the day to day bills (such as council tax, electricity, gas etc.) and the Church pays all maintenance (and even redecorating) costs. The Church will continue to provide a home for Bob until he dies (as long as he remains a Vicar - it is normal for Vicars to live in a Church ‘House for Duty’ until their death). Bob receives a good salary and has 16 years until retirement, when he will receive a decent pension.

Jane has worked since the age of 18, in a professional career. She was Medically Retired 22 years ago and received a £30k lump sum from her pension, from which she gave each of her 2 children £5k. She has been able to qualify in a less demanding version of her previous role and so has been able to carry on working - although she is older than Bob so now only works part time, she also receives her monthly private pension, which tops up her earnings to a full time wage. She has 5 years left until retirement.

As they had a Church house to live in, Jane decided to sell her own house and Jane and Bob purchased a 3 bedroom house together (“Rental House”), which they planned to rent out with the intention that the rent would cover the mortgage cost. Jane used her £60k equity from the sale of her house and the remaining £20k from her Private Pension lump sum as the only deposit. Jane organised a local Rental Agent to manage the property and it was rented out successfully.

Bob’s Father died 17 years ago, and his Mother received a large Life Insurance pay out, his pension and a lump sum from the same. Over the years, she has gifted around £20k to her son, which he has mainly spent on cars and alcohol, but Bob has never received an official inheritance to date. When Bob’s Mother dies, her Estate will be split 50/50 with half going to Bob and half to his sibling. Bob’s Mother has estimated in the past that he will receive around £200k when she dies – obviously we have no idea of how accurate this figure will be when the time comes.

Jane’s Parents died in quick succession, 15 years ago. Jane received an inheritance of £20k from her parent’s estate. Shortly after this, Jane’s younger child moved to a new city to continue her studies and Jane decided to use her £20k inheritance from her parents as a deposit on buying a flat (“Rental Flat”) there for her daughter to live in - rent free - for the duration of her studying for this qualification. The purchase was again in the joint names of both Jane and Bob. The mortgage on this property was initially paid from Bob and Jane’s Joint Bank Account. After a year, Jane’s daughter had finished studying and started working, so started to pay rent (into Bob and Jane’s Joint Account), which covered the cost of the mortgage. When Jane’s daughter moved out of the Rental Flat, Jane organised a local Rental Agent to manage the property and it was rented out successfully.

Over the last 15 years Bob’s behaviour has become a stream of coercive control, anger, sulking, emotional abuse, gas-lighting, isolating, cruelty, disrespect, ‘punishment’, selfishness, criticism and lies, plus around 30 units of alcohol every day. To the outside, he is a Vicar with a somewhat charming exterior, but it hides a psychopathic, racist, homophobic, misogynist monster.

Now she’s found the courage and left him, Jane simply “wants what’s hers” so that she can buy a one bedroom flat in the city she’s now living in, near to her eldest child and grandchildren. Jane would like the following; £100k deposits she paid on the two Rental Properties and half of the profit from the sale of both of these. She has taken some furniture from their Church home (the contents of the house all belong to Jane and Bob), but only enough to furnish the one bedroom flat she is currently renting. Bob has an entire 5 bedroom house full of decent furniture, which Jane does not intend to claim any more of.

Bob has refused to agree to this and has countered that they sell both rental properties and split all profits 50/50, ignoring the issue of who paid what deposits.

Logic tells me that Bob’s right, since they purchased the properties together as a married couple and made no special clauses regarding who is entitled to what in the event of a sale but Jane is coming to the end of her working life, having paid a mortgage since she was 18 and endured an abusive husband for the last 20 years and all she wants is enough money to buy somewhere to live. It doesn’t seem a lot to ask. If she gets what she’s asking for, it would be enough of a deposit so that she could get a small mortgage for a simple little one bedroom flat, which would be paid off to coincide with her retirement. If things go Bob’s way, Jane would not be able to afford to buy anywhere within the area where she has now settled and would struggle to pay rent once she has retired.

The only 2 things we can think of for Jane to use as 'bargaining chips' are:

  1. Jane has no intention of pursuing any claim on Bob’s future earnings, pensions or inheritances, although she would be interested to hear whether this is even a realistic possibility, in the case where he still refuses her request?

  2. Jane doesn’t mind if Bob wants to stay married rather than go through the process of divorcing - It is difficult for a Vicar to divorce, it opens a very intrusive can of worms which can include a panel of people from the Church interviewing the couple, their friends and family as well as various members of the congregation; it’s a very uncomfortable and invasive process and Bob would be terrified of what they might uncover. But Jane has already reverted to her maiden name and will not be going back to using Bob's surname in any situation. Again, Jane would be happy to go the other way and divorce him for unreasonable behaviour, citing his alcoholism and his refusal to address it and to detail the abuses she has suffered at his hands in the divorce papers and to make herself available for a 'Divorce Interview' with a Church panel (where she would be entirely honest) - the consequences of which will certainly at least be that Bob has to enter and complete an in-patient Alcohol Rehabilitation Programme and could quite possibly even mean the end of his career (and therefore, also the Church house that comes with the job), if he refuses to agree to her request.

