Divorce where only one party owns home

[Tearingmyhairout82]

DB bought a house in 2017 for him and SIL to live in. The house is in his name and he pays the mortgage. DB and SIL married in 2019 and separated in Jan 23. They have two DS, 9 and 5. SIL stays in the home currently and has a charge against the property. DB initially wanted her out and didn't see why he should have to give her anything, SIL wanted to stay in the house till DS2 turned 18. DB has now offered SIL 20% of the increased value of the home since it was purchased (about £20,000) and SIL is still adamant that she should live there till DS2 is 18 as she is self employed and doesn't think she will be able to buy a house in the area they currently live.

I suspect they are both being unreasonable. DB can't afford anything, buy or rent, while he is paying the mortgage on his house and I doubt SIL could buy on her own with only £20,000 for a deposit.

They have reached a stalemate. DB currently lives with me and my nephews stay 4 nights in 14. Its not sustainable and I am tearing my hair out as neither will come to compromise and there is no end in sight to my current living situation.

Looking for advice/opinions from other people who have been in either DB or SIL situation. What agreement did you come to? Any solicitors out there who can give me an idea of what DB needs to offer in order to break the stalemate without crippling himself?

In general if it is a short marriage then the courts aim to roughly put the people back where they were and split any gains in assets.

However, if they have joint children then the needs of the children over-ride this.

Are the children both DB's and SIL's?

Where does your DB think his two children are going to live if he boots his wife out with nothing? (Not that in law he would be able to make her leave with no share of assets).

Hope your ex-SIL gets a good solicitor is all I want to say here. I don't feel inclined to offer any advice that would support your DB in treating his wife and children badly.

Yes both DB and SIL. They have informally agreed to 50/50 shared care but that can't happen in practice until he has somewhere to live. We are packed to the rafters at mine and it would be too much to have them here half the time with my DH and DC to consider.

He moved out because he could stay with me, so she would have space for her and the DC. They have informally agreed to 50/50 shared care but that can't happen until he has somewhere to have them. Neither are high earners, though he earns more and had a deposit which allowed him to buy.

I don't want to see SIL out on the street, and he doesn't want that for the mother of his children. But he can't afford anything else whilst he is still paying the mortgage on a house he doesn't live in. And neither DB or I want him to live in my spare room for 13 years.

They are both being unreasonable.
Why didn’t he add his wife (later partner) to the mortgage and deeds? You can add a SAHM with zero income.
Can SIL afford the mortgage on her own? If not then she can’t live in the house until the children are 18- she can’t afford the mortgage repayments.

I do completely see that they are both being unreasonable. Not sure why she was never on the mortgage, possibly because she wasn't putting anything toward the deposit. But I doubt she can afford the mortgage on her own.

He should move back in to the house. This might focus both their minds on a solution.

The current situation is not sustainable and SIL cannot hang onto the house until their children are 18 while expecting DB to fund at least part of the mortgage, that's insane thinking.

I don't think it matters too much that SIL doesn't on paper own the house, they are married.

Have either of them been to see a solicitor?

But I assume she wasn't "putting anything" into the mortgage because she was staying at home to raise the kids thus enabling his career to the detriment not only of her earnings at the time but also to her entire future earnings?

It's all about the sums tbf. No amount of arguing about what's fair and who owes what to whom will change the total amount of capital and income they have available to house four humans beings in two locations.

How large is the house? How much would downsizing cost? Is there anywhere cheaper / smaller that they could buy to house DSIL and two children? Would DSIL's income entitle her to any benefits as a lone parent? Does DB's?

She has a bf who stays a lot so I'm sure DB moving back in would fairly cramp her style. I suggested that to DB but his thinking is it would not be a great situation for the kids as it is getting pretty toxic. I also don't think he wants to be sat in the living room whilst SIL and her bf are getting busy upstairs.

He had a solicitor, who very quickly made him release he would need to give her something. There was some back and forth but she stopped responding in September and he no longer wanted to pay for letters that weren't doing anything. Hoping he will have a re think in the new year. He is finding it hard not seeing his kids as much as he wants and feeling a bit frustrated that another man is sleeping in the house he pays for.

Have they tried mediation? Cheaper than solicitors, quicker than going via the courts.
https://www.gov.uk/money-property-when-relationship-ends/mediation

Its a three bedroom in a good area (our parents live on the next street over). DB would like to move back into the house which in can afford, though he would need to see if he could extend the mortgage to buy her out. There is about £140,000 equity which is the deposit and the £100,000 in value it has gone up since covid madness. I'm not sure on her financials. She is a nail technician, I can't imaging she earns much but also not sure how much she declares. I believe she is claiming UC.

I will suggest that to DB. I just think they are both living in a fairy tale land where they will get exactly what they want if they just stomp there feet hard enough. Meanwhile I have seven people in my three bed house every other weekend 😐

What stage in the divorce are they at? Surely this will all be figured out by solicitors and court?
Your brother wanting to boot his wife out of the family home and thinking he shouldn't give her anything makes him sound like he doesn't have the faintest grasp of comprehension on what the legalities of marriage involve, and should figure that out with his solicitor. Having him packed to the rafters in your property sounds awful.

I sympathise OP, it can't be easy on you. It sounds like both are being unrealistic and unreasonable, it's a shame you're suffering as a result!

I'd suggest he starts the divorce.

They are both being unreasonable and will end up meeting in the middle.

If he starts the process then he can organise mediation. They have to try mediation before court if the cannot agree unless abuse.

The process will force both of them to accept that they are not going to get what they want.

They are at no stage. She has filed for a no fault divorce, but it has stalled as they haven't managed to come to any agreement about finances. I suspect it will end up in court but that will require DB to get a kick up the ass and start things moving again. She has never had a solicitor, did write back a few times herself but is no longer responding.

In case it helps, I was in a similar situation but after a much longer marriage. I owned the house and XH was not on the mortgage (his preference).

Solicitor said that the court would consider the "need to be housed" of the two parties - so me and STBXH, and the DC spending time with both of us. In our case we were able to agree that I kept the house and provided the main home for the DC (who are with me the bulk of the time, again by XH preference), and XH has rented a small house with enough room for them to stay.

The solicitor advised that technically, the court could have ordered me to sell the house and split the proceeds to allow both me and XH to buy somewhere (however modest, however much a drop in perceived quality) to provide two homes for the DC. Because the marriage was long, the house was viewed as a marital asset, despite only me having bought it and paid for all of it and works to it.

The solicitor advised against a Mesher Order (the staying in the house until children are 18) because of the hardship that entails for the non-resident parent, in this case your DB. Whether or no SIL can buy a house in the area they currently live in is less relevant than both parties being able to buy a home somewhere...courts prefer children not to have to move schools, but your DB having to live in one room for the next 13 years is not something anyone should be expected to put up with, and the courts are unlikely to support that.

I think, get the house valued - take off the outstanding mortgage and then see what DB might offer to SIL on a 50/50 basis, and if that would leave both of them with enough to buy something to live in that's big enough to have the kids.

Divorce is far from easy, and financially it is punitive - splitting one thing - the marital finances - two ways means no one comes out of it rich. But the DC's need somewhere to live, on a roughly equal footing, with both parents, so the house cannot be held hostage as it currently is.

If they have not come to an agreement about finances then mediation is probably the way firward.

With respect to what is a reasonable offer:

The main assets of most marriages are houses and pensions.

You have mentioned the house. Does DB or SIL have significant pension? This will also count as an asset.

In general an offer of close to 50:50 is likely to be reasonable. If she can't afford to pay the mortgage on the house he could offer to buy her out and he should probably look into whether this is possible as otherwise the house may have to be sold and it's not a good market.

If the kids are 50:50 both him and sil have to housed if possible so that they have space for the kids.

Surely, if he bought it in 2017, when their eldest was already three years old, it was always ‘their’ house and when they married it would certainly have become a marital asset?

Split 50/50, they would each get £70k, which would be enough for a deposit in most areas.

Thank you, that is really helpful. I did look to see if a Mesher order was a thing when the non-resident solely owned the home but couldn't find an answer. I do think 50/50 on the equity is probably the fairest thing but both seem to think they will be short changed if this is the final agreement.

Both self-employed and neither have pensions. I will suggest mediation to DB. I have been tip toeing around him a bit, partly as he is not in a great place and partly as I assumed this would be a short term thing. Need to get a bit firmer with him after Christmas.

I can't imagine she will manage to buy at all, I think she has under reported earnings for years, do the courts need her to be able to afford to buy or will they see it as an acceptable home if its a rented one?

Yes, he bought it for them to live in. I think as they weren't married and he could afford to buy on his own he chose to do that. I'm not saying this was right or wrong, its just what he chose to do. They never changed anything after marriage.

Rented is considered acceptable.

To be honest if she walks away with half of the amounts being talked about she can certainly afford to buy unless they all live in central London.

I honestly think she should secure a rental, he should sell the house and give her a percentage of the sale gains, and he can then either move into somewhere smaller with a mortgage or rent.

It would be great for her to stay in the home with them til they're 18 but that's not fair on dbil if he is therefore unable to secure another rental or home purchase.

In the meantime, is it possible for your parents to stay with you when DB has his kids and him to stay in their house that weekend?