Should I adjust the shares of our house?

[Bickytoria]

When me and my (now) husband bought our house 4 years ago, I paid the deposit, so I ended up with a greater share of the house- 54%. His larger salary allowed us a larger mortgage though.

He always said he wanted to ‘buy’ his way to 50% over time by paying for and doing renovation work, and we agreed this based on half the value of the deposit at the time (£30k), provided he carry out the work within a couple of years.

He has kept very poor records of his expenditure, so it is a finger in the air to determine how much he had spent. He says however he believes he has now reached £30k, although he is including the costs of his LABOUR.

I am not keen to adjust the shares yet, mostly because the work is not finished. If we were to put the house up for sale now, I am not sure it would have added value, in fact it might be worth less because of the state of the outside.

I am also not sure I want to include his labour costs. He insists, because he ‘paid’ for my labour whilst I was on maternity leave by paying for my expenses.

Lastly, he wants to CONTINUALLY update the shares of our house over the years, as he (probably) will contribute more.

I am interested in people’s opinions about the three above points:

1. updating house shares before the work is finished and based on financial input only

2. counting labour costs as well as expenditure, and

3. the prospective of continually updating house shares over the years.

Some background knowledge- he earns triple my salary and we have been married for two years, together for 8.

Thanks for your contribution.
Yes we are having couples therapy because it is obviously quite dysfunctional (at least from my point of view!).
We have a joint account that we use to buy things for our DD which we contribute towards 50/50, despite the salary disparity. Yet another bugbear of mine almost worth another post!

Thanks for your contribution.
I agree with your points, it seems nitpicky over 4% and I would happily make it 50/50 and stop counting but alas he refuses. Sadly we contribute 50/50 though towards bills despite the salary disparity. A battle I am planning on tackling with our therapist who seems to see reason here as well.

Yes I totally agree. I have always wanted to do this but my DH refused. We are having couples therapy. :(

You need a divorce lawyer, not a therapist OP.

Thank you. I agree. I suggested that to no avail.

Thanks for your contribution. All his ideas surprisingly. I would happily go 50/50 and stop counting but refuses.

Thank you for your contribution. I agree it is madness and we are not working as a team.

Good luck - I hope the couples therapy works for you both.

Sadly, I’m on it already. Just hoping we wouldn’t get that far.

He's being ridiculous and ruining his marriage for something that doesn't even make sense assuming you're in the UK. If you divorced and he owned 100% of the house on paper, it'd still be a marital asset and you'd be given, let's say, half (maybe more). A judge wouldn't care that he owned it on paper. Any money he saves in his name would also be a marital asset and you'd be given some (again, let's say half although could be more). So he's "protecting himself" but ironically making it more likely that he'll lose half the house in a divorce anyway.

You’d be better off skipping couples therapy this week, the relationship is dead anyway, and go to see a financial advisor or solicitor.

You both need to realise that as you are married AND share a child, that overrules whatever your tenants in common set up says anyway. You could adjust it to 90/10 in his favour but when you get divorced you’ll still be able to get at least your 50% because you are married, so this entire argument over shares is totally irrelevant.

This is not necessarily true. You can choose to be tenants in common rather than joint tenants. It can be better for income tax or capital gains tax purposes (not really relevant here as it is the main residence) or for flexibility when it comes to who inherits assets. I've been looking at this for my holiday let property so I'm feeling relatively well informed! At the moment it is 100% mine, but that probably isn't the best solution for us. However, we view our property jointly and if I transfer some ownership to my DH, then it will not be anything to do with how much money he has put into it.

This seems bizarre to me. Are you planning for a future divorce? In my marriage, everything is shared regardless of how much money or labour each individual has put in.

Did I miss in the early posts that you’re consulting a divorce solicitor?

kinds changes your question somewhat… you’re now telling everyone you’d happily give 50/50 when you implied earlier that you didn’t want to as he hadn’t earned it.

Now it feels like you’re more scared of losing more than 50%… oh, and there’s a child!

Even this sounds quite nit picky and dysfunctional. You’re both contributing 50:50 to your kids but you’re saying that’s not fair. Possibly you’re technically right but why sweat the little stuff.

obviously if he’s earning millions and you’re slaving away in minimum wage. Or if he’s buying Gucci suits and you’re shopping in charity shops (not out of choice) then it’s different but in the grand scheme of things if you’ve got some disposable cash then seriously stop penny counting.

if you divorce in the future, assets should be split 50:50 including things like his pension so is it really worth quibbling and harbouring resentment over a 50:50 vs a 75:25 split???

but this advise equally applies to him as well as you.

Thanks for your comments. I will bear this in mind.

Yes this was my suggestion but he refused. He is the one who insists on counting like this. We are having counselling.

thanks for your thoughts. I will bear this in mind.

Well his point exactly- he considers himself having ‘paid me’ already for my ‘labour’ whilst I was on maternity (covering bills and giving me spending money) so why not me pay his labour too? I am interested in people’s opinions on this.

Thanks for your thoughts. Just to clarify, he was the one who insisted on giving me the greater share of the house based on my deposit, and who insists on counting everything in this way. I would have been happy with going 50/50 on the house if it meant no counting in this way for everything else.

Don’t be ridiculous-that’s not paying you for your labour. In your shoes I would start by billing him for carrying his child. If he truly wants 50/50 then he needs to pay you for 24 hrs of child gestation for 4.5 months (because you were still working and contributing 50/50 then weren’t you?) So I would calculate it at an hourly rate of say twice my current hourly rate at work to take into account danger pay (after all pregnancy literally risks your life). Then look at the hourly rate for a Norland nanny and calculate that accordingly for all the childcare you have done solo (with a bump for recovery after labour). Then if the cleaning etc is not 50/50 invoice him accordingly. Then do some research into the extent that a woman’s earnings are directly impacted by each case of maternity leave over her lifetime and invoice him for 50% of that. And so on and so forth. And see how much it comes out to over the last 8 years. Because you have been paying 50/50 in terms of finances but I’m betting he has not been contributing 50/50 in terms of domestic labour.

Send hun an invoice for all of the above and then call a lawyer.

I’d be interested to see the comparison in hourly rates between him paying the bills while you were looking after HIS child, and his “labor” on the house. And unless he really does do a full 50% of all household tasks and all childcare, is he paying you for your labor there? But I wouldn’t actually go that route because this is just ridiculous, and he is showing no love or care towards you at all, and no concept of what a marriage is in terms of sharing both labor and finances and working as a team.

I certainly wouldn’t be changing the deeds while you’re still unsure about divorce, I’m no expert but is it possible that doing so shortly before divorce could be seen as some kind of “post-nup” and be taken into account in the financial settlement?

Yes this.