What happened to having to keep in and DC in home until out of education??

[Mintymoomoo]

Following my thread earlier regarding my friend and her recent split from her DH of 20 years due to his adultery have have a question regarding the family home that she has just brought up in convo!

I remember that when you spilt you were able to stay in family home with ex contributing to mortgage until the children left full time eduction then the house would either be sold or someone brought out etc.

Now this no longer seems to be the case, it appears you either have to sell up or take over mortgage repayments yourself to stay in the family home!

My friend is desperate not to lose her family home they went through a hell of a lot to get there children age 9/11 (both adopted) and my friend has suffered some serious health issues over the years!

Are we right in thinking that this still stands and she will be able to keep the children in the only secure family home they have ever had ?

Hope this makes sense ?

I hope this makes sense and you are all understand what

She needs to get proper legal advice based on the specific circumstances.

Yes, the best interests of the children will come first. But that is not always synonymous with staying in one specific (and perhaps no longer affordable) property.

Hi,

Every case is different but this has been my recent experience. I moved out of the family home due to being a SAHM and ex H wouldn't leave. I couldn't afford to buy him out or pay the mortgage and bills to stay there so my solicitor said that because we had no savings or couldn't raise enough money to give him a deposit to buy another property that the house would need to be sold and the money split so that we could both be rehoused. I was told that I could take it to court but he's not a high wage earner and court cost would have meant that if I lost I'd have even less money for a deposit on a new home.

Like I say, every case is different and good legal advice is the best way forward in these things as outcomes are all dependant on the individual case.

Staying in the home until the children finish school etc. is not an automatic right/entitlement and I'm not sure it has ever been. It became fashionable during the 80's I think after a Judge applied it is case known as 'Mesher'. It usually comes down to the economics of what money is actually available, and how it can best be used to turn one family into two 'sustainable' families - rarely an easy task - with the priority usually being to try and rehouse everybody. Specialist advise is needed.

Thank you your right this is something I always hear the older generation say, my friend asked as that's what her dad had to do when her parents spilt when she was a child, I have advised her to first speak to a solicitor to go through options then she can look at speaking to a financal adviser/mortgage options etc once she knows where she stands legally.

This is interesting. My DDs father moved out in may '12. Into his g/friends house (a work colleague). We went to mediation re childcare and the mediator said "
There isn't a court in the country that would throw you out of your family home" . I relaxed and thought I was safe to stay til dd2 is 18. He's gone on the buy a house in the countryside and get married and go on honeymoon and get chickens etc (BLEURGH). So he's not struggling. He pays the minimum maintenance and I pay mortgage and all
Bills/house repairs etc. I am meeting with a financial advisor soon to discuss if/how I can give ex any money but on a temp contract at work so Not in the best position. Be interested to hear other people's situations

I thought they couldn't make you sell, but the ex would only have to pay child maintenance. So if you couldn't afford the house you would have to move as it would be unfair to expect him to pay the mortgage as well.

There has never been a rule that says the remaining partner gets to stay in the marital home just because there are children. It is judged, as a PP said, on an individual basis. If the couple can't afford to run two homes and everyone have a decent standard of living.... i.e. it would be unreasonable for the exW and DCs to be in a five bed detached and the exH slumming it in a caravan because he's still paying the mortgage... then a fairer solution has to be arrived at.

If you think about it there is no law that guarantees that even the most happily married families will be able to stay in their present level of accommodation until their children are out of education. It only takes a shift in interest rates, or a change in income or other expenditure and many families find they have to downsize.

Just because you are divorced the realities of life don't stop happening. A court can't order somebody to spend money he hasn't got.

And a divorce is in itself a massive change in other expenditure: the income that formerly went to maintain one household will now have to make do for a household and a half. Very likely the money will not be enough for everybody to remain on the same standard of living.