Split after 20 years - nothing but half the house - really?

[WeaponisingIncompetence]

I've been in a relationship for 20 plus years and have recently left because it was intolerable. But that is for another thread. We have a 13 yo son and I was always primary carer - SAHM until he started nursery at nearly 3 then changed my work so I could take him to and pick up from school. Also only working during term times so was at home for all school holidays and half terms.

We own the house 50% 50% so I feel secure with that but am borrowing money from family for rent until I can access this money. I am now in my late 50s and though I have my own business I have a very low income with no prospect of that changing much. Meanwhile he is in the high tax bracket (as he was able to grow his career) though I don't know how much because he never thought this was my business. He bought other properties for 'our' pension... I have no pension and no other assets. He will continue being a high earner. Our agreed 'temporary' arrangement is that we have custody 50/50 (week on, week off) even though he works normal hours and sometimes leaves our son on his own from after school. I only have evidence of this twice but I think it's now all the time. At first he was leaving work early everyday but he couldn't sustain this. My son doesn't talk about my ex to me and I won't ask him to. I presume it goes the other way too.

I believe our son would be better off primarily with me and desperately want him with me but he will not want to choose and my ex would never want to be seen as a part time Dad. Not good for his view of himself. I'm not sure how I am going to fight this or if I can/want to put my son through that...?

I believe and have it from a good solicitor that I am not entitled to anything other than half the house as we were never married. Here's my question...Does anyone have any experience of this NOT being the case? My friends have encouraged me to ask here and say I need to try and get more than just the house! The initial solicitors advice may have been because I said I didn't WANT anything else, but reality is hitting. Thank you for any help!

"yes, and the partner obviously welcomed the free childcare and easy life."

You see this sort of thing time and time again on MN.

If you think being sole earner, paying for everything - mortgage, bills, food, clothes, transport, leisure - is an easy life, you'd wonder why more women aren't prepared to do it....

Of course, if the reality is that one partner has tried to coerce the other into not working then that's a form of abuse. But in the majority of cases it seems the woman is quite happy to either give up work, or cut down significantly or take an easier low stress job. I do think the OP's situation is the kind of scenario that should be spelt out to all young people - boys as well as girls. Too many people seem to end up in situations which might seem attractive at the time but which afford very little security further down the line

Just checking, the additional properties etc. - are they all in your exP's name solely?
And is there any chance he would give you more than you are entitled to, i.e. a bigger share of the main house or any savings or pensions? Just because it would be fair to, not because he is legally obliged to.

Your story doesn't really add up - and you should take responsibility for your bad and frankly lazy decisions. Your mess is largely of your own making. So tired of women blaming men for their own laziness.

Why would she be entitled to CMS if they have a 50 50 residency split

You're right, of course. I was just think if it's not 50/50, which I think is more common.

Another one of these people who have no understanding of why women don't want marriage.

Internalised misogyny should be challenged not virtue-signalled.

Saying someone needs to take responsibility for bad decisions is pointing out the obvious, not internalised misogyny. What do you want, everyone flutters around the OP saying 'Poor dear, it's so not fair that this is happening to you and it's not your fault you made shit decisions, it's the patriarchy.'?

It's normal for 13yo to be at home without a parent there because they are working. Unless your son has special needs so is unsafe alone, that wouldn't change things.
At age 13, your son would be allowed to choose how much contact to have with each parent and if he's used to 50/50, chances are he'll want to maintain the status quo and keep things 50/50.

it sounds like you’ve been in financial la-la land for years and don’t quite understand how it all works.

Your job may be exhausting and beneficial to others, but it’s not paying enough for you to support yourself without borrowing from family, so you have to look for a new one. You don’t have the luxury as a parent of doing ‘work you love’ if it means others have to prop you up.

You need to find a new job, figure out where you can afford to live with your money from the house and build yourself up from scratch. You’ve made yourself very vulnerable but that’s not something you can fix now so you need to look ahead and take responsibility. Good luck

Lawd, unless there are additional needs, there is no need for a 13YO to have a parent at home immediately after school.