Can anyone offer some advice for Jane please? Does she stand a chance?

Thank you for reading if you made it to the end!

OP posts:
Birdie6 · 23/06/2019 03:46

Bob is right - it doesn't matter "who paid what deposit" years ago. They bought both properties as a married couple, so the divorce court will award them 50/50 when the properties are sold.

Re Bob's future inheritance - no, from personal experience I'd say that once you are divorced, any inheritance belongs to the person involved, not their ex partner.

Re future pensions - yes his future pension would be split 50/50.

Re staying married - I guess that's up to them. Of course if he's as awful as you say, she'd have a terrible time trying to get any money out of him to fund her single lifestyle. He sounds horrible - surely a divorce would be preferable to staying married to him and having to deal with him over many years to come.

Nat6999 · 23/06/2019 03:54

I would think if Bob wants things to end quietly he has no choice but to agree to Jane's request. If he refuses then everything will come in to the open & he will lose his job, his home & his standing in the church community. Jane needs to find a good solicitor who can give her good advice on how she is best to proceed & to get her as much out of the proceeds of the marriage. In reality she needs more than just enough for a one bedroom flat, she needs enough to make her comfortable in her old age & also to leave as a legacy for her children & grandchildren. If Bob is to remain in the church, then he will always be provided with a home until such time as he can no longer carry on.

tomatosalt · 23/06/2019 05:25

What does Bob propose to do with his pension? Perhaps he is not aware that it would usually be split and this needs to be brought to his attention.
I’m not sure I would remain married to someone like this due to all the usual legal repercussions of being married. Jane cannot be forced to partake in any interview and the church cannot legally hinder a divorce.

prh47bridge · 23/06/2019 08:49

Bob is right - it doesn't matter "who paid what deposit" years ago. They bought both properties as a married couple, so the divorce court will award them 50/50 when the properties are sold

The first sentence is correct. The second is not. It is not an automatic 50/50 split. There is a list of factors the courts take into account when determining a fair split including, for example, earnings potential. It may be that she is entitled to more or less than 50%.

Bob's future inheritance - no, from personal experience I'd say that once you are divorced, any inheritance belongs to the person involved, not their ex partner

This is correct.

Re future pensions - yes his future pension would be split 50/50

Again, there is no automatic 50/50 split. The pension fund goes into the pot to be split between them. There are several possibilities. Some of his pension pot could be transferred to her, or she could get more of the other assets and leave his pension alone, or she could get some of his pension when he retires.

If she doesn't divorce him the situation is different. In that situation they can negotiate a separation agreement. This can say whatever they want but, if they later divorce, the courts could change what has been agreed if it is clearly unfair. Note also that a separation agreement is not legally binding so she may not be able to get the courts to enforce it if he doesn't stick to it.

SittHakim · 23/06/2019 08:53

If Bob is an Anglican the Clergy Discipline Measure might be a useful threat for Jane - it has been used against clergy who divorce in 'fault' circumstances. Jane could make a formal complaint.

ComeAndDance · 23/06/2019 09:32

If he doesn’t want to get divorced, then he has little leeway on what to say. He will have to accept some stuff he isn’t keen on.

My advice would be for Jane to get some legal advice. She needs to know where to stand if they dint get divorced (eg what if he suddenly decide to get huge debts he can’t repay?). And what would be an appropriate compromise re the split of assets if they were getting divorced (which would be a good starting point for the négociations with her ex).

Tbh I can see why she would want to keep all the inheritance she has just received but I’m not sure how she stands in front of the law on that one.

ComeAndDance · 23/06/2019 09:38

I also think she needs to be careful about not ‘being too nice’ with him and forgetting to protect what is hers. Living with someone who is an alcoholic and emotionally abusive is bound to leave her struggling to maintain her boundaries.
Having an idea of what a lawyer would say is an acceptable split of the assets in case of divorce is a MINIMUM starting point.

She also needs to establish if the ‘not getting divorced’ is a way for her ex to keep some hold on her and a way to still make her life a misery (see the risk of incurring debts etc etc).

The fact he doesn’t want to get divorced is not here nor there. She has to do what works FOR HER rather that what suits him.

RedHelenB · 24/06/2019 18:20

Presumably it's her word against his as regards any church interview unless his alcoholism is known?

If it were me I'd divorce quickly and get on with the rest of my life as there seems to be enough money to satisfy both parties. Jane waits he loses his job possibly and he may end up with more as he would jo longer be housed.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread