Anyone able to help with post split financial advice

[Whatevertheweather]

Will try and keep it brief - just trying to ascertain if I've been fair to ex-p as he is adamant I've screwed him over:

Together 12 years. 2 children (young both under 10). Not married. Split 5 months ago at my request due to his ongoing moods/bad temper
House is in my name only as he had bad credit at the time we bought it (8yrs ago)
Mortgage of 156k always been on interest only. Worth about 185k.
I take home around £3k pm (nursery fees of £350 deducted before take home pay) He takes home £1.4k.
I gave him £3k when he left and have kept a car loan I took out for him which has approx £7k left to pay.

There are also other debts accrued jointly which I will keep and pay the remaining balance.
Not asked for any maintenance though he has been giving me around £250 per month since he left as he is currently living with his parents. Once he rents somewhere he will most likely not be able to afford to give me anything and I accept that.

He feels I should buy him out and give him 50% of the equity (so approx £15k) I don't agree and feel the cash, him being debt free and that the children live here full time means we're even.

Any opinions? I don't want to be unfair. I have booked a free 30min consultation with a family solicitor next week but wanted to gauge opinion I case I am way out

Thank you

I'm not an expert but to me it seems that you've been more than fair, you're not married so technically you don't owe him anything and as you're presumably the main carer for your DCs, the only money that is owed is maintenance from him, which he is paying (albeit informally).

Even if you were married or the house was in both names, with equity of about £30k in the house, by giving him £3k and keeping the £7k loan he is only coming out of the situation £5k down, but if you're paying the other joint debts and have the DCs most of the time, you've been more than fair.

FWIW, I was married for 14 years and the house was in joint names. I came out of it with 100% of the equity and him paying maintenance, which covers the mortgage. He earns more than I do and has pensions, so he accepted that my need for stability for the DCs was stronger than his need to get a lump of cash, so he rents now and has a hassle-free and 90% child-free life!

The fact that your ex would rather uproot your DCs and take away your stability and thinks you've 'screwed him over' by keeping a roof over their heads speaks volumes about him.

How much would he be liable to pay for your DCs on his income? Why are you happy to let him not pay this? Whatever he's earning he should be able to pay a nominal amount towards the upkeep of his DCs.

Thank you MarkRuffalo I think there's an awful lot of bitterness on his side because I am still living in the house and my life hasn't been turned upside down but his has. I think he just wants me to suffer as he is and isn't really thinking about the children

Oh and maintenance CSA calculator says £287 pm for both children based on his take home pay. Realistically he can't pay that and rent somewhere and I knew that when I instigated the split. I'm fortunate enough that I can survive without it so any odd bit he does give me I'll just put into the girls savings.

I don't think he has any entitlement to the home. And you paying off his car seems way too much tbh. CSA claim should be put in too quite frankly.

He thinks he has a beneficial interest as he's lived here and contributed to the mortgage for 8yrs. My argument back to him is he's effectively just been renting (as have I) because it's interest only. The plan was (and still is) to convert to repayment once youngest starts school next Sept

Well in that case I'd suggested putting it all down on paper and showing him that with the money you've already paid/written off and the lack of maintenance, even without counting the joint debts you intend to pay off, within 20 months he'll be better off than he would be if you had done it all 50/50.

If you were to buy him out and give him 50% because that's what he thinks SHOULD happen, then he SHOULD be paying maintenance and will end up paying it all back to you in less than 2 years, in which time you've had to move, incurring solicitors and moving fees, eating into your half of the equity and causing disruption to your DCs.

Has he taken legal advice on this?

No I don't think so, it sounds spouted from Google. I've told him to take legal advice in the hope that would set him straight.

Good way of thinking about it re offsetting maintenance!

Exactly, paying an interest only mortgage is like rent (although luckily for me, about half the cost of renting a similar place) so doesn't really entitle him to any equity.

Out of interest, where did the deposit for the house come from though? If he contributed to the deposit then he should probably get that back. Mine was from my parents' inheritance, which was another reason I felt justified in keeping the equity. DM's instructions were that this money should be used for something fun to make my life better, not something boring like a mortgage!

However, when it came to it, we had lost money on a previous business venture and XH had taken a year off work, so we ended up using my inheritance for the deposit.

Deposit was originally £7k of which £5k came from his parents. My parents also gave us £5k for legal a/moving costs so in effect equal contribution. This was on a flat we bought prior to the house and the remainder of the deposit on the house (another £9k) was from increase in value on the flat

I don't think it is fair to argue that an interest only mortgage is effectively renting, as owners benefit from any increase in house value, while tennants do not.

It sounds as if he should get 50% of the equity and needs to pay 50% of any joint debt. In addition if the car loan was for a personal car that is his (and still is his), then he should be responsible for all of that debt. If £15K -£7K - 50%(joint debt) leaves any balance, then he should receive that amount. Were there any joint savings? If so those need to be taken into account, and also the £3K already given unless that was different in some way.

In the future he should pay child support with reference to his means at any point in time. What he may or may not pay in the future shouldn't really influence a fair settlement at this point.

Personally, I would err on the side of generosity at this point (if you can afford to be). Was the car completely 100% his or was it used as a family car at all? If you count the car loan as part of the joint debt what balance would he have left out of his share of the equity?

I do understand your point about benefitting from rise in value woodhead I didn't put it very well I meant that his contribution in the last 8 years hasn't decreased the mortgage balance at all. There was £9k in savings at the time we split. That was entirely from an annual bonus I received from work. The £3k came from that.

I can't ask him to take over the car loan as he wouldn't get the credit. Same with the other debt (approx 11k - we lost a child 4 years ago and I had extended time off work and debts built up) . Car is entirely his in so much that I have my own car (company). So in lieu of giving him any further cash I agreed to keep all of the debt

So £15K -£7K -0.5*£11K = £2.5K

You've given him £3K so slightly more than he is owed in a fair split.
Does he not understand that you keeping his debt must be deducted from his share of the equity?

It sounds as if your split is slightly on the generous side. If he thinks that somehow he should get another £15K that would be equivalent to him receiving 100% of the equity, which is clearly unfair. I suppose go through the 50:50 equity and debt calculation with him and hopefully he will understand that he has already received his share and been bought out.

So sorry to hear about your loss.

That's how I worked it woodhead I think he feels it's unfair as he has nothing 'physical' and I have the house (and a shedload of debt but I am working on that!)

So he has a free car, you are up to your eyeballs in debt, an interest only mortgage, which means the bank actually own your house, and he doesn't pay a penny maintenance? Plus he trousered £3k when he left? Blimey - he is taking you for a mug isn't he.

To be fair, I can see why he'd feel gutted. 12 years, having a flat and then a house with a family, and now he has £3K and a car and is living back with parents. I don't think you can magically fix that though, and presumeably he wanted to have the car and the loan that goes with it!

It's difficult to not see the house as a large tangible asset, even if in reality its mainly owned by a bank and you have taken on a large debt from which he is now free. Perhaps ask him how he would work out a 50% share of your joint assets and debts? If he actually has to work it out himself, I doubt he can specify where you have supposedly been unfair.

How much did the debts amount to overall? And how much in savings was left and how were they split?