Here we go again 🙄

@Itsallok and @MrsDanversGlidesAgain make perfectly reasonable points. It's not internalised misogyny to point out that some women make really bad decisions.

And let's turn this around for a moment. If I were working full time, earning good money and having made good investments, and some guy came along who by his forties had not paid into a pension, and who 13 years after having a child with me was working mornings only, term time only, running their own little business which hardly made any money... quite frankly I'd want to run a mile.

I haven't seen anything as extreme as this, but among my own wider family and friends I know couples where the woman is perfectly happy to not take equal financial responsibility... they're much more comfortable working part time, or in very easy low stress jobs, quite often even when their kids are much older and don't need collecting at the school gate.

Where there's genuine abuse of course that needs calling out but we shouldn't be afraid to be honest that sometimes women just don't actually want to do what's required to have financial equality

If you don'r want marriage, you don't want all the benefits of marriage. Which is fine, but don't then complain about not having the benefits of marriage.

The simple fact is OP would be in a vastly different position if she were married. She would not be entirely fucked, as she is now.

But Op did want to marry she says so (he didn’t)

I'm not in the UK and these threads blow my mind.

Why aren't women in the UK up in arms about how absolutely screwed women are in this situation?

Where I live she would be a de facto spouse in the eyes of the courts and would receive a much fairer proportion of the assets, recognising her contributions to the family and his career.

You need to get a better paying job to support yourself OP.
Having your own business, working term time only and generating a low income is a luxury you can't afford now.

Your DS is now 13. That's old enough to be home after school himself and by next summer holidays he'll be 14 and well able to be left alone unless he has additional needs.

How do you prove you're a de facto?

But what about couples who make the conscious decision not to marry precisely because they don't want their assets joined?

I don't want to remarry because I don't want to give anyone any rights over my assets.

If you want the legal protection of marriage, get married. It can be done very easily and inexpensively.

Because we have an option to have all those benefits, in fact we have two: marriage or civil partnership.

We also have the chance to live with someone and not be forced into financial sharing, which it sounds like we would be where you live? If you are assumed as defacto without ever making a concious decision, that's actually removing options from women, not giving them.

If you have your own steady employment and return to work after maternity leave, generally you’ll be ok. If you are a SAHM or work few hours, you need the ring.

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmwomeq/92/report.html

This is worth a read if you have interest in the area. Proposals for reform.

Many people don’t realise how few rights cohabitates have - the myth of ‘common law marriage’.

That's unnecessarily harsh. It's not lazy to love and trust your dp, and to believe that you will be together forever or, if not, that he'll split assets fairly.

I do think it's unwise and naive. I think threads like these should be essential reading for women who think marriage isn't necessary or is 'just a piece of paper.'

But putting the boot in and calling someone lazy serves no purpose at all. Her and her dp settled into a family life that worked at the time. He worked more hours and she provided childcare, chores at home etc. Whilst she could have increased her hours or improved her career progression as her child grew older, who wouldn't be tempted by part time hours if your dp can support the household and your pension seems taken care of.

@MrsDanversGlidesAgain

I think it's pretty rare for people to disagree whether there were defactos but If it was in dispute I imagine you'd show the the court things like whose name was on the bills, lease, what address you were using. Having children together is a big one.

@donttellmehesalive @Arayes

I get your points.

It just seems to be mostly women who have had children who get burnt by this. Very few men. Women are more vulnerable, especially once they are pregnant or have children. It sets women up for financial abuse. It assumes all women have the same amount of power and choice as men when we know that's not the case.

Where I live you can make a prenup type document to protect certain assets. If it is reasonable and fair it will hold up.

I totally see how it would be better if you were partnering up later in life and you wanted to protect assets you have acquired on your own. But for people having families and women taking that professional hit, it seems to land in favour of men.

But again, I'm not in the Uk so Mumsnet has probably given me a warped view of the reality over there!