Relationship breakdown - unmarried

[TheMoistvonlipwig]

I'm writing this in behalf of and with permission of my friend (DF) who is not a Mumsnet user.

DF is in the early stages of ending a 10 year relationship (unmarried but engaged) where they have a 4 year old DD together, a dog and a house that they own (joint mortgage).

They are both nice people and good parents, there has been no infidelity or abuse. They are just incompatible and unhappy, they've tried several times to address the issues in their relationship and failed.

DF is currently taking some time away from her partner and is feeling more and more convinced that separating is the way to go. So far they have managed to be civil and calm when discussing matters.

The last time they discussed how to move forward her partner was adamant that the house would have to be sold. My DF initially agreed to this as she hadn't thought things through properly and on the face of things it seemed fair. There is approximately 40k equity in the house.

However my concerns for her are;

• DFs partner earns double the wage she does and also earns a huge amount on top of this as overtime. He's been steadily increasing his wage whilst she has been working part time doing the bulk of the childcare, cleaning etc, he's also been able to advance his career and has the potential increases his wage vastly over the next 5-10 years whilst my DFs wage has been stagnant due to responsibilities at home.

• DFs partner would like the house to be sold and for them to both buy a house each. He reacted with shock when DF suggested otherwise. I have heard if mesher orders for married couples. They aren't married. Is there similar for unmarried couples to allow my DF to stay in the house until her DD is 18?

• One option is for my DF to buy her partner out of the house. How does this work? Whilst she could afford the monthly mortgage payments on her income, I'm not sure my DF would get a mortgage for the value of the home on her wage alone.

• if they were to sell my DF would only be able to afford a house in a dodgy area that would need work. Whereas he would be able to afford a nice house in a good area.

I have advised my DF to get legal advice. I'm worried she will make a decision too quickly to get things over with, that she perceives to be fair but will actually put her in a vulnerable position. I believe that 10 years down the line he will be very secure financially and she may trapped in a terrible position financially should she make the wrong move now.

DF is trying to avoid all out war with her partner and ultimately aims to coparent well. At the moment all is calm however I worry this will change when she stands up to him over the house.

I believe the best solution would be for my DF to stay put with her DD and her partner to continue paying his share of the mortgage (£200) and see it as an investment for when they eventually sell, but I don't have any experience in this kind of thing and I am married and aware that they are not so it's a different situation.

Any advice/experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

In addition my DF doesn't drive and her DD has settled into school. She needs to be close to her DDs school whereas her partner drives and therefore has more options when it comes to housing.

Hi. I don't by any means have all the answers

However I don't t think she gets to think about mesher orders or staying in the house while he carriss on paying as they aren't married. Again the fact she has let hee career stagnate in favour of his onlynl carries weight if you are married. This is why getting married is important protection for women.

I don't know all about this though so I would also advise legal advice.

What has your solicitor suggtesed?

I cant afford one. I'll happily sit here and be your beacon of hate.

Blacktea - that's what I thought re the mesher order. I was hoping there would be something she could do along those lines

She doesn't have a solicitor. I've advised her to get one but thought I'd post here just to get her started thinking about things. Her heads a bit of a mess at the moment but I'm sure she'll get there eventually.

They aren't married, so he has no obligation to support her at all. He does have an obligation to pay maintenance to support his child.

She can work out how much child maintenance she would be legally entitled to using the calculator on Gov.uk.

Her partner is correct that, as they own the house jointly, they should sell up and split the equity equally.

Legally, that's all she's entitled to.

That doesn't prevent them from voluntarily agreeing any other arrangements between them. Given that they have a daughter, he will doubtless want to ensure that his daughter is well cared for when she is with her mum. He may therefore be open to the idea of treating their house as an investment, so that his daughter can live there - but that will very much depend on what sort of person he is, his own financial position, and how viable that is for him. He is under no obligation to think about any of that. There could be some sort of trade off here with maintenance, if they go for a voluntary arrangement between them rather than going to the CMS.

Ultimately, this is one they'll have to talk through. If they can agree something, they can sort it all out themselves. There is no role for the courts on the financial side here, because they aren't married - so it is up to them what they do.

But if he sticks only to what he is legally obliged to do, then she will need to sell the house and will only receive child maintenance from him.

I second proper legal advice.

However, I think, as they are not married then there is legally nothing she can do.

If they are cooperating well, can she set it out as this would be in the best interests of the daughter? (moving areas and probably schools being more disruptive and likely to a worse area). If they can agree they need to get it legally written up for the protection of all involved, and bare in mind it would leave them financially tied (ie credit ratings linked) via the shared mortgage, which also has other implications.

Read this before:

There is one way in which you as part of an unmarried couple might have the same protection in financial disputes as married couples. Under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970 an engaged couple who separate will have the protection of any law which relates to the property rights of husband and wives. All you need to show is that there was an "agreement to marry" and that this agreement has been broken.

However, this does not stretch as far as allowing the court to change the ownership of property between you and your opponent.

However, engaged couples can for example make an application to ask the court to decide on the division of the contents of the home or for the return of any contents removed by the other party.

The court has the power to transfer tenancies between unmarried couples. The court can also order that the person who gains the tenancy pays compensation to the other.

If your friend is in UK there is info on citizens advice and www.gov.uk about the difference between married and single people. I would suggest that she gets a job and both parents share the cost of childcare. If she cannot afford to buy the house the sensible action is to sell it and each person to buy or rent their own property. She should apply for child maintenance via CMS. Her ex has no obligation to support her, only his child.

Bear in mind that any proceedings would eat into that equity

All you need to show is that there was an "agreement to marry" and that this agreement has been broken.

And how do you agree who broke it?

That isnt as simple as it sounds.

He doesnt have any obligation to her. Only their child.

If he doesnt want to keep paying half the mortgage. The house will need to be sold.

Given he earns more, I imagine she cany afford a lengthy legal case?

I believe that 10 years down the line he will be very secure financially and she may trapped in a terrible position financially should she make the wrong move now

I think you are correct that he will be financially secure - he has a good career with prospects of earning more, plus twenty grand equity to put into a house. Whereas your friend has given up her career - this is what has made her vulnerable, not any "wrong move" she might make now.

If she wants to be financially secure, then I reckon the best course of action is to take her twenty grand equity and buy a house she can afford to run herself. Go for fifty fifty custody and work full time (or as near to full time as she can). In a year her child will be at school, which should make things easier for both of them.

But I honestly don't think there's an option where she continues to have the benefit of her ex partners salary (in the form of mortgage payments or spousal maintenance) despite them breaking up.

Running two households is more expensive than running one. It's unfair of either of them to expect their standard of living to stay unchanged - she will experience a drop in income, he will (presumably) find that childcare impacts his career more than it used to.

I know this doesn't help your friend, but to anyone else reading this : don't give up your career when you have a child, especially if you don't have the protection of marriage.

This is where I find UK law so bizarre. A 10 yr relationship with a 4 yr DD and no legal standing! I am in British Columbia, Canada and we fortunately have common-law marriage where what assets you have before marriage are still yours, like marriage but after I believe 18 months or upon having a child you are considered civilly married. You are then protected when you go part time or less to do child care or become a SAHM.

I know a lot of people on MN are against common-law marriage but it has many benefits.

I hope your friend gets legal advice and is able to buy her ex out.

His only obligation is to their child - but unless it's a 50/50 custody that includes an element for housing so it's possible that she could negotiate her transferring the house into her name (assuming the lender agrees) as part of child support, or could agree to repay the equity agreed at the time of the split when the house is finally sold or when the child is 20 (or whatever). Alternatively her could agree to help her set up in a different house financially assisting her (it's then a clean break). Everything is negotiable and talking calmly about all the options is the best way forward

I don’t think there is much she can do. She will get 50% of the equity. I doubt he would want to remain on the deeds or mortgage as it makes it difficult and more expensive to buy. It’s also not really a good thing for her to have to give him 50% of the equity in 14 years time which could be £100,000’s.

Best to think about whether upping her hours and seeking more equitable parenting would make her better off now or in the future.

I’m sure that the CMS doesn’t make any addition to support for housing needs. A court might, if deciding on the split after a divorce, but they’re not married so...

Unfortunately for her, the property will be treated like an investment between two parties (no different than two business partners). And if one wants to sell, the other may be able to stall and slow the process down, but ultimately can’t stop it if forced into court, with the potential to have costs awarded against them.

This is where I find UK law so bizarre. A 10 yr relationship with a 4 yr DD and no legal standing!

I agree. But it is what it is and I still don't understand why women still have children and give up their careers without the legal protection of marriage or now (I believe) civil partnership.

My unmarried niece has four children with her partner of about 20 years and is a SAHM. Things are looking iffy in their relationship now and I dread what will happen to her.

Ironically the only reason they're not married is because she wanted - but couldn't afford - to have the big white wedding .

It's not about the morals, no one cares any more, it's about not leaving yourself open to the situation the OP's friend finds herself in.

Thank you all for your well thought out replies.

Hopefully they will come to an amicable agreement and will be able to continue in a way that's best for their DD.

I'll let her know there are some replies on this thread to look at. DF has said that she plans to seek some legal advice next week which is a positive step. Thanks again

I would suggest a quick, clean financial break. Which probably means selling the house or one person buying the house & a remortgage. Because legally these are both single people, why would one person want to pay £200 for a property that they would not be living in, when they would have their own housing costs ? What happens if they both meet new partners ?
Agree with child maintenance
Other costs, ensure a fair, clean, financial break

Remember to ask about section 1 of the Children Act, which does give some further rights linked to parenthood (limited, but can be loans).

www.lawsociety.org.uk/practice-areas/family-children/not-just-for-wags-schedule-one-children-act-1989-claims/

Stereotypical example of an unmarried partner who shouldn't have reduced her working hours. She should speak to a solicitor, theres TOLATA claims, but ultimately it doesnt sound like there's enough money here to make a legal challenge worthwhile.