Order of Sale enforcement

Blob

Exactly, the point is that when the house/property is purchaced, that if you like is the effective date and the proof of who put in what then is where it turns in law. If you can proov the NRPP put the money from the sale of a previous property in to the purchase of the new home then that money is thiers, end off.

Then in comes the CSA and demand the sale of the home as there are arrears probably due to them! That is the starting point of where the money from the sale of said property is worked from. The CSA have a claim on the half that belongs to the NRP. That half is the 50% of any equity that is left after the mortguage and the money from the NRPP is taken out.

e.g. Property worth £160K

NRPP put in £75k
Loan on property £85k

NRPs equity share £0 less cost of sale say £2,500

CSA would then be liable to pay the NRPP possible £2,500 plus dammages for makeing them homeless.

Check the 'White Book' Civil Procdure Rules, the application would in all prob fail on the 9 points on rule 75 I think but it is 70 something!

LizzieS_2

Blob wrote: »

Exactly, the point is that when the house/property is purchaced, that if you like is the effective date and the proof of who put in what then is where it turns in law. If you can proov the NRPP put the money from the sale of a previous property in to the purchase of the new home then that money is thiers, end off.

Then in comes the CSA and demand the sale of the home as there are arrears probably due to them! That is the starting point of where the money from the sale of said property is worked from. The CSA have a claim on the half that belongs to the NRP. That half is the 50% of any equity that is left after the mortguage and the money from the NRPP is taken out.

e.g. Property worth £160K

NRPP put in £75k
Loan on property £85k

NRPs equity share £0 less cost of sale say £2,500

CSA would then be liable to pay the NRPP possible £2,500 plus dammages for makeing them homeless.

Check the 'White Book' Civil Procdure Rules, the application would in all prob fail on the 9 points on rule 75 I think but it is 70 something!

Agree. I'm looking at the wider angle above the deposit.

Property value £160K

Nrp deposit 10K
Nrrp deposit 50K
Outstanding mortgage 20K

Each will get back their respective deposits. That would then leave 100K out of which 20K will be repaid to mortgage company. There is then 80K profit.

MWPA recovers the 50K no problem. It does not directly address the 80K profit or mortgage payments made, especially if the house is in nrp name only.

Blob

Fair enough and yes we are both correct in the figures we use. In yours I would suggest that the of equity is split 50/50 and the CSA can then go for the NRPs 50% as well as the NRPs £10k deposit.

In my divorce that is how it worked out with the Off Rec geting 50% of equity only. Ex got and rightly so her money back. The fact that LSC then took it is not up for question but such is life.

stressed_nrp

nadine273 wrote: »

If a NRP owes a very large sum of monies not because he was unfairly assessed but simply because he refuses to pay any maintenance would you still think that it is unfair for his house to be sold?

A NRP's responsability towards his child does not end when the marriage/relationship breaks down.

You are right it doesn't, however for a large majority of NRP's they are prevented contact, given contact on the whim of PWC. PWC's are hardly ever made to account for their actions. Far better than the CSA would be a magistrate enforcing mediation to ensure the childs needs can be met by both parents without them feeling torn or guilty about wanting a relationship with both parents. I honestly think that maintenance would be less disagreeable should care be shared equally. Perhaps that's the way forward, kids spent 50% with one parent and 50% with another - cuts the squabbling and maintenance issues.