Divorce, co-owned house, building work

[TirisfalPumpkin]

Hello,

I'm currently at decree nisi stage of divorce from my husband.

We own a property together. The intention is I'll buy out his share and am working on a consent order to do so.

When we separated, there was an outstanding building/planning issue with the house. Basically we need to demolish an out-building. It is leaking, poorly constructed and we don't have planning permission to have it as it currently is. He wants nothing to do with it, will not contribute, isn't even paying the mortgage, etc. Fine.

Can I go ahead and hire a builder to take it down, or as co-owner of the home, does he need to agree to this?

Have you been told to remove it by the planning department? If not, why not wait until things are settled and you are divorced?

It's leaking and I don't want it to deteriorate any further and potentially fall down/cause damage to neighbouring property.

Re. why now - I don't know how the consent order will go; I understand judges can overturn your agreement. What we've agreed will stretch me to the limit financially; if I have to give him any more, I would need to sell the house - which I'd struggle to do with an outstanding planning issue. I also don't know how long it will take, even going well, with courts backlogged.

I haven't been ordered to fix it by the planning dept, but they have told me it is not compliant as is and have refused an application to repurpose it.

Can you get him to agree in writing - whether by text, WhatsApp, email to you demolishing the outbuilding on safety grounds? Have you got something which states it is unsafe and potentially dangerous to life? If so, you could fall back on that if he starts saying you've devalued the place by demolishing it. Could it be fenced off in the interim?

The judge will only overturn your agreement if it is clearly unfair. If you have both received independent legal advice and there has been full disclosure the judge is unlikely to reject your agreement.

wowfudge - thanks. I'm just trying to understand if I must get his agreement, or if I can proceed without it. He is not always responsive to communications.

I think I can engage tradesmen to work on my house in my own right (and have been doing, for smaller jobs, without asking his permission). His attitude has been, 'if I don't live there, not my responsibility', although presumably he'd prefer if I didn't default on the mortgage or set fire to the place.

I have photographic evidence of the issues with the outbuilding, so think it'd be pretty difficult to argue it added any value - in fact, I think at the moment it's depressing the house's value until fixed. A surveyor has confirmed there are safety issues with it, but didn't go far as to say it posed an immediate danger to life, just 'not up to code and needs sorting'.

prh47bridge - thank you, that is reassuring. He will not get legal advice (he contacted every solicitor in town for the purpose of creating conflicts of interest, not using them) but, as far as I know and despite me recommending he do so several times, has not actually properly been to a solicitor. He thinks a google search is as good and won't be told otherwise. I had a solicitor help me draft the order and advise on the content, but will be representing myself.

Whether it's fair - short marriage, no kids, I put in 80% of the assets, so it's more than 50:50 in my favour but not as far as would be proportionate on contribution alone. I'm developmentally disabled and a lower earner with less job security and career prospects, so I would say my 'need' is greater. He's doing fine, big salary and professional job. So I guess it's whether 'fair' means 'just and equitable' or 'exactly equal'.

Fair means "just and equitable". It definitely does not mean "exactly equal".

There are a range of factors the courts take into account in determining what a fair settlement looks like. Note that, in deciding whether you've had a short marriage, the courts include any time you spent co-habiting prior to marriage.

Even including cohabiting we're under 5 years, so I think 'short marriage' applies.

Sorry for the splerg of paragraphs. I'm apparently having a bit of a stress day about it all. It's the uncertainty, I think. I just want the whole thing done.

I guess if I can evidence the work needed doing (surveyor's report) and it improved the house/increased its value (valuation), that would seem a reasonable, fact-based defence against any kicking off from ex. I can't think of any real grounds he would have to oppose it, other than making my life more difficult.

I got more than the lions share in our financial settlement and my ex didn't seek legal advice. The judge signed the consent order. It may have been partly due to ex being a professional and having already transferred the house ( where he was also advised to get legal advice. ) Good luck with it all

Thank you, RedHelen. I suppose you can’t force someone to get legal advice if they don’t want to.

I guess in our favour, the finances are relatively uncomplicated (no pension sharing, maintenance, shares, investments etc) so a layperson could understand them without being bewildered by jargon.