Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Financial advice for divorce re house %

35 replies

EL8888 · 16/04/2019 16:18

A friend of mine has been separated from her husband for about 12 years. He left her for someone else and they had young children. During that time he never paid her child support and just paid half of the mortgage. He has now met someone else again, fallen madly in love and wants a quick divorce. She wants rid but he wants half the house. Which seems unreasonable to me. Legally am l right in thinking he should get less? I have suggested she gets legal advice ASAP -it seems like her ex is trying to railroad her into this

OP posts:
Putthatlampshadeonyourhead · 16/04/2019 16:36

What's the reasoning behind him not getting half?

Original poster
EL8888 · 16/04/2019 16:41

He never paid child support. For the last 12 years she’s paid for everything for their children, half the mortgage and repairs / maintenance of the house

OP posts:
LemonTT · 16/04/2019 16:43

Presumably his claim is based on paying half the mortgage whilst owning half. It could be viable if the child is 18 and they shared 50/50 parenting.

How old is the child and why didn’t she claim or receive CMS.

Putthatlampshadeonyourhead · 16/04/2019 16:43

But the mortgage payment could easily be argued as in lieu of maintenance.

What I am saying it's not as simple as he cant have half legally.

No one can answer the question. I would suggest that he has a good claim for half. Since he has paid half.

But other things will be taken into account. She may have been better getting divorced when the kids were younger.

Soontobe60 · 16/04/2019 16:44

Paying half the mortgage probably worked out more than if he had just paid child support though.
Yes, he should have half if he's paid for it.

Lineo68 · 16/04/2019 16:50

Starting point is 50/50. It’s then up to solicitors to work out the end result from that.

If the kids are still dependant though I doubt he can force the sale

Original poster
EL8888 · 16/04/2019 16:54

Children are 14 and 18. She had custody. He doesn’t bother with the children basically, might see them once a month or less. He refused to pay CMS, saying he only wanted to pay 50% of the mortgage. He is self employed so only declares a fraction of what he earns apparently anyway

I’m hazy about the legal ins and outs of it all. That’s why l have suggested she sees a solicitor. I wondered what other people’s experiences were

OP posts:
LemonTT · 16/04/2019 17:00

Well he couldn’t refuse to pay CMS that’s the point. Whether he would have been assessed as needing to was another thing if self employed. It is a pigs ear mess that should have been sorted years ago by your friend. Presumably she had her reasons for not doing so. Some people will agree to bad deals to stay in the house and just defer formal action. Unfortunately this situation is the risk they run.

Why and what did she agree to when she decided not to claim CMS and accept him paying the mortgage?

Original poster
EL8888 · 16/04/2019 17:16

She was worried he’d manipulate it so he only had to pay £5 a week or something stupid like that. Yeah l think she realises it was a silly move. She’s been being avoidant but he’s keen to move it forward and she can’t stall forever

OP posts:
LaughingCow99 · 16/04/2019 17:19

Surely if she was able to get maintenance out of him, she would have. Why wait 12 years? He's paid half the mortgage, good luck looking for a lump sum now

Original poster
EL8888 · 16/04/2019 17:20

PS It was agreed he would pay half the mortgage and it was left like that. Divorce or house sale etc was never discussed

OP posts:
GylesYronwood · 16/04/2019 17:27

If the house is in joint names, he's entitled to half.

Even if he hadn't have been paying 50% of the mortgage payments over the past 12 years, he'd still have a very strong case for half.

Surely she could see that this was his intention, to benefit from rising house prices and maintain his investment?

I doubt she's got a leg to stand on. He would argue that he paid 50% mortgage in lieu of CM at her request. Would she have been able to pay the mortgage by herself? Would her provider have allowed her to take it over?

I think she needs to see a solicitor for proper legal advice. She may be able to negotiate a share greater than 50% for herself if her income is lower than his, or to delay the sale until her youngest is 18.

Putthatlampshadeonyourhead · 16/04/2019 17:27

If he is self employed its likely paying half the mortgage, is more than CMS.

It may also depend on their financial situations, right now as well.

NameChangeNugget · 16/04/2019 17:37

She needs legal advice.

I can’t see how she can object to him having half the property he’s paid for and half in his name

Thatnovembernight · 16/04/2019 17:44

Depends. My solicitor said 50/50 equity split usually only happened when the children lived 50/50 with each parent. If he only sees them once a month this isn’t the case. She said the court would usually split in favour of the resident parent and the split would usually be more or less depending on how many nights etc the children spent with each parent. I agree, OP, that your friend needs legal advice ASAP.

NorthernLurker · 16/04/2019 18:16

He sounds like a delight! Time to get a solicitor and brace herself I think.

OKBobble · 16/04/2019 18:24

She needs to lawyer up. She is potentially entitled to more than 50% in the circumstances you describe butnitnwould need full disclosure by both of them re pensions, savings etc. The court will take into account that she has cared for the children

Can she afford to buy him out?.

Original poster
EL8888 · 16/04/2019 18:31

It is in joint names. She never would have been able to pay it on her own. I think she’s wanting to delay the sale at least. But if he gets 50% of the house, then it’s like he never even paid child support? It takes us back to her needing legal advice doesn’t it

OP posts:
TheStuffedPenguin · 16/04/2019 18:35

She needed legal advice 12 years ago .

Putthatlampshadeonyourhead · 16/04/2019 18:47

But if he gets 50% of the house, then it’s like he never even paid child support? It takes us back to her needing legal advice doesn’t it

How so? But he may not get half.

The problem, is that theres 2 sides. Delaying the divorce this long has likely hindered her.

Does she work?

HeckyPeck · 16/04/2019 18:49

It takes us back to her needing legal advice doesn’t it

She definitely needs legal advice. No one on here can say what she’s entitled to.

Original poster
EL8888 · 16/04/2019 19:00

@TheStuffedPenguin totally. The beauty of hindsight

OP posts:
Original poster
EL8888 · 16/04/2019 19:03

@Putthatlampshadeonyourhead well if he gets 50% out, after putting 50% in then she hasn’t gained financially. He has invested in the house and is quids. While she has maintained the house and fed / clothed etc 2 children all by herself

She has recently started working full time, was part time for the majority of it

OP posts:
bengalcat · 16/04/2019 19:04

She needs legal advice .

Dropthedeaddonkey · 16/04/2019 20:32

Usually she would have to pay mortgage herself to stay in the house. She probably would have paid this from CM so is probably no worse off given he would have fudged his earnings to pay the minimum and had more children to support. He has paid his own housing costs plus half of hers. She hadn’t paid towards his expenses. So he has contributed to her costs / his children. She may be able to claim more than 50% based on relative incomes / contribution via childcare etc although she’d have had a stronger claim when they were younger. Unless the children have additional needs then can’t usually justify staying part time past secondary age. She may also be able to get the costs repairs / maintenance etc taken into account given he hasn’t paid half of those. She may also be able to take her costs of moving / selling etc off the equity before it’s split as the children will still need a house. But he didn’t have to pay half the mortgage when he wasn’t living there and could have tried to force a sale years ago. She may be able to negotiate up from 50% but not on basis he hasn’t contributed because he has by paying half the mortgage. She may be able to delay the sale until children are 18 if she can’t get a mortgage / house with her share but that will just delay her having to sort housing herself and as it’s harder to get a mortgage the older you are it’s usually better to just get on with splitting the property if you can. As they aren’t divorced and the house is in joint names he is still entitled to live in the house and could have lived there for last 12 years without paying housing costs for a new